Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New ... · Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New Gateway State Jeremy Hilburn University of North Carolina Wilmington
Post on 26-Mar-2020
5 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 41 Spring 2015
Teaching Newcomers Inclusively: Social Studies in a New Gateway State
Jeremy Hilburn
University of North Carolina Wilmington
Xue Lan Rong
Hillary Parkhouse
Alison Turner
University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
We explored social studies teachers’ dispositions towards working with immigrant students in an
Atlantic new gateway state. We surveyed 99 middle and high school social studies teachers
using the additive versus subtractive models as a theoretical framework. Although teachers’
professional backgrounds and school contexts were connected to teaching inclusively, their
academic expectations of immigrant students, their beliefs on assimilation (regarding schools’
and teachers’ roles in maintaining heritage cultures and languages), and their opinions on the
effective implementation of school policies concerning immigrant students’ learning were
significant contributors to teaching inclusiveness.
Key words: inclusiveness, social studies education, immigrant students, additive versus
subtractive approaches, teachers’ beliefs and attitudes, culturally relevant
pedagogy, new gateway state
Introduction
In this study, the authors attempted to identify social studies teachers’ dispositions toward
teaching immigrant students in central North Carolina, an area with a rapidly rising immigrant
population. North Carolina has a unique context in terms of immigrant students. Since 1990,
patterns of immigrant settlement in the United States have expanded beyond the six traditional
gateway states—those states that have historically been the preferred settlement locales for
newcomers including New York California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas—to include
new gateway states, such as Georgia and North Carolina (Rong & Preissle, 2009). In 1990, the
Latino population in North Carolina was 77,000; it increased to over 855,000 by 2010 (U.S.
Bureau of the Census, 2010). The Asian population also increased dramatically, from 53,000 in
1990 to over 210,000 in 2010 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2012). Although these states may still
receive fewer immigrants than traditional gateways, the percentage of growth is remarkable. In
2000, for instance, the number of heritage-language speakers above age four in Wake County,
one of North Carolina’s largest school districts, was only 5.7%. By 2010, that number had
increased to over 20% (Wake County School District, 2011).
Teaching Immigrants in New Gateway States
Educators in the new gateway states are facing many obstacles in the education system.
According to Xue Lan Rong (2012), in addition to the scant resources for social and health
programs for newcomers and for their families and communities, the new gateway states’
educational organizations and personnel have had very little preparation for working with immi-
grants. To illustrate, teacher education programs in North Carolina have only recently added
English as a Second Language (ESL) coursework; the only certification requirement for teaching
ESL is successful completion of the PRAXIS II English to Speakers of Other Languages exam
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 42 Spring 2015
(North Carolina Test Requirements, 2013). Inadequate education policies and limited funding
prevent schools from restructuring the curriculum and implementing programs to address the
realities of immigrant students’ needs (Fix & Passel, 2003; Terrazas & Fix, 2008). During the
past decade, national education reform focusing on standardized testing has failed largely to
address the special needs of immigrant students. These high-stakes testing policies have created
environments that were not designed with immigrant students in mind (Parker, 2008) and have
led newcomers to be overrepresented in special education and underrepresented in gifted and
talented programs (Artiles, Rueda, Salazar, & Higadera, 2005) and Advance Placement courses
(Kanno & Kangas, 2014).
Teachers in schools need to understand not only how their instructional decisions affect
newcomers, but also how school culture and policies influence the students. Teachers of
immigrant students, however, often have limited language resources to draw upon within the
school, through professional development, or from the community. Multiple scholars have
identified that teacher education programs in new gateway states offer limited preparation for
teaching newcomers (Goodwin, 2002; Hilburn, 2014; Rong, 2012). For instance, Amanda Sox
(2009) found that North Carolina did not mention English language learners in its state standards
beyond an “example of diversity” (p. 316). In terms of instructional decisions regarding
linguistic minority students, teachers in North Carolina viewed second-language learning as a
problem for students to overcome rather than as a resource for richer learning (García, 2014;
Murillo, 2002). They may have internalized the widespread notion that English immersion is a
better model than bilingual instruction, although this notion has long been challenged in
established educational research (Cummins, 1986). As a result of this notion, teachers may
engage in subtractive behaviors (Valenzuela, 1999), such as discouraging native-language use or
neglecting the active maintenance of native languages.
Well-intentioned teachers may overemphasize assimilation to American culture at the
expense of the maintenance of heritage cultures, a subtractive practice that has been described as
“benevolent racism” (Villenas, 2002, p. 17). Students in such classrooms are forced to adopt
dual identities: at school, they are Americanized and conform to “whitestream” (Urrieta, 2010, p.
47) expectations or those impositions of White norms and cultural capital, while at home they
maintain their families’ cultures (Wortham, 2002). This may result in either the rejection of their
parents’ values or resistance toward their school’s expectations in order to preserve familial
connections. The latter often involves behaviors associated with academic failure, such as
truancy and withdrawal from school (Meador, 2005). Teachers in new gateway states may not
be aware that whitestream characteristics, such as promoting individualism and competition over
cooperation, can conflict with immigrant students’ home cultures. Teachers may not see the
connection between school performance and patterns of assimilation (Gibson, 1995). As a result,
they may inadvertently force students to adopt dual identities or choose between assimilation and
the maintenance of the home culture (Meador, 2005).
One common school policy in new gateway states is to remove immigrant students from
mainstream classrooms in order to provide them with targeted ESL instruction. This practice
disrupts their content-area learning, restricts their ability to take honors and Advanced Placement
courses, and isolates them from their peers (Olsen, 1996). In one study of a new gateway state
school adapting to a sudden influx of Mexican immigrant students, language teachers were
expected to teach in hallways and supply closets (Hamann, 2002). Newcomers are then viewed
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 43 Spring 2015
as others and have fewer opportunities to communicate and to form relationships with native-
born students (Valenzuela, 1999). At the same time, learning suffers when students with
minimal English language skills are taught by mainstream content teachers who have limited
training in ESL or bilingual methods, or when they are taught by teachers reluctant to adapt
instruction for this population (Wainer, 2006).
In North Carolina, the only certification requirement for teaching ESL is successful
completion of the PRAXIS II English to Speakers of Other Languages exam (North Carolina
Test Requirements, 2013). Teachers who have not completed ESL coursework or other related
training are less likely to promote the maintenance of home cultures and heritage languages,
since they believe parents, and not the school, are responsible for such maintenance (Lee &
Oxelson, 2006). Likewise, newcomers in North Carolina are marginalized in the social studies
textbooks (Hilburn & Fitchett, 2012) and standards (Journell, 2009). As a result, these structural
factors in North Carolina and other new gateway states, immigrant students are limited in their
development of positive bicultural identities.
Compounding misunderstandings of how assimilation policies and practices negatively
influence immigrant students are differences in teachers’ and newcomers’ often-contrasting
views of parental involvement in education. Teachers, in terms of attendance at conferences and
other school functions, often narrowly define parental involvement, whereas immigrant families
may demonstrate involvement through assistance with homework and instruction on life skills
(López, 2001). Teachers often misinterpret immigrant families’ different methods of school
involvement as a lack of commitment to education (López, 2001). On the other hand, immigrant
families may expect schools to perform certain roles that U.S. schools fail to fulfill, such as
functioning as the primary site of learning as well as teaching formality and discipline (Li, 2003).
Effective teachers of immigrant students understand not only the complex interactions
between school and classroom policies, positive identity formation, and academic success, but
also how societal conditions, such as xenophobia, present unique challenges to immigrant
families. New Latino Diaspora states e.g. North Carolina are affected by particular forms of
discrimination (Murillo, 2002). The “addition of a ‘third race’ to a historically biracial southern
community” (p. 219) has led to a “pro-immigration script” (Suárez-Orozco, 1998, as cited in
Murillo, 2002, p. 225) that “uses immigrants’ very arrival as ‘proof’ of the fairness and
attractiveness of current conditions, thus becoming an argument for the socioeconomically
stratified status quo and against substantive newcomer accommodation” (p. 225).
Immigrant families in North Carolina may be relegated to low prestige and hazardous
jobs and perceived by low-income White families as economic threats. They are “expected to
either fully and successfully assimilate into White middle-class culture, or they are blamed for
failing or resisting these efforts” (Murillo, 2002, p. 221). Poverty rates, among immigrant
families, are higher than among native-born families (Gaytan, Carhill, & Suarez-Orozco, 2007),
as are rates of enrollment in racially and linguistically isolated and low-resourced schools
(Kozol, 1991). Undocumented immigrants have higher rates of stress (Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-
Orozco, & Todorova, 2008), depression (Gaytan et al., 2007), poverty (Edelman & Jones, 2004;
Rong & Preissle, 2009), and homelessness (Huerta-Macios, Gonzales, & Holman, 2000).
Teachers in new gateway states must maintain an awareness of these inequitable conditions and
use critical, inclusive pedagogy in their classrooms to counteract them.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 44 Spring 2015
Factors Contributing to Effective Teaching of Social Studies to Immigrant Students
As the central goal of teaching social studies is to promote civic competence (NCSS,
2011) there is an additional layer of complexity for social studies teachers in new gateway states.
Scholars asserted there is a civic education opportunity gap between immigrant students and
native-born students (Levison, 2010; Marri, 2009; Torney-Purta, Barber, & Wilkenfeld, 2006).
Social studies literature conflates the needs of immigrant students with the needs of ELL students
(Goodwin, 2002), which is problematic for these reasons: some immigrant students do not
require ELL services, many ELLs are not newcomers, and the majority of ELL learners’ needs in
social studies classroom are beyond ESL services. In Educating Democratic Citizens in
Troubled Times (Bixby & Pace, 2008), the editors cite the civic disenfranchisement of
marginalized groups, and of immigrants in particular, as one of the four most troubling
characteristics of contemporary civic education.
In addition to knowledge of immigrant families’ assets and struggles, as well as skills for
teaching English language learners (ELLs), the dispositions of teachers are integral to the
effective teaching of immigrant students (Davies, 2008; Garmon, 2005). In emphasizing
culturally relevant teaching as more of a mindset than a collection of skills or strategies, Gloria
Ladson-Billings (1995, 2006) underscored the importance of dispositions for the successful
teaching of diverse learners. She defined culturally relevant pedagogy as an ethical position, a
long-term commitment to “democracy as a central principle of their pedagogy” (2006, p. 40).
Social studies teachers, in particular, should prioritize teaching, not just about democracy but
also through democratic practices. In an extension of Ladson-Billings’ model, Django Paris
(2012), included the explicit and active fostering of cultural pluralism in the classroom and in
society, which aligns with the National Council for the Social Studies (2011) curriculum
standards. The dispositions of effective teachers of immigrant and culturally diverse students
were also highlighted by Valenzuela (1999). These teachers embody additive schooling by
showing authentic caring, building on students’ bicultural experiences, and presenting dominant
knowledge not as something to master, but as something to challenge.
In terms of teaching the content of social studies to immigrant students, Bárbara Cruz and
Stephen Thornton (2009) outlined successful strategies and considerations for ELLs and for
immigrant students who are not ELLs. Cruz & Thornton’s recommendations for supporting
students through the stages of cultural adjustment, creating a positive classroom environment,
and achieving access and follow-through with parents are useful for teachers of all immigrant
students. For teaching ELLs specifically, the authors expounded upon research in second-
language acquisition to suggest strategies for making social studies content comprehensible for
ELLs, as well as for developing their English language skills through the teaching of social
studies. Toward the first aim, the authors recommended using visual aids, cooperative and
kinesthetic learning, modified texts, role-plays, and other strategies. They also recommended
modifying the assessment of ELLs through the provision of multiple opportunities to practice
and to correct errors in their English productively. Employing such strategies requires
substantial effort and regular critical reflection on practice; thus, a strong commitment to caring,
democratic, and culturally sustaining pedagogy is essential to the effective teaching of immigrant
students.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 45 Spring 2015
Theoretical Framework
The researchers who conducted this study were interested in ways to help social studies
teachers develop inclusiveness in their teaching. Although the term inclusive teaching may often
be used in relation to special education, we apply this concept here with a broader definition:
social and cultural inclusion for marginalized groups, such as immigrant students. Scholars have
noted the importance of culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2002) and culturally relevant
teaching (Ladson-Billings, 1995). Culturally relevant teachers, as argued in Ladson-Billings,
know how to base teaching experiences on the cultural realities of the child (e.g., home life,
community experiences, cultural and language backgrounds, belief systems, etc.). Teachers need
to rethink and restructure their curricula, practices, and classroom learning environments to
maximize the full participation of all learners. Culturally responsive pedagogy comprises three
dimensions: institutional, personal, and instructional (Richards, Brown & Forde, 2007). The
personal dimension refers to the cognitive and emotional processes needed for teachers to
become culturally responsive, and the instructional dimension includes materials, strategies, and
activities that form the basis of instruction. The institutional dimension reflects the
administration and its policies and values. To assess the institution’s cultural responsiveness,
and building on Judith Little’s (1999) model, Richards, Brown, and Forde summarized three
specific areas of observation:
1. Organization of the school: Do the administrative structure and the use of physical
space (including planning schools and arranging classrooms) reflect a fair
consideration of diversity?
2. How do the school's policies, procedures, and practices influence the delivery of
services to students from diverse backgrounds?
3. Community involvement: What is the extent of, and approaches to, involvement with
families and communities?
As described above, Ladson-Billings’ scholarly works (1994, 1995, 1999) provide our
study with a broad framework for working with diverse students. Since our argument focuses on
inclusive teaching specifically for immigrant students, we incorporated perspectives from the
additive versus subtractive models of schooling. The additive model (Gibson, 1995) suggests
schools and teachers provide equal opportunities to immigrants and acculturate students through
a bicultural or multicultural process that values their heritage cultures and languages. This
model promotes home-school relations and encourages students to maintain their ethnic
communities while also learning and adopting aspects of American life.
The subtractive model, contrarily, is based on a deficit perspective (Valenzuela, 1999),
which associates immigrant children with multiple presumed handicaps in schooling, such as
language barriers, lack of parent involvement, lowered motivation and potential to do well
academically, lack of understanding with respect to the social, political, and educational
institutions in the United States, and apathy towards school. Subtractive practices in education
emphasize English-only instruction, rapid Americanization, and a monocultural approach to
assimilation. It recommends a corrective curriculum that devalues belief structures and cultural
traditions outside the Euro-American mainstream. This imposition of White norms and cultural
capital, or whitestreaming, through both curricula and pedagogy has been likened to cultural
genocide (Urrieta, 2010).
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 46 Spring 2015
Research indicates teachers who have adopted the additive model tend to teach
inclusively (Gibson & Hidalgo, 2009; Valenzuela, 2002). Based on the definitions of additive
and inclusive teaching outlined, we constructed six items to measure the extent to which teachers
appear to be additive and inclusive in their teaching. These six items were as follows: believing
immigrant students should be taught in mainstream classrooms (not in separated classrooms or
groups), including multicultural perspectives in class, enjoying teaching immigrant students,
valuing immigrant students’ life experiences, incorporating immigrant students’ life experiences
and culture into class discussions and activities, and believing social studies teachers should be
resources for immigrant students.
Based on the perspectives of culturally responsive pedagogy and additive versus
subtractive models, we established a multidimensional and multilevel model including a variety
of factors important to developing an integrative understanding of what upholds social studies
teachers’ inclusive teaching with culturally diverse students, particularly immigrant students.
Based on the model, this study aims to reveal the causal relationship between social studies
teachers’ dispositional variables (see variables in Domains 2-4 in Figure 1) and their
inclusiveness in teaching immigrant students through answering the following three research
questions:
1. What are the profiles of the teachers who participated in the study? What are their
personal and professional characteristics? What characteristics of their schools are
related to immigrant students?
2. Will teachers’ inclusiveness be affected by their personal, professional, and school
characteristics, their academic expectations of immigrant students, their beliefs on
assimilation, and/or their opinions on the effectiveness of policies related to immigrant
students?
3. What are the more influential variables on teachers’ inclusive teaching when all other
variables are held constantly?
Method
Participants and Data Collection
The pool of targeted participants included 255 middle and high school social studies
teachers in central North Carolina, an area with a large number of immigrant students (Migration
Policy Institute, 2008; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2009). Teachers in three rural counties, one
suburban county, and one urban county were contacted in order to reach a representative sample
across the population, ranging from the children of high-skilled immigrants in the Research
Triangle Park area to children of agricultural laborers in rural counties. We emailed all 255
teachers and received affirmative responses from 101 teachers. We sent a survey to each of the
respondents and used online survey software to collect their responses. Among the 101 teachers
who participated in the survey, two were excluded in the data analysis due to a large number of
incomplete responses. As a result, 99 teachers who completed the survey in its entirety were
included in our data analysis. The return rate of this study (44%) is considered within the an
acceptable range (e.g., Kalton, 1983).
Survey Instrument We collected the data through a 55-question survey with open and closed-ended
questions. Survey items were drafted based upon the reviewed research literature. Primarily
Gibson’s model of additive acculturation (1995) and Valenzuela’s critiques of subtractive
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 47 Spring 2015
assimilation (1999, 2002) influenced the survey items. The survey, further, was grounded in
Richards, Brown, and Forde’s (2007) three-dimension framework of culturally responsive
pedagogy. Part of this literature suggested although teachers may espouse a belief that
immigrants should maintain heritage cultures, “the manner in which many teachers assume this
process implies the replacement of the old language and culture” (Gibson, p. 96). One of the
Likert-scale items on the survey thus asked respondents to agree or disagree with the statement,
“Recent immigrants should be Americanized as rapidly as possible.” Items related to heritage
culture maintenance are grounded in research indicating the maintenance of heritage language is
a significant factor in academic progress (Lee & Suárez, 2009). We asked teachers to evaluate
the effectiveness of policies that place ELLs in mainstream classrooms based on research
demonstrating that language is learned best through content and isolation contributes to gaps in
achievement between ELLs and native-English speakers (Cummins, 1986).
The survey questions were conceptualized into five factors. Figure 1 shows a design
construct of the dependent (output) factor in relationship to the independent factors, which
comprise four major domains of explanatory factors: Domain 1: Socio-demographic
characteristics of teachers and schools; Domain 2: Teachers’ expectations of immigrant students’
academic potentials; Domain 3: Teachers’ beliefs in immigrant students’ acculturation, including
their affinity for maintaining pride in the heritage country and their positions on using heritage
languages. Domain 4 uses seven 5-point Likert-scale survey questions to indicate teachers’
opinions regarding the implementation of classroom integration, school language, and testing
policies relevant to immigrant students. It also incorporates teachers’ opinions regarding how
supportive the school policies for immigrant students are and whether the school involves
parents of immigrant students in its policy implementation.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 48 Spring 2015
Figure 1. Inquiry Model
Domain 1
Socio-
demographic
Characteristics
Teacher
1. Years of
Experience
2. Gender
3. Significant time
spent overseas
(more than 6
months)
4. Race/ethnicity
School
1. % immigrants in
student population
2. Variety of
heritage countries
represented in
student population
Inclusive Social Studies Instructional Strategies
and Classroom Environment
Teach immigrants in mainstream classes
Include multicultural perspectives
Enjoy teaching immigrant students
Value immigrant students’ life experience
Believe social studies teachers should be a resource
for immigrant students
Share immigrant experiences in class discussions
(DependentVariables)
Domain 2
Academic
Expectation of
Immigrant
Students
1. Higher potential
to go to college
2. Greater
motivation to learn
Social Studies
3. Higher grades
Domain 3
Beliefs and
Attitudes
Regarding
Assimilation
1. Immigrant
students feel
patriotism
toward the U.S.
2. Assimilation
does not
necessarily need
to be rapid
3. Immigrants
have pride in
heritage
countries
4. Schools
should support
heritage
language
maintenance
5. Teachers
should support
heritage
language
maintenance
Domain 4
Opinions on
Effectiveness of
Policies for
Immigrants
1. ESL programs
2. Mainstream
classroom
3. Textbook in
heritage languages
4. Documentation
sent home in
heritage languages
5. End-of-Course
Exam waiver
6. Belief that the
school policy is
supportive toward
immigrant students
7. Belief that
school policies
involve parents of
immigrant students
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 49 Spring 2015
Figure 1: Inquiry model
In order to construct a valid survey instrument, we did an initial review of research
literature on teaching social studies and educating immigrant students, and wrote eight open-
ended questions for a semi-structured interview. The first author conducted a think aloud
(Ericsson & Simon, 1993) pilot test on the first draft of the survey with five former social studies
teachers and made revisions based on their feedback. The first author then conducted one-on-
one semi-structured interviews with six local high school social studies teachers, focusing on
their personal and professional experience in working with immigrant students in social studies
classrooms. After coding and thematic development, we identified the more relevant variables
that were later classified into factors. The survey was distributed and collected using online
survey software. The reliability indexes for the total instrument and for each of the five factors
were in the acceptable range: 0.7 for the whole instrument, and a range of 0.5–0.7 for the factors.
We acknowledge two limitations of this study. First, the participants were self-selected;
therefore, caution is advised in attempting to generalize the findings to a larger population.
Readers should compare the demographic, social, and professional characteristics of the
participants in this study to those in their own school and school districts when they consider
applying the results of this study. Second, the indicators for inclusiveness in teaching-related
practice were determined by participants’ self-reports, which can yield different data than other
data collection procedures (e.g., classroom observations) or instruments.
Data Analysis
The data analysis was conducted through the following four steps:
1. Pre-data analysis preparation. We took the following steps to prepare the dataset for
statistical analysis:
a. We cleaned the dataset. Since the missing answers were rare and random, we
replaced a few missing values through multiple imputations (replacing the few
missing items with a probable value based on other available information) (Adèr,
2008; Newman, 2003).
b. We totaled the scores of items for the six independent variables and merged them
into one numerical variable: inclusive teaching.
c. The teacher’s race was not included in the regression model due to the following
dilemma: If we had coded the minority teachers into separate groups (2% Native
American, 3% mixed race, 7% African American) with dummy variables, the
small size of each group would not warrant valid regression analyses in the
statistical sense. Conversely, to lump all minority teachers together (12%) may
have caused inaccuracies in the interpretation of findings.
d. We created a scatterplot to make sure that the causal relationship between
teachers’ additive perspective in their disposition and their inclusiveness in
teaching is linear
To answer Question 1, simple descriptive statistics were run.
2. Four ordinary least-square regressions were conducted separately to answer Question 2.
3. A hierarchical regression approach with four theoretically built models was applied to answer
Question
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 50 Spring 2015
Results
Findings for Question 1
The findings reported in Table 1 answer the following questions: Who are the social
studies teachers? What are their personal and professional characteristics? What characteristics
of their schools are related to immigrant students? Specifically, Table 1 contains information
regarding the teachers’ gender, years of teaching, substantial experience abroad, percentage of
immigrant students of their school’s student population, and variety of countries from which
their immigrant students chiefly emigrated. The vast majority of participants self-identified as
White (n= XX, %), and almost 40% were relatively inexperienced with less than five years of
teaching experience. More than half of the participants estimated that newcomers comprised less
than 10% of the student body at their respective schools.
Teachers’ responses to all items contained in the four domains and inclusive teaching
factors are found in Table 1. These factors include the following: What are teachers’ academic
expectations of immigrant students? What are their beliefs on acculturation regarding the
heritage countries, cultures, and language of immigrant students? How did they see the
effectiveness of their schools’ policies related to working with immigrant students and their
parents? How do they view their own teaching in terms of inclusiveness in working with
immigrant students? Due to space limitations, the text will not repeat numbers and percentages
reported in Table 1, but clearly formatted and straightforward descriptive statistics will be
presented for readers to peruse.
Table 1
Teachers’ Response Frequencies and Percentages, Organized by Domain
DOMAIN 1 – SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Teacher Characteristics
Years of
experience 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 >25
38
(38.3%)
17
(17.1%)
15
(15.1%)
12
(12.1%)
5
(5%)
10
(10.1%)
Gender Female Male Missing
48
(48.4%)
50
(50.5%)
1
Lived overseas
<6 months Yes No Missing
16
(16.1%)
81
(81.8%)
2
Race/Ethnicity African-
American
American
Indian
Asian
American
Latina/o White Other
7 2 0 0 87 3
Student Characteristics
Estimated % of
IS in the
School
1-5% 6-10% 11-20% 21-40% 41-60% >61%
18 38 26 10 4 3
Heritage
countries of
ISa
Mexico Honduras El Sal. Guat. China
93 36 35 31 27
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 51 Spring 2015
DOMAIN 2 – ACADEMIC PERCEPTION OF IS
Potential to go
to collegeb
Much
more
Somewhat
more
About
the same
Somewhat
less
Less I am
not
able to
rate
3
(3%)
5
(5.1%)
43
(43.4%)
37
(37.7%)
5
(5.1%)
6
(6.1%)
Motivation to
learn social
studiesb
3
(3%)
29
(29.3%)
50
(50.5%)
13
(13.1%)
3
(3%)
1
Grades
expected from
IS
Much
higher
Somewhat
higher
About
the same
Somewhat
lower
Much
lower
Missing
3 9 56 28 1 2
(3.1%) (9.3%) (57.8%) (28.9%) (1%)
DOMAIN 3 – BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES REGARDING ASSIMILATION
IS should be
rapidly
assimilated
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither Disagree Strongly
disagree
Unable
to rate
7 11 42 37 2
(7.1%) (11%) (42.4%) (37.4%) (2%)
IS should have
pride in
heritage
countries
17
(17.2%)
52
(50.5%)
22
(22.2%)
6
(6.1%)
1
(1%)
1
(1%)
Role schools
should play in
maintenance of
L1
Teach
English
only;
advocate
English
only
outside of
school
Teach
English
only;
make no
comment
regarding
L1
Teach
English
only;
advocate
value of
L1
Teach
English
and
maintain
L1
5 19 54 21
(5.1%) (19.2%) (54.5%) (21.2%)
Personal
recommenda-
tion to families
regarding L1
maintenance
Make no
comment
about L1
English
only
Learn English and
maintain L1
14 2 83
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 52 Spring 2015
14.1 2.0 83.8
DOMAIN 4 – OPINIONS ON EFFECTIVENESS OF POLICIES FOR IS
ESL Programs Very
effective
Effective Neither Ineffective Very
ineffective
Missing
27 47 13 8 1 3
(28.1%) (48.9%) (13.6%) (8.3%) (1.0%)
Mainstream
classroom
11 58 18 9 0 3
(11.4%) (60.4%) (18.8%) (9.4%)
Textbook in
L1
5 30 45 10 3 6
(5.4%) (32.3%) (48.4%) (10.7%) (3.2%)
Documentation
sent home in
L1
23
(24%)
57
(59.4%)
12
(12.5%)
3
(3.1%)
1
(1%)
3
End-of-Course
Exam Waiver
22
(23.4%)
35
(37.2%)
28
(29.8%)
4
(4.3%)
5
(5.3%)
5
Belief that
school policies
are supportive
of IS
Supportive Somewhat
Supportive
Unable to
rate
Not very
supportive
Not
supportive
Missing
24 49 13 12 0 1
(24.5%) (50%) (13.2%) (12.2%)
Belief that
school policies
involve parents
of IS
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither Disagree Strongly
disagree
Missing
19 42 24 12 1 1
(19.4%) (42.9%) (24.5%) (12.2%) (1%)
DEPENDENT VARIABLES – SOCIAL STUDIES INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES
AND CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
IS should be
taught in a
separate class
Yes No
12 87
(12.1%) (87.8%)
I include
multicultural
perspectives
A great
deal
Some Not much None
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 53 Spring 2015
Findings for Question 2
The results from four ordinal least-square regressions in Tables 2 through5 reveal that all
models fit the data well. Items in each of the four domains explain inclusive Teaching, ranging
from explaining 14% of the variability of the dependent variable (by characteristics of teachers
and schools) to explaining 30% of the variability (by teachers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding
assimilation). Some individual items are singled out by the four separated regression models as
significant contributors: more years of teaching experience and whether or not the school
enrolled immigrant students from multiple countries predicted more inclusive teaching (see
Table 2). Teachers who have higher expectations for immigrant students’ grades are more likely
to report practicing inclusive teaching (see Table 3). The beliefs that immigrant students should
have pride in their heritage country and schools should play roles in heritage language
maintenance are two powerful predictors for inclusive teaching (see Table 4). Finally, teachers
are more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching if they have positive opinions on the
62 34 2 0
(63.3%) (34.7%) (2.0%)
I enjoy
teaching IS Much
more
Somewhat
more
About
the same
Somewhat
less
Much less Missing
6 27 63 1 1 1
(6.1%) (27.6%) (64.3%) (1%) (1%)
I believe life
experiences of
IS provide
learning
opportunities
for their
classmates
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
Missing
61 32 4 1 0 1
(62.2%) (32.7%) (4.1%) (1%)
I believe SS
teachers
should be a
resource for IS
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither Disagree Strongly
disagree
Missing
30 44 22 2 0 1
(30.6%) (44.9%) (22.5%) (2%)
Perception of
how often IS
share their
experiences
Often Sometimes Rarely Never Not given
the
opportunity
to share
10 44 40 5 0
(10.1%) (44.4%) (40.4%) (5.1%)
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 54 Spring 2015
effectiveness of placing students in mainstream social studies classes and of two-year waivers for
end-of-course standardized tests (see Table 5).
Table 2
Socio-demographic Predictors of Social Studies Teachers’ Inclusiveness (Domain 1)
Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient.
a In the school’s student population, based on the teacher’s estimations
* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.
Table 3
Teachers’ Academic Expectation of Immigrant Students, as Predictors of Inclusiveness
(Domain 2)
IV β Potential to go to College
a .145
Motivation to Learn Social Studies -.007
Earn Higher Grades .231**
R2 .10 (p ≤ .02)
Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. a teachers’ perceptions of their immigrant students, as compared to non-immigrant students
* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.
Table 4
Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Towards Immigrant Students, as Predictors of Inclusiveness
(Domain 3)
IV β Rapid Assimilation not Necessary .049
IS Show Pride in Heritage Country .370***
Teachers Should Maintain L1 -.067
Schools Should Maintain L1 .392***
R2 .293 (p ≤ .000)
IV β
Teacher Characteristics
Years of Experience .213**
Gender .001
Lived Overseas .062
School Characteristics
High Percentage of Immigrantsa
.139
Many Heritage Countries Representeda
.296**
R2 .142 (p ≤ .027)
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 55 Spring 2015
Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. IS = Immigrant Students. L1 =
First Language, or Heritage Language.
* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.
Table 5
Teachers’ Opinions on Effectiveness of Policies for Immigrants, as Predictors of Inclusiveness
(Domain 4)
IV β ESL Programs .009
Mainstream Classroom .266**
Textbook in L1 .027
Documentation Sent Home in L1 .098
End-of-Course Exam Waiver .262**
Belief that School Policies are Supportive .087
Belief that School Policies Involve Parents of IS .154
R2 .227 (p ≤ .003)
Note. IV = Independent Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. IS = Immigrant Students. L1 =
First Language, or Heritage Language.
* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. ***p ≤ .001.
Findings for Question 3 A hierarchical regression method was employed to identify, among other variables, those
that may significantly contribute to social studies teachers’ inclusiveness in teaching immigrant
students. Hierarchical regressions were performed with a four-stage model, with each stage
adding one domain from the previous stage. The order for the entry of the variables by domains
was theoretically determined.
Stage 1: Domain 1 (Characteristics of Teachers and Schools)
Stage 2: Domains 1 and 2 (add Teachers’ Academic Expectation of Immigrant Students)
Stage 3: Domains 1, 2 and 3 (add Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes Regarding
Assimilation)
Stage 4: Domains 1, 2, 3 and 4 (add Teachers’ Opinions on School’s Implementation of
Immigrant Student-Related Policies).
Due to space limitations, we will only report the significant results (see Table 6). All
models fit the data well, and the R square value increased with each factor added to the
regression model. While Model 1 explains 14% of the variability of teachers’ inclusive teaching
by dependent variables, Model 4 explains more than 41% of the variability of the teachers'
inclusive teaching by dependent variables. Findings from Model 4 reveal that, while all 21
variables are held constantly, 4 variables have shown statistical significance: teachers are more
likely to report teaching inclusively if their students are from many countries (rather than from a
few countries) and if they believe schools should play a role in maintaining immigrant students’
heritage languages. Teachers who have more years of teaching experience and who believe that
their schools effectively implement mainstream classroom policies tend to practice inclusive
teaching, based on self-reports.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 56 Spring 2015
Table 6
Hierarchical Regression Models Predicting Social Studies Teachers’ Inclusiveness in Teaching
Immigrant Students
CV Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4
R2 .142 .193 .377 .421
p< (.03) (.02) (.00) (.00)
Teacher Characteristics (β)
Years of Experience .198* .213** .174* .181* .175*
Gender .001 -.001 -.044 -.049 -.062
Lived Overseasa
.062 .063 .047 .046 .078
School Characteristics
High Percentage of Immigrantsb .139 .136 .066 .096
Many Heritage Countries
Representedb
.296** .254* .197** .178**
Academic Expectations of IS
Potential to go to Collegec .094 .022 .034
Motivation to Learn Social
Studies
-.025 -.113 -1.05
Earn Higher Grades .188 .145 .149
Beliefs and Attitudes Toward IS
Rapid Assimilation not Necessary .109 .083
IS Show Pride in Heritage
Country
.274** .181
Teachers Should Maintain L1 -.109 .110
Schools Should Maintain L1 .295** .263**
Opinions on Effectiveness of
Policies for IS
ESL Programs -.005
Mainstream Classroom .192*
Textbook in L1 -.043
Documentation Sent Home in L1 .092
End-of-Course Exam Waiver .067
Belief that School Policies are
Supportive
.057
Belief that School Policies
Involve Parents of IS
.013
Note. CV = Control Variable. β = Standardized Coefficient. a for more than 6 months
b In the school’s student population, based on the teacher’s estimations
c teachers’ perceptions of their immigrant students, as compared to non-immigrant students
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 57 Spring 2015
* p ≤ .10. **p ≤ .05. Models fit at ≤ .05 level.
Discussion
This study is important for several reasons. Returning to the study’s framework from
Ladson-Billing’s culturally responsive pedagogy (1994, 1995, 1999), the study of teachers’
perceptions is important because a teacher’s self-reflection is a crucial part of his or her
professional improvement as a culturally responsive teacher. By carefully examining their
attitudes and beliefs about themselves, students, and their institutions, teachers can achieve self-
realization in terms of who they are, what has shaped their beliefs, and how to recognize and
confront biases that have influenced their value system and practice (Villegas & Lucas, 2002).
Inspired by culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy, Paris (2012) advanced it with culturally
sustaining pedagogy, which questioned if culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy goes far
enough in embodying some of the best research and practice in the cultural resource pedagogy
tradition. Our study substantiates culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy in teaching
immigrant students in social studies education with additive versus subtractive perspectives. In
this sense, contributions to the field are made. Specifically, the following four areas are
identified as contributions to the literature.
First, the existing research literature on inclusive social studies teaching often focuses on
special education (e.g., Lenz & Schumaker, 1999; Lintner & Schweder, 2012). Goodwin (2002)
examined teacher preparation for working with immigrant children, and Cho and Reich (2008)
surveyed social studies teachers specifically; however, their focus was on ELLs rather than on
immigrant students broadly. Hilburn (2014) urged educators to realize the multiple challenges
facing immigrant students in the social studies classroom extend far beyond the linguistic
domain, particularly in new gateway states. This study helps to fill the gap in addressing areas
beyond the linguistic domain in terms of teaching immigrant students in the social studies
classroom. Inclusive social studies teaching can extend beyond linguistic accommodation by
incorporating multicultural perspectives and immigrant students’ life experiences into the
curriculum, a key element of culturally relevant teaching.
For the preparation of pre-service and in-service teachers in new gateway states, this
study not only provides insights into teachers’ dispositions relevant to educating immigrant
students, but also helps to refine an understanding of those factors, which contribute to inclusive
social studies instruction beyond special education and ESL issues. A teacher focused primarily
on immigrant students’ acquisition of English may see the students in terms of their linguistic
abilities only and thus prioritize pull-out English instruction over inclusion in content classes.
Our study found teachers who believed immigrant students should be taught social studies in
mainstream classrooms were more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching. Teachers who
tend to teach inclusively may be those who are likely to recognize ELL needs beyond the
acquisition of English, such as the need to keep up with their peers’ content knowledge, to
socialize with U.S.-born students, and to feel a part of the school community (Cummins, 2001).
Effective social studies teachers of newcomers, likewise, overtly draw on materials relevant to
immigration. An exemplary approach to this type of history teaching was studied by Maria
Franquiz and Cinthia Salinas (2011). Their teacher participant engaged her newcomer students
in a primary document analysis of Latino discrimination during the U.S. Civil Rights era. In
reporting their observations, the authors stated, “This was history they had not learned before—
history that included them and their interests as young citizens” (Franquiz & Salinas, 2011, p.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 58 Spring 2015
73). Having students grapple with social studies concepts like acculturation and discrimination
are critical issues to address in any social studies classroom, and can be particularly meaningful
to newcomers (Salinas, 2006). Sociopolitical consciousness development is also one of the
central components of culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 2006).
This study provides complementary evidence to support teaching an additive approach
within teacher education programs and in-service teacher training programs. The findings
indicate the Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes domain was the most significant in predicting
inclusive teaching for immigrant students. This finding supports other research literature
(Garmon, 2004; Gollnick & Chinn, 2006; Guskey, 2002; Pohan, 1996; Villegas & Lucas, 2002)
that argued teachers’ beliefs and attitudes in the classroom was important in determining their
treatment of diverse students including immigrant students. Teachers who believe all children
can learn, and who appreciate and value the multiple diversities brought by immigrant students
to the classroom, are more likely to report practicing inclusive instruction by promoting a
culturally responsive classroom environment, varying instruction, adopting instructional
strategies that facilitate accommodation and differentiation, and expressing enjoyment to work
with immigrant students and their communities. Research conducted in traditional gateway
states also supports the finding teacher attitudes towards newcomers and heritage language
maintenance is a key factor in inclusive instruction. In Florida, where all of the social studies
teachers had received professional development on working with newcomers, three-fourths still
indicated newcomers should not be placed in their content area classes until they had maintained
a minimum level of English proficiency (O’Brien, 2009).
Considering our finding beginning teachers are less likely to report practicing inclusive
teaching than more experienced teachers, it stands to reason teacher education programs are not
adequately developing the dispositions needed for inclusive teaching. This implies these
programs need to include more coursework and field experiences to educate candidates on
incorporating an additive approach in their teaching. Teacher education programs can positively
influence candidates’ attitudes and beliefs towards teaching culturally diverse students (Ladson-
Billings, 1999). One example of a successful model is Marilyn Cochran-Smith’s (1995) use of
student teachers’ prior constructions of race, language, and ethnicity as a basis for them to
rewrite their autobiographies and disrupt the dominant discourse. Other studies describe the use
of documentary film to challenge, and possibly reorient, social studies preservice teachers’
dispositions towards diversity (Parkhouse, 2014), educational policies (Journell & Buchanan,
2013), and immigration (Buchanan & Hilburn, 2014). In-service programs should not be
overlooked, however. Jacqueline Jordan Irvine’s CULTURES program at Emory University, for
example, has been successful in changing experienced teachers’ attitudes towards students
through cultural immersion and other experiences supported by research, combined with
opportunities for reflective practice (Irvine, 2003). These and other programs can serve as
exemplars for other teacher education programs to build frameworks for ensuring that their
candidates hold the beliefs and attitudes towards teaching immigrant students that are necessary
for inclusive instruction.
The third finding of this study is confirming that school context matters (Cummins,
2001); teachers are more likely to report practicing inclusive teaching when they believe their
schools effectively implement policies relevant to working with immigrant students, especially
mainstream classroom policies and the End-of-course exam waiver policy. Furthermore,
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 59 Spring 2015
teachers who work in schools with immigrant students from many countries are also more likely
to report practicing inclusive teaching than teachers in schools with an immigrant population
from one or two countries. Similarly, Banks and McGee Banks (2004) argued that when schools
receive multiple, newer immigrant groups, administrators often respond by directing professional
development towards teaching diverse students, or even adjusting their hiring practices in order
to prioritize hiring teachers skilled in teaching diverse students. Similar findings, specific to
civic and political teaching, in increasingly diverse schools were identified in a study conducted
by Jacobsen and colleagues (2012). They proposed when a school reaches a certain threshold of
diversity—usually three or four racial or ethnic groups of students—students were more likely to
report inclusive opportunities for learning civic and political knowledge and practicing these
skills in and out of the classroom. They argued,
Highly diverse environments with many groups (including historically disadvantaged
groups) push faculties and administrators to prioritize professional development or hiring
of skilled faculty in teaching techniques to engage diverse groups of students. It appears,
however, there is a threshold of diversity (e.g., number of groups) that must be reached
before faculty and administrators seek such out such action (p. 836).
Although there is little a teacher or administrator can do to change the demographic
makeup of a school, it is important for stakeholders in more homogenous schools to be aware
that working with larger numbers of nationalities may positively influence the schools’
inclusiveness climate. This study did not investigate the reasons for this, but it could be that
U.S.-born people in a community with a dense population of immigrants from one country may
feel threatened or may develop xenophobia toward that group (Murillo, 2002). Another
possibility is teachers with more diverse classes are exposed to a greater variety of unique
cultural assets than those with classes of native-born students only, or those with classes of
native-born students and immigrant groups from one predominant country.
Another finding was that teachers may be more likely to practice inclusive teaching if
they believed that schools should play a role in the maintenance of their students’ heritage
languages. It is not surprising inclusive teachers, who themselves believe in heritage language
maintenance, would agree schools should share this commitment. This finding has implications
for school administrators who may not promote heritage language maintenance (Lee & Oxelson,
2006). In failing to do so, they are not only engaging in subtractive schooling (Valenzuela,
1999), but are also potentially creating a dissonant work environment for their more additive
teachers (Powers, 2014). These teachers may lack job satisfaction if they feel that their schools’
educational philosophies and approaches to teaching immigrants are not aligned with their own.
Recent trends in immigration suggest points of entry and dispersion will continue to
impact new gateway states that have little historical and material preparation for educating
immigrant students. Social studies educators in these states will play a key role in the
socialization and education of immigrant students. This study indicates social studies scholars,
teacher educators, school leaders, teachers, and policymakers can each contribute to creating
more inclusive social studies classrooms for immigrant youth in new gateway states.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 60 Spring 2015
References
Adèr, H. J. (2008). Chapter 13: Missing data. In H. J. Adèr, & G. J. Mellenbergh (Eds.) (with
contributions by Hand, D. J.), Advising on research methods: A consultant's companion
(pp. 305-332). Huizen, The Netherlands: Johannes van Kessel Publishing.
Artiles, A. J., Rueda, R., Salazar, J., & Higareda, I. (2005). Within-group diversity in minority
disproportionate representation: English Language Learners in urban school districts.
Exceptional Children, 71, 283-300.
Banks, J.A., & McGee Banks, C.A. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education
(2nd
ed.) New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
Bixty, J. S., & Pace, J. I. (Eds.). (2008). Educating democratic citizens in troubled times:
Qualitative studies of current efforts. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Buchanan, L.B., & Hilburn, J. (2014). Which way home: Documentary counter-narratives of
U.S. immigration. Proceedings from the 2014 College and University Faculty Assembly
Annual Meeting: Boston, MA.
Cho, S., & Reich, G. A. (2008). New immigrants, new challenges: High school social studies
teachers and English language learner instruction. The Social Studies, 99(6), 235-242.
Cochran-Smith, M. (1995). Color blindness and basket making are not the answers: Confronting
the dilemmas of race, culture, and language diversity in teacher education. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 493-522.
Cruz, B. C., & Thornton, S. J. (2009). Teaching social studies to English language learners.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard
Educational Review, 56(1), 18-37.
Cummins, J. (2001). Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society
(2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Davies, A. Z. (2008). Characteristics of adolescent Sierra Leonean refugees in public schools in
New York City. Education and Urban Society, 40(3), 361-376.
Edelman, M. W., & Jones, J. M. (2004). Separate and unequal: America’s children, race, and
poverty. The Future of Children, 14(2), 134-137.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Revised
edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fix, M., & J. S. Passel. (2003, January). U.S. immigration: Trends and implications for schools.
Presentation at the National Association for Bilingual Education NCLB Implementation
Institute, New Orleans, LA.
García, O. (2014). U.S. Spanish and education: Global and local intersections. Review of
Research in Education, 38, 58-80.
Garmon, M. A. (2004). Changing preservice teachers’ attitudes/ beliefs about diversity: What
are the critical factors? Journal of Teacher Education, 55(3), 201-2013.
Garmon, M. A. (2005). Six key factors for changing pre-service teacher attitudes/ beliefs about
diversity. Educational Studies, 38(3), 275-286.
Gay, G (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education,
53(2), 106-116.
Gaytan, F., Carhill, A., & Suárez-Orozco, S. (2007). Understanding and responding to the needs
of newcomer immigrant youth and families. Prevention Researcher, 14(4), 11-13.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 61 Spring 2015
Gibson, M. A. (1995). Additive acculturation as a strategy for school improvement. In R. G.
Rumbaut, & W. A. Cornelius (Eds.), California’s immigrant children: Theory, research,
and implications for educational policy (pp. 77-105). San Diego, CA: Center for US-
Mexican Studies.
Gibson, M. A., & Hidalgo, N. (2009). Bridges to success in high school for migrant youth.
Teachers College Record, 111(3), 683-711.
Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2006). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (7th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Goodwin, A. L. (2002). Teacher preparation and the education of immigrant children.
Education and Urban Society, 34(2), 156-172.
Guskey, T. T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching:
theory and practice, 8(3), 381-391.
Hamman, E.T. (2002). ¿Un paso adelante? The politics of bilingual education, Latino student
accommodation, and school district management in Southern Appalachia. In S.
Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.), Education in the New Latino
Diaspora (pp. 67-97). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Hilburn, J. (2014). Challenges facing immigrant students beyond the linguistic domain in a new
gateway state. The Urban Review, 46(4), 654-680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11256-
014-0273-x
Hilburn, J., & Fitchett, P.G. (2012). The new gateway, an old paradox: Immigrants and
involuntary Americans in North Carolina history textbooks. Theory and Research in
Social Education, 40(1), 30-60.
Huerta-Macios, A., Gonzales, M. L., & Holman, L. (2000). Children of undocumented
immigrants: An invisible minority among homeless students. In R. Mickelson (Ed.),
Children of the streets of the Americas (pp. 238-246). New York, NY: Routledge.
Irvine, J. J. (2003). Educating teachers for a diverse society: Seeing with the cultural eye. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Jacobsen, R., Frankenberg, E., & Lenhoff, S. W. (2012). Diverse schools in a democratic
society: New ways of understanding how school demographics affect civic and political
learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 812-843.
Journell, W. (2009). Setting out the (un)welcome mat: A portrayal of immigration in U.S. history
standards. The Social Studies, 100, 160-168.
Journell, W., & Buchanan, L. B. (2013). Confronting educational politics with preservice
teachers: Reactions to Waiting for Superman. Action in Teacher Education, 35, 252-271.
Kalton, G. (1983). Introduction on survey sampling. London, England: Sage.
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York, NY: Crown.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American
children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. J. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Education Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A Critical Race
Theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211-247.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 62 Spring 2015
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). Yes, but how do we do it? In J. Landsman, & C. W. Lewis (Eds.),
White teachers/ diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools, promoting
high expectations, and eliminating racism (pp. 29-42). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Lee, S, J., & Oxelson, E. (2006). “It’s not my job”: K-12 teacher attitudes toward students’
heritage language maintenance. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 453-477.
Lee, J.S. & Suárez, D. (2009). A synthesis of the roles of heritage languages in the lives of
immigrant children. In T. Wiley, J.S. Lee, & R. Rumberger (Eds.), The education of
linguistic minority students in the United States (pp.136-181).Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
Lenz, K., & Schumaker, J. (1999). Adapting language arts, social studies, and science materials
for the inclusive classroom. Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
Levison, M. (2010). The civic empowerment gap: Defining the problem. In L.R. Shrod, J.
Torney-Purta, & C. A. Flanigan (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy on civic
engagement in youth (pp. 331-361). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Li, G. (2003). Literacy, culture, and politics of schooling: Counternarratives of a Chinese
Canadian family. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 34(2), 182-204.
Lintner, T., & Schweder, W. (2012). Practical strategies for teaching K-12 social studies in
inclusive classrooms. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Little, J. W. (1999). Organizing schools for teacher learning. In L. Darling-Hammond, & G.
Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp.
233-262). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
López, G. R. (2001). The value of hard work: Lessons on parent involvement from an
(im)migrant household. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 416-437.
Marri, A. R. (2009, April). Closing the civic opportunity gap: Engaging urban youth in civic
education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Diego, CA.
Meador, E. (2005). The making of marginality: Schooling for Mexican immigrant girls in the
rural Southwest. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(2), 149-164.
Murillo, E. (2002). How does it feel to be a problem?: “Disciplining” the transnational subject in
the American South. In S. Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.),
Education in the New Latino Diaspora (pp. 215-240). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Newman, D. A. (2003). Longitudinal modeling with randomly and systematically missing data:
A simulation of ad hoc, maximum likelihood, and multiple imputation techniques.
Organizational Research Methods, 6(3), 328-362.
Olsen, L. (1996). From nation to race: The Americanization of immigrants in a high school of
the 1990s. Proceedings from the American Educational Research Associate Annual
Meeting: New York City, NY.
Parkhouse, H. (2013). Teaching culturally relevant pedagogy and transformational resistance
using the film Precious Knowledge. Proceedings from the 2013 College and University
Faculty Assembly Annual Meeting: St. Louis, MO.
Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41 (3), 93-97.
Pohan, C. A. (1996). Preservice teachers’ beliefs about diversity: Uncovering factors leading to
multicultural responsiveness. Equity and Excellence in Education, 29(3), 62-69.
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 63 Spring 2015
Powers, J.M. (2014). From segregation to school finance: The legal context of language rights in
the United States. Review of Research in Education, 38, 81-105.
Richards, H. B., Brown, A. E., & Forde, T. B. (2007). Addressing diversity in schools:
Culturally responsive pedagogy. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(3), 64-68.
Rong, X. L. (2012). Advocacy-orientated teacher education in new gateway states. Teacher
Education and Practice, 25(4), 580-584.
Rong, X. L., & Preissle, J. (2009). Educating immigrants in the 21st century: What educators
need to know (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Salinas, C. (2006). Educating late arrival high school immigrant students: A call for a more
democratic curriculum. Multicultural Perspectives, 8(1), 20-27.
Sox, A. K. (2009). Latino immigrant students in southern schools: What we know and still need
to learn. Theory into Practice, 48 (4), 312-318.
Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M. M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning in a new land:
Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, England: Belknap Press.
Terrazas, A., & Fix, M. (2008). Gambling on the future: Managing the educational challenges
of rapid growth in Nevada. Washington, D.C.: Migration Policy Institute.
Torney-Purta, J., Barber, C., & Wilkenfeld, B. (2006). Differences in the civic knowledge and
attitudes of adolescents in the United States by immigrant status and Hispanic
background. Prospects, 36(3), 343-354.
Urrieta, L. (2010). Whitestreaming: Why some Latinas/os fear bilingual education. In L. Diaz
Soto, & H. Karhem (Eds.), Teaching bilingual/ bicultural children: Teachers talk about
language and learning. (pp. 47-55) New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Valdés, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools.
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Valenzuela, A. (2002). Reflections on the subtractive underpinnings of education research and
policy. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 235-241.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: US-Mexican youth and the politics of caring.
Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers: Rethinking the
curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20-32.
Villenas, S. (2002). Reinventing educación in new Latino communities: Pedagogies of change
and continuity in North Carolina. In S. Wortham, E. G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman
(Eds.), Education in the new Latino diaspora (pp. 17-35). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Wainer, A. (2006). The new Latino south and the challenge to American public education.
International Migration, 44, 129-165.
Wortham, S. (2002). Gender and school success in the New Latino Diaspora. In S. Wortham, E.
G. Murillo, Jr., & E. T. Hamman (Eds.), Education in the New Latino Diaspora (pp.117-
141). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Web-based References
Migration Policy Institute. (2008). North Carolina: Social and demographic characteristics.
Retrieved from http://www.migrationinformation.org/datahub/state.cfm?ID=NC
Social Studies Research and Practice
www.socstrp.org
Volume 10 Number 1 64 Spring 2015
National Council for Social Studies. (2011). National curriculum standards for social studies:
A framework for teaching, learning, and assessment. Retrieved from
http://www.socialstudies.org/standards
North Carolina Test Requirements. (2013). ETS: The PRAXIS series. Retrieved from
http://www.ets.org/praxis/nc/requirements
O’Brien, J. L. (2009). High school social studies teachers’ attitudes toward English language
learners. Social Science Research & Practice, 4 (2), 36-48. Retrieved from
http://www.socstrp.org/issues/PDF/4.2.3.pdf
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2012). North Carolina state and county quick facts. Retrieved
from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html
U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2009). American communities survey 2005-2009. Retrieved from
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37/37163.html
Wake County Schools District Website. (2011). WCPSS demographics. Retrieved from
http://www.wcpss.net/demographics/
Author Bios
Jeremy Hilburn is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington, his
alma mater. He addresses three lines of inquiry in his research: social studies curriculum and
pedagogy specific to immigrant students in new gateway states, spatial citizenship education, and
social studies pedagogy in multiple contexts – middle, secondary, and teacher education. Email:
hilburnj@uncw.edu
Xue Lan Rong is a Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her
research interests include immigration and education, the education of Asian American
children, and education in China. Hillary Parkhouse is a doctoral student in Culture, Curriculum, and Change at the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, with research and teaching interests in secondary social studies,
immigrant students, and global education. She teaches graduate social studies methods classes
and online global education classes for practicing teachers.
Alison M. Turner is a PhD candidate at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Her
research interests include ESL and bilingual education, world language education, and minority
issues in education. Her dissertation focuses on efforts to open Third Spaces by connecting
school to homes in a two-way immersion school.
top related