Integrating social justice with mathematics and science: An analysis of student teacher lessons

Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Integrating social justice with mathematics and science: An analysis of student teacher lessons Barbara Garii a, *, Audrey C. Rule b a b

State University of New York, Oswego, NY 13126, USA University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 6 February 2007 Received in revised form 17 October 2008 Accepted 13 November 2008

Student teachers have difficulty planning lessons that fully integrate social justice with mathematics/ science content. This study was a content analysis of 26 poster presentations of mathematics or science lessons incorporating social justice issues made by student teachers (20F, 6M) at a mid-sized college in central New York State. The presented lessons applied four pedagogical approaches to integration (data collection followed by graphing analysis; discussion of text/video; modeling; library/internet investigation) and addressed three major social justice themes (diversity, system disparities in human communities, and in stewardship of earth). Deeper content knowledge, faculty lesson modeling/reflection and practice delivering lessons are recommended. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Equal education Mathematics education Science education Social influences Socioeconomic influences Pedagogy Social justice

Changing demographic patterns in the United States suggest that new teachers are increasingly likely to teach students whose backgrounds are vastly different from that of the teachers themselves (Garmon, 2005). Social justice, which offers both students and teachers opportunities to recognize and begin to redress societal oppression and marginalization, is a powerful tool that, when used effectively, gives all stakeholders in schools opportunities to more fully participate and succeed in educational opportunities (McDonald, 2005). Yet many new teachers find that working in diverse classrooms is challenging (McDonald, 2008): effective functioning in these classrooms requires preparation, dedication, and a willingness to develop cultural competencies, make connections across communities, and engage in civic understanding (Garmon, 2005; Romo & Chavez, 2006). Professional education programs do address these concerns directly, but most coursework focuses on creating classroom communities to ensure learning in diverse and multicultural settings (Garmon, 2005; Romo & Chavez, 2006). University coursework emphasizes the role of social justice within a pedagogical stance and student teachers – those students in the last year of their teacher preparation programs – embrace this perspective (Kennedy, 2006; McDonald, 2005; Tyson & Sung Choon, 2006). Yet social

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 315 312 2475; fax: þ1 315 312 5446. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Garii). 0742-051X/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.11.003

justice pedagogy, which gives weight to recognizing oppression and taking steps to foment change, is less valued in primary and secondary schools and many classroom teachers are not comfortable with or knowledgeable of social justice strategies (Westheimer & Kahne, 2002). Teaching for social justice raises questions in the classroom about the role of the school in society: are we preparing students to reproduce existing knowledge or to create new questions and new understandings? Teachers who incorporate social justice into their teaching create a classroom environment that, ideally, supports student inquiry into and understanding of inequitable power relationships in society while helping students become effective voices for change (Gutstein, 2007; Mayberry,1998; Roth, 2007). These transformative educational goals are often at odds with traditional classroom practices that support and reproduce exiting societal values and expectations without deeply questioning the reasons underlying society’s decisions (Barton, Tan, & Rivert, 2008; Gutstein, 2006, 2007; Mayberry, 1998; Roth, 2005). Many new teachers, especially at the elementary school level, are not confident in their ability to teach the mathematics and science curricula mandated in their classrooms (Empson, 2002; Gerofsky, 2006; Hind, Leach, & Ryder, 2001) and they enter their professional practice with a limited and unsophisticated knowledge of the science or mathematics they will be teaching (Eaton, Bell, Greenwood, & McCullagh, 2006; Schoenfeld, 2007). Evidence suggests that these teachers express an overall discomfort, bordering on a fear of, the

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

content and pedagogy of primary school mathematics (Goldman, 2007; Greshner, 2007). While science is ‘‘expected’’ to have room for some discussion (Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007), both science and mathematics are understood to be a set of routinized, algorithmic practices that lead to a single, correct answer and neither science nor mathematics are assumed to be closely connected to real-world issues and concerns (Gerofsky, 2006; Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007; Schoenfeld, 2007; Zevenbergen, 2000). For many student teachers, the mathematics and science curricula they are required to learn, understand, and ultimately teach, is overwhelming. Many will rely solely on the classroom textbook to guide their classroom practice (HerbelEisenmann, 2007; Schoenfeld, 2007), although the teachers’ comfort with the mathematics and science will determine students’ opportunities to experience and learn the content (Remillard, 2000, 2005). While specific definitions of social justice vary, all include an underlying assumption of identifying and valuing diversity, recognizing oppression caused by differences, and taking action to alleviate injustice (Bigelow, Christensen, Karp, Miner, & Peterson, 1994; McDonald, 2008; Stables, 2005; Wise, 2006). Social justice also includes tying the academic content to students’ own lives, recognizing that this will empower them within the contexts of their lives and communities (Bigelow et al., 1994; Gutstein, 2006; McDonald, 2005). Preservice and student teachers are expected to incorporate social justice practices into their lesson planning and are challenged to create content-specific units across all academic areas (Citadel School of Education, n.d.; David O. McKay School of Education, 2005; Pace University, 2004; SUNY-Oswego School of Education, 2004) to ensure that newly graduated teachers are able to incorporate diversity and fairness into their lessons and units (NCATE, 2002; Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC), 2004). At the primary and secondary levels, the incorporation of social justice concerns is accepted as appropriate and (relatively) straightforward (Wise, 2006). Ultimately, it is hoped that these new teachers will bring a social justice conscience into the classroom to help primary and secondary school students identify ways they can take action to make positive change in society. Evidence suggests, however, that the ability of student teachers to integrate social justice into classroom content is often disconnected from the sociopolitical realties of their placement classrooms. These student teachers focus instead on recognizing individuals in the classroom as objects of social justice pedagogy, rather than exploring the larger communities that the classrooms represent (McDonald, 2008). While teaching for social justice is acknowledged to be difficult for nearly all teachers (Barton et al., 2008; Jaeger, 2006), many teachers have embraced the teaching of social justice in the humanities (Pierce, 2006; Stables, 2005; Tyson & Sung Choon, 2006), recognizing that literature, history, social studies, and philosophy lend themselves to discussions of social justice concerns at all academic levels. However, the incorporation of social justice into science and mathematics teaching is understood to be more challenging and is often limited to the recognition of contributions of women and peoples from non-dominant cultures and observations of disparities and oppression in society (Bloom, 2005; Gutstein & Peterson, 2005; Romo & Chavez, 2006). Student teachers are less likely to explore issues of marginalization and oppression through mathematical and scientific lenses, perhaps because they do not conceptualize, or are less confident or comfortable with, these ideas (Gutstein, 2006; McDonald, 2008; Norman, 1998). Both mathematics and science content are ripe for the inclusion of social justice content into curricular design. Gutstein (2007) and Roth (2005) acknowledge that, when teaching mathematics and/or science, teachers address more than the identified content. Traditionally taught, mathematics and science reflect the institutionalization of what is deemed as necessary and valued knowledge: answers are known before the questions are asked and there is limited contextualization between the classroom experience and

491

the world outside of school. Social justice pedagogy adds tension to mathematics and science classrooms because by contextualizing the mathematics and science into the lives and communities inhabited by students themselves, the classroom pedagogy raises questions about values, ethics, and the implications of decisionmaking practices that utilize the tools of mathematics and science (Barton et al., 2008; Donnelly, 2006; Gutstein, 2007; Hind et al., 2001; Norman, 1998). Traditional science education stresses the socialization of students into accepted scientific practices while often ignoring the creative and questioning role of science that leads to innovative practices and, ultimately, knowledge (Roth, 2005, 2007). Thus, incorporation of non-traditional teaching practices acknowledges and attempts to expand the limited school practices of classroom mathematics and science. This, then, creates a classroom discourse that bridges science and mathematics with a social justice context to create, for the students, a new understanding of the meanings and uses of science and mathematics to identify and rectify societal inequities (Barton et al., 2008; Gutstein, 2006; Hind et al., 2001; Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007; Roth, 2005, 2007). Yet classroom teachers rarely recognize school mathematics and science as explicit tools for societal change. The mathematical and scientific implications of social justice considerations introduce gray areas and uneasy possibilities not usually associated with the clearcut answers expected from mathematics and science content in primary and secondary classrooms (Bishop, Clarke, Corrigan, & Gunston, 2006; Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007). There is ample evidence, however, that tying this knowledge to students’ understanding of social justice, while helping them develop the tools of critical thinking, scientific contextualization, and mathematical rigor, empowers them in all areas of their lives, inside and outside the classroom (Barton, 1998; Barton et al., 2008; Gutstein, 2003, 2007; Remillard, 2005). While there are some readily accessible mathematics and science social justice curricular resources (Bigelow et al., 1994; Gutstein, 2003; Lesser & Nordenhaug, 2004), social justice is most often introduced into the science and mathematics curriculum haphazardly and informally (Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007). Student teachers recognize the importance of social justice in the classroom, both for themselves as teachers and for their students (Bishop et al., 2006; Jaeger, 2006; Kennedy, 2006). Yet student teachers often find themselves doubly challenged: 1). they are struggling to incorporate a new pedagogy, one that is not understood and not often supported by experienced classroom teachers, and 2). they are unsure how to incorporate mathematically and scientifically correct content into a social justice framework (Frazier & Sterling, 2005; Hind et al., 2001; Moscovici, 2003; Williams, Connell, & White, 2003). Additionally, when student teachers face the realities of the classroom – including challenging curriculum they are required to teach, classroom management concerns, issues of school administration and management, and standardized testing mandates – social justice pedagogy is one of the first casualties of new teacher overload (Romo & Chavez, 2006). Thus, the evidence suggests that while teaching for social justice is supported within education programs and may be adopted by teachers and student teachers, inclusion of social justice within primary and secondary mathematics and science curriculum is in its infancy. In this study, we conduct a qualitative analysis of the mathematics and science lessons that primary and secondary student teachers presented during a ‘‘Social Justice Conference.’’ This conference was a twice-yearly event during which student teachers shared a poster describing a lesson that integrated social justice with a content area. Specifically, we: 1) discuss the pedagogical techniques student teachers use to integrate social justice with scientific and mathematical learning; 2) examine the types of social justice themes student teachers address through these lessons; and 3) explore how to help students design and implement successful social justice understanding in K-12 science and mathematics

492

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

curriculum, all the while ensuring that the academic content is well grounded and developmentally appropriate. 1. Method 1.1. Participants The study was a content analysis of student teachers’ lessons described in poster presentations of mathematics or sciencefocused lessons (26 of the 197 posters, 13%) during a ‘‘Social Justice Conference’’ held during the spring of 2006 at a mid-sized public college in central New York State. The twenty-six student teachers who authored the mathematics and science posters (20F, 6M) conducted their student teaching in elementary schools (grades 1– 6; N ¼ 10) or secondary schools (grades 7–12, N ¼ 16). 1.2. Research context This study was completed at a mid-sized state college located in a rural area about 40 miles from the nearest urban area. Students enrolled in the initial teaching certification program at either the graduate or undergraduate level complete a traditional two-year program. Prior to becoming a candidate in the education program, both graduate and undergraduate students in the Childhood Education program (to become primary school teachers teaching grades 1 through 6) must complete their general education requirements which include mathematics and science classes. These include two mandated mathematics classes, MAT 106, Number Systems and Operations, and MAT 206, Introduction to Geometry and Probability, both designed for preservice elementary school teachers and 2 student-selected science classes (1 lab science, 1 non-lab science, in different areas). Those who intend to teach secondary mathematics or science must complete 33– 36 semester credit hours (11–12 courses) of content-specific courses in their chosen field, most of which are upper-level courses. Both childhood and secondary teacher education candidates complete a sequential series of educational methods and theory courses and participate in multiple field experiences during the 3 semesters prior to student teaching. School of Education policy ensures that Teaching for Social Justice, both as content and educational practice, is included in all courses. Within this sequence, two mandated courses focus explicitly on various aspects of teaching for social justice: EDU 301 (Schooling, Pedagogy, and Social Justice), the introductory educational foundations course, examine the material conditions, ideologies and social values, teaching conditions, and curriculum and pedagogical practices that contribute to the structure of American education. Later, in EDU 380 (Culturally Relevant Teaching), students assess the cultural and socioeconomic influences that influence the classroom experience for teachers and students with a commitment to challenging social and educational injustice. Students in the childhood education program complete a science methods course (Semester 1) and a mathematics methods course (Semester 2) that each includes an in-depth examination of primary school science and mathematics curricula, current best professional practices, and explicit examples and discussions of social justice content and practice. Students in the adolescent education program complete an interdisciplinary methods course and a content-specific methods course that explicitly address the integration of social justice content and pedagogy in the secondary classroom. Thus, social justice pedagogy and content is explicitly taught in two foundations courses and the integration of social justice pedagogy and content is incorporated in both content-specific methods courses. Finally, during the student-teaching semester, while student teachers are preparing their social justice/academic content lessons, they work closely with individual faculty members who assist the student teachers as they formulate, clarify, and articulate the connections between social justice and specific academic content.

1.3. Procedure The study was a qualitative analysis of social justice lessons in mathematics and science taught by student teachers and described in poster presentations. All the student teachers were in their final semester of their teacher education program. Student teachers in the childhood education program were permitted to integrate social justice into any academic content area taught in the elementary grades. Only 10 childhood education majors elected to present mathematics or science lessons. Secondary education majors, who are preparing to teach specific academic content at the middle or high school levels, presented posters within their academic specialties. Sixteen students were completing their secondary education major with a concentration in mathematics or science. All 16 presented mathematics or science posters. All 26 student teachers worked individually and closely with university faculty as they developed their lessons and were encouraged to connect their social justice lessons to a broad sociocultural context, extending beyond their classroom communities. However, the areas of expertise of the university faculty members involved directly with the students teachers focused on elementary education, literacy education, and critical pedagogy, rather than science or mathematics content. At the conclusion of the Social Justice Conference, all student teachers provided their posters and additional documentation describing and reflecting on the preparation and teaching of the lesson itself. This documentation included a formal written reflection discussing the process of creating a social justice lesson within specific academic content, student responses to the lesson, and the student teachers’ analyses of his or her understanding of the social justice and its connection to the mathematics and science content. The researchers examined the 197 posters and separated all those that focused on mathematics or science topics. The resulting twenty-six posters were then carefully read and analyzed for the following components: 1. How were science or mathematics ideas connected to social justice concepts? 2. What was the essential social justice message of the lesson? 3. Werethemathematicsorscienceconceptswelltaughtbythelesson? 4. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the lesson in teaching both social justice and mathematics or science?

1.4. Data analysis The study used phenomenological analysis (Creswell, 2007) of student teachers’ recognition and reporting of social justice issues embedded in mathematics and science lessons. We queried the different ways that student teachers characterize and articulate social justice content and how student teachers conceptualize their understanding of social justice in a classroom context (Linder & Marshall, 2003; Marton & Pong, 2005). Information obtained from the student teachers’ posters and the associated documentation reports were collected and entered into a database that allowed manipulation and categorization of their thoughts and ideas about their social justice teaching in mathematics and science classrooms. All posters were reviewed by both authors and relevant information was abstracted onto an Excel spreadsheet. Relevant information included the lesson abstract, grade level taught, topic area as identified by the student teacher (i.e., chemistry, fractions and differences), articulated connections between social justice and the science/mathematics content, and the lesson’s take-home message. Individually, we characterized each poster in detail to identify accuracy of academic content, appropriateness of social justice connections, and overall viability of the lesson. We then met together to discuss and compare our individual assessments and to

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

resolve discrepancies. We clarified discrepancies by returning to the original posters and reviewing the presented material. Next, utilizing common understandings of social justice in science and mathematical practice (Barton, 1998; Bigelow et al., 1994; Gutstein, 2006), we placed each poster into one of the three categories (Diversity, Human Communities, and Stewardship of the earth). Later, we subdivided Human Communities to better characterize the specific communities addressed. Finally, we identified the primary pedagogical practices employed in each lesson as presented on the poster. With this information in hand, the constant comparison method was employed to identify core concerns and responses (Charmaz, 2006; Richards, 2005) that illustrated student teachers’ understanding of the teaching of social justice in primary and secondary classrooms. An overview of all 26 lessons is presented in Appendix 1. 2. Results 2.1. Activities that connected social justice with mathematics or science Ten childhood education student teachers presented lessons in which social justice was incorporated in a science or mathematics lesson. Sixteen secondary education student teachers – all of whom were preparing to teach science or mathematics at the middle or high school levels – included social justice into their content areas. The 26 student teachers employed four pedagogical approaches in combining social justice with mathematics and science: data analysis, discussion, modeling, and library/internet investigation (See Table 1). 2.1.1. Data analysis Many activities (N ¼ 10) involved students in data collection, organizing, and summarizing. For example, in a high school psychology class, students collected data through an anonymous survey on alcohol and drug use with respondents self-classifying themselves into social groups. Students tallied and graphed the responses to understand and/or break stereotypes of drug use among different groups. In another lesson, elementary students explored different online television weather websites to gather data on the number of female and male meteorologists – scientists, rather than television weather personalities. They produced a bar graph that showed the gender disparity in this area. With a similar gender focus, three different junior high school lessons focused on graphing data of men and women in the workplace and in Olympic sports currently and in the past. In all cases, students used the scientific method as a catalyst to guide their analysis as they organized and summarized the data in order to support their conclusions with evidence. 2.1.2. Discussion of reading or videos Another popular activity (N ¼ 10) involved reading articles/books or viewing videos followed by discussion. In a high school life science class, students read articles explaining how different socioeconomic

493

groups have different access to health care services. They discussed how differential access is associated with differences in prevention and treatment protocols. In a creative energy science lesson for eighth graders, the student teacher produced three, short, biased articles about electrical energy use, each read by students who roleplayed a different group during a debate on pricing and consumption: the U.S. president with advisors, big business, and working class poor. Students in a high school science class read articles about research on genetic diseases and discussed the impacts of new technologies on decision-making and possible discrimination against people at greater risk of contracting diseases. Additionally, in an eighth grade science class, students read articles about the marginalization of scientists of non-dominant races/cultures and their discoveries. 2.1.3. Modeling of situations Some lessons modeled situations for students (N ¼ 4), allowing them to experience the social justice concepts firsthand. In two lessons for first graders focusing on the five senses and described on different posters, students began to understand differences in sensory ability and how to support each other. Students took turns being blindfolded and led by a partner around the school grounds to discover areas that might be improved for people with sight impairments. Similarly, they simulated deafness and discussed obstacles and possible enhancements to the school environment to resolve these. In a fourth grade mathematics class, students played an online mathematics game that compared the scores of boys and girls from the international audience that accessed the website. This data revealed that girls performed mathematically as well as the boys. Students also visited websites that compared male versus female mathematics scores statewide, breaking the gender stereotype that females do not perform as well as males. 2.1.4. Library/internet searches A fourth approach (N ¼ 2) to integrating social justice issues with mathematics or science involved library-based inquiry. In an eleventh grade chemistry class, students were assigned an atomic number and asked to determine its discoverer, a member of a nondominant group by gender, race or ethnicity. Similarly, in an eighth grade mathematics class, students found information concerning biographies of women and minority mathematicians. 2.2. Social justice categorization Two categories, diversity (N ¼ 2) and system disparities (N ¼ 24), occurred as social justice themes in the lessons described on the posters. The latter category was subdivided into Human Communities (recognition of diversity, oppression, and injustice, N ¼ 21) and Stewardship of Earth (variable impacts on human communities, N ¼ 3), to distinguish between lessons that directly applied social justice issues (Human Communities) and lessons that encompassed more indirect or abstract (Stewardship of Earth) elements of social justice into their pedagogy (Table 1). However, the three lessons

Table 1 Preservice teacher lessons on social justice integrated with mathematics and science (n ¼ 26). Pedagogical approach

Social justice theme Diversity (n ¼ 2)

System disparities Human communities (recognition of diversity, oppression, and injustice (n ¼ 21) Poverty (n ¼ 6)

Data analysis Data collection, organizing, and summarizing Discussion of articles/books/videos (n ¼ 10) Modeling of the situation (n ¼ 4) Library/internet investigation (n ¼ 2)

1 (secondary)

1 (elementary)

2 (secondary) 1 (elementary) 3 (secondary)

Race/ethnicity gender (n ¼ 7)

Disability (n ¼ 4)

2 (elementary) 2 (secondary)

1 (elementary) 2 (secondary)

Stewardship of earth (variable impacts on human communities) (n ¼ 3) In history (n ¼ 4)

Environment habitat (n ¼ 1)

Biodiversity (n ¼ 2)

3 (secondary) 1 (elementary) 1 (secondary) 2 (elementary)

2 (elementary) 1 (secondary)

1 (secondary)

494

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

categorized in the Stewardship category were compromised in their content, indicating that students had difficulty planning lessons for this domain, but not invalidating the category. These lessons are more fully described later in the paper. Table 1 shows social justice themes charted along the top horizontal axis with the pedagogical activities shown along the left vertical axis. This chart is particularly useful as it shows areas where additional integration of social justices with mathematics or science lessons may be developed, especially within the Stewardship of earth theme.

Three lessons were introduced in this category, although all three contained major conceptual errors. Student teachers of two lessons taught in elementary school classrooms asked students to anthropomorphize animal behaviors, thereby misrepresenting the ways animals think and behave. The high school lesson oversimplified and overgeneralized behaviors within indigenous communities, thereby ignoring the negative environmental impacts potentially caused by ecological ignorance. These lessons will be discussed in greater detail in the following section.

2.2.1. Diversity Two of the twenty-six posters addressed simplistic issues of diversity without discussing injustices. While this is an important precursor to understanding social justice issues in mathematics and science, it does not go the extra step to examining disparities among groups. More specifically, at the elementary school level, these activities focused on the identification of categories within the classroom (e.g., boys versus girls, eye color), giving students opportunities to understand how descriptive statistics models an environment. At the high school level, students conducted a survey among their fellowstudents to explore the cross-categorization of social status and selfreported recreational drug use. This activity was utilized to investigate data collection and data organizing techniques, as a way to counteract stereotypical images. Ultimately, however, this activity focused on the descriptions of the diversity and did not explore issues of injustice.

2.2.3. Problems with lessons 2.2.3.1. Elementary lessons. All ten elementary school lessons were taught in self-contained classrooms with the classroom teacher instructing all core academic subjects. Many authors have commented upon or suggested causes for the incomplete science and mathematics content knowledge of elementary teachers (Ackerson, Flick, & Lederman, 2000) that leads to avoidance of these subjects or other undesirable coping strategies (Harlen, 1997). We found that a lack of content knowledge contributed to problems with some of the lessons, while unfamiliarity with teaching within social justice framework was a factor in problems with other lessons. The instructors of two of the lessons in the elementary school asked students to complete a data analysis, in which students organized and graphed data comparing gender, racial, and ethnic characteristics of either the school population or workplace populations. While one teacher asked students about the implications of the lack of racial diversity in the school, the other instructor did not ask students to consider the ramifications of the data they were reporting. In other words, the social justice pedagogy, which is associated with the analytical portion of this approach, was inconsistently addressed in these lessons. Student teachers delivering eight of the lessons in elementary schools asked students to model and/or discuss a classroom or similar situation. This allowed students to participate concretely as they counted peers or experienced some aspects of disabilities. Four student teachers’ lessons required K-12 students to identify peers with different characteristics or to model the challenges experienced by persons with sight or hearing impairments while two lessons attempted to tie issues of biodiversity to social justice understanding. One student teacher in an elementary grade asked students to create and interpret a series of fractions that described the class (‘‘What fraction of the class are girls? What fraction are boys? What fraction of the girls wear glasses?’’). In the last lesson, students compared and contrasted girls’ and boys’ performances in mathematics as a way of addressing academic stereotyping. Only in this last lesson were students encouraged to explore the ramifications of their learning, to place the experience in the context of both the mathematics/science learning and social justice understanding. Most student teachers focused their efforts on the understanding of social justice, which must be applauded, but were less able to integrate the mathematics and science effectively.

2.2.2. System disparities 2.2.2.1. Human communities. Twenty-one posters examined system disparities within various human communities. Several of the posters described exemplary lessons integrating mathematics and or science with social justice issues. An outstanding example of this type of integration occurred in an upper-level mathematics class where students explored the politics of AIDS treatment by modeling the exponential growth of AIDS diagnosis and treatment options within specific racial and socioeconomic groups. More frequently, however, student teachers abandoned the mathematics and/or science content to conduct a social studies lesson. For example, elementary school students collected data about male versus female salary inequities and presented this information graphically. The associated discussion explored the historical context for these inequities rather than exploring (for example) alternative graphic presentations of the data or alternative explanations for the salary inequities. At the middle school level, students studying chemistry presented short talks about non-dominant culture scientists who identified/discovered new elements. The focus of these talks did not reflect the chemistry and/or mathematics associated with these discoveries but, instead, discussed the societal contexts and stereotypical expectations associated with the times during which the scientists lived and did their work. 2.2.2.2. Stewardship of the earth. Within science and mathematics, social justice concerns may be more broadly understood by looking at the differential impacts on populations when environmental and ecological issues are supported and/or compromised. Humans cannot ignore the rights and needs of other organisms on the planet. This viewpoint recognizes that responsibility to all life on the planet supports and embraces a social justice perspective. All humans depend upon a healthy planet with unpolluted air and water resources and stable climate and ecological communities. A disregard for damaged ecosystems shows selfishness that erodes both environmental and human relationships. If we do not keep in mind ecological concerns, people living in poverty throughout the world are the first to suffer the consequences because they have the least access to financial, educational, and political resources to mitigate problems. Additionally, people living in poverty are most at risk for health problems associated with ecological and environmental degradation, including malnutrition and infectious diseases.

2.2.3.2. Secondary school lessons. The sixteen lessons taught in secondary school (junior high and high school, grades 7–12) were taught in specific mathematics, science, or combined mathematics/ science classes. The student teachers in these classrooms were academic specialists: their academic training included specific coursework that focused on advanced mathematics and/or scientific concepts. Teachers of eight lessons asked students to integrate data analysis with social justice understanding. A particularly effective lesson asked students to address the exponential growth of AIDS diagnoses within racial, ethnic, gender, and social class groups. Students then explored this growth within the realm of available treatment options, given community values and economic realities. Therefore, students developed an understanding of how mathematics and science work together to analyze disease in an epidemiologically relevant manner that considers social justice concerns, thereby integrating social justice

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

concerns effectively with science and mathematics. The instructors of the other seven lessons in this category asked students to gather and graph information about students in their school or data taken from the historical record. This was an attempt to integrate social justice concerns with the mathematics curriculum. Unfortunately, none of these graphs were interpreted from a social justice perspective. Instead, the lessons were merely used as a conduit for the teaching of graphing. Similarly, the six reading/discussion lessons focused on social justice, excluding opportunities to explore science content. For example, students read a series of books and articles related to genetic disease diagnosis and treatment and participated in a discussion of the morals, ethics, personal and medical decision-making protocols to explore how treatment decisions are made, both personally and professionally. In three classrooms, students read about issues of poverty and its relationship to energy and environmental protection concerns. While these lessons were taught in science classrooms, the content of the lessons focused on issues of social studies and economics, with little scientific content being included. The final two lessons in secondary school involved students in finding library information as a precursor to classroom presentations about mathematicians or scientists from non-dominant cultures. Unfortunately, the guidelines for these presentations required students to focus on the lives of the scientists and their contributions to the field with students not having to understand or explain these contributions. 2.2.3.3. Re-visioning lessons with conceptual problems. Three lessons were particularly problematic in that the scientific content was invalid, thereby also calling into question the social justice elements. These lessons, which were the only three lessons that discussed issues of earth’s stewardship, represented the sole attempts to make broad connections between scientific concepts and social justice concerns. In two lessons, elementary school students were erroneously directed to assume that animals shared emotional, intellectual, and decision-making capacities with human beings. One of the student teachers asked first graders to consider the injustice of penguins not including flamingoes in their activities because they looked different and how the birds might feel about this situation. Although a fantasy picture book depicting this situation might be appropriate for a diversity-related lesson in literacy, the use of this scientifically incompatible scenario for a science lesson was inappropriate. Alternatively, to keep this in a science classroom, students could investigate the ways the animals portrayed in the fantasy picture book behave as real animals and the ways they do not. One lesson required high school students to consider the ecological and environmental footprints left by historic Native American peoples in comparison to the footprints left by modern, industrial societies. Similar to the above discussion, when exploring the ecological habits of indigenous peoples prior to European intervention in the Americas, it is problematic to make sweeping comments about native cultures’ pristine ecological practices. ‘‘There is substantial evidence. that the Native American landscape of the early sixteenth century was a humanized landscape almost everywhere. Populations were large. Forest composition had been modified, grasslands had been created, wildlife disrupted, and erosion was severe in places’’ (Denvan, 1992, p. 369). For example, Keeley (2002) provided evidence that Native Americans converted California shrublands to grasslands through burning. To improve both the scientific and social justice content of this type of lesson, students could be asked to investigate the positive and negative environmental impacts of indigenous practices and compare and contrast these practices with current individual and industrial practices that are assumed to mitigate negative environmental impacts. 2.2.3.4. Summary of comparisons of difficulties encountered by elementary and secondary student teachers. In general, student teachers in the elementary school presented lessons that were more focused on the concrete comparisons associated with social justice

495

concerns but were less able to integrate the science and/or mathematical curricular context. An interesting contrast is that no lessons conducted in secondary schools included ‘‘modeling’’ as the pedagogical approach, perhaps because secondary student teachers focus on more abstract learning. In elementary schools, the curriculum was used as a ‘‘jumping off’’ point but the science and mathematics content was not thoroughly addressed, possibly because these instructors lacked sufficient content knowledge. At the secondary level, students were given more opportunities to grapple with the academic content in a social justice context. However, even at the secondary level where student teachers are content specialists, these instructors struggled with making those connections clear and relevant for their students. 3. Conclusions Four of the ten elementary lessons and fourteen of the sixteen secondary lessons approached the academic content through an appropriate social justice lens. The integration of social justice and academic content, however, was incomplete and, ultimately, the lessons themselves focused on either issues of social justice concern or academic content but not both. Additionally, two elementary school lessons and one secondary lesson compromised the mathematics and science content to such a degree that the lessons themselves were inadequate as either content lessons or social justice lessons. Only five of the 26 elementary and secondary lessons effectively introduced both academic and social justice content. This suggests that student teachers continue to struggle with the integration of academic content and social justice pedagogy even when they have completed extensive training in both areas (Eaton et al., 2006; Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007). 3.1. Pedagogical approaches The student teachers used one of four pedagogical approaches (data analysis, discussion, modeling, and library/internet research) to integrate two social justice themes (diversity and system disparities) with the academic content. As long as academic content was integrated with social justice issues that narrowly and directly explored the human experience, the lessons were at least somewhat successful with either the academic or the social justice content being well-developed. Unfortunately, when the social justice ideas addressed concerns that were less explicitly directed towards human issues, the lessons were not successful because both the academics and the social justice lessons were compromised. This mirrors the contentions of both Gutstein (2006, 2007) and Barton (Barton, 1998; Barton et al., 2008) who articulate that teaching for social justice in mathematical and scientific contexts requires a deeper understanding of the explicit academic content being taught to make meaningful connections to appropriate social justice contexts. For example, it is stewardship of the earth lessons that offer the greatest opportunity for deep social justice learning within the broadest science and mathematics curriculum contexts because inadequate attention to our care of earth’s environments and resources differentially impacts the world’s population. Those who have less access to political and economic representation and supports are at most risk for marginalization and most likely to face marginalization and/or oppression. Thus, helping students recognize the social justice impacts of scientifically- and mathematically-based decision-making concerning earth resources is crucial. Yet, as McDonald (2008) suggests, new teachers – including preservice and student teachers – are more comfortable approaching social justice through the lens of individual students rather than through the exploration of global issues and concerns. In fact, these student teachers were explicitly encouraged to explore social justice content through outside-of-classroom questions, an approach that is challenging for all teachers (Barton et al., 2008; Bishop et al., 2006). Not surprisingly, student teachers who taught at the elementary school level tended towards more concrete lessons, focusing on

496

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

directed data analysis and modeling, while student teachers at the secondary level were more comfortable letting students develop their own conclusions in the context of discussions and library/ internet based research. Elementary students need more support and guidance to understand how academic content interacts with real-world social justice issues while secondary students are presumed to have developed skills in decision-making and reasoning. Thus, these pedagogical decisions are well-founded and help students structure and scaffold their learning. 3.2. Valuing of social justice While student teachers articulate that social justice is an important component of the educational process, they often report that mandated testing prevents the incorporation of these aspects into their teaching (Garmon, 2005; Jaeger, 2006). Additionally, many student teachers still perceive that social justice is not an integral part of content-area teaching and suggest that social justice issues should be taught as its own subject, as time allows (Romo & Chavez, 2006). They fail to recognize that inclusion of social justice issues into the mathematics and science curriculum enhances student understanding because sensitivity to social justice concerns often reflects lived experiences (Gutstein, 2006; Mukhopadhuyay & Greer, 2007). When preservice and student teachers recognize that the incorporation of social justice thinking into mathematics and science content enhances student understanding and better prepares the students for standardized testing (Gutstein, 2006; Jaeger, 2006), they may be more inclined to better incorporate social justice into their daily lesson planning. 3.3. Preparation to integrate social justice with mathematics and science At the elementary and middle school levels, teachers may not have enough self-confidence or content knowledge to incorporate social justice well into the curricula. The incomplete science content knowledge of elementary generalists may partly result from the emphasis on literacy specialization for elementary teachers (Ackerson et al., 2000). Additionally, the college science courses that elementary teachers do take often do not meet their interests or topical teaching needs for elementary students and therefore do not contribute to their science content knowledge (Dickinson & Flick, 1996), although this array of courses is generally recommended by accrediting agencies (NCATE, 2002; Office of Professional Preparation Programs, n.d.; Office of Teaching Initiatives, 2007; Teach Louisiana, 2008). This results in elementary teachers resorting to coping strategies, such as limiting science teaching or relying on step-by-step recipe lessons and lecture rather than hands-on or inquiry activities, to make up for their deficiencies (Harlen, 1997). Ackerson (2005), however, found that questions asked by elementary students can motivate elementary teachers who have a positive attitude towards science to improve their content knowledge. At the same time, McDonald (2008) has suggested that allowing new teachers to integrate social justice through student-centered and/or classroom community approaches, rather than addressing social justice through a national or international lens, gives new teachers the confidence in their abilities to simultaneously negotiate both academic and social justice content. This suggests that new teachers will widen their social justice approaches as their self-assurance in their own pedagogical practices and content knowledge deepens. Perhaps a way to increase elementary teachers’ science knowledge is through inquiry exploration of problems that straddle the social justice/science border. Integration of more familiar social science ideas into science may motivate elementary teachers to investigate more of the related science information. Another possible solution is to provide specific social justice example lessons in their mathematics and science methods courses. Importantly, both preservice and student teachers need better

preparation in mathematics and science affording them a wider vision of the interplay between science, mathematics, and daily life. This foundation will allow them to prepare lessons that more fully integrate the academic content with appropriate social justice concerns. For example, a teacher interested in having his/her students complete library-based investigations that explore issues of stewardship of the earth in terms of biodiversity and impacts on social justice might ask students to explore how population growth or industrial expansion is related to loss of species and/or invasion of non-native species into specific ecosystems. For instance, Arkansas fish farmers imported a black carp from China to control fish parasites that threatened their livelihood (Ferber, 2001). However, flooding allowed these carp to be introduced into streams and, eventually, into the Mississippi River where they have decimated native populations of clams and mussels and displaced other fish (Chick & Pegg, 2001). As a result, fishing has been severely impacted and naturalists fear that these fish may eventually make their way into the Great Lakes (Kolar & Lodge, 2002). From a social justice perspective, this environmental introduction has negatively influenced the diets and livelihood of peoples along the river. Students might discuss the competing needs of different groups of people and the necessity of forethought before introducing non-native species. 3.4. Recommendations The foregoing discussion prompts the following recommendations. 1. We suspect that both preservice and student teachers see science and mathematics pedagogy as disconnected from social justice pedagogy because of unfamiliarity with the currently recommended breadth of the mathematics and science curriculum and lack of experience with making wider real-world connections. Therefore we recommend that preservice teachers have deeper knowledge of the content areas they are expected to teach. 2. Effective integration of academic content and socially just teaching requires that lessons focus on the academic content being taught while truly integrating the social justice ideas being presented. Therefore, we recommend that in methods classes, education faculty model the integration of social justice into academic planning, both as social justice pedagogy and content. This gives preservice and student teachers opportunities to see how social justice enhances their classroom practice (e.g., ensuring that students are full participants in the classroom) and the mathematics and science content. Thus, social justice becomes more than an abstract discussion but a lived reality in these classrooms. Additionally, faculty need to actively reflect with preservice teachers on the incorporation of social justice issues into teaching, allowing preservice teachers to experience how social justice teaching enhances and deepens their own understanding of academic content. 3. Finally, preservice teachers need more opportunities in classroom practice and practicum placements to incorporate social justice and to receive feedback from the college faculty, cooperating teachers and supervising teachers. Our results suggest that student teachers in our study were beginning to recognize that social justice and mathematics and science content must work together in the classroom. However, these student teachers needed more support and guidance from college faculty with dual expertise in the academic content as well as social justice, in order to effectively integrate social justice with the mathematics and science. This guidance must begin in methods classrooms, continue during early practicum experiences, and culminate during the student teaching semester when student teachers work in the classroom. This will give student teachers more opportunities to expand their knowledge and confidence to present interesting and relevant lessons that meet academic and societal needs that allow for student growth and development.

Appendix. 1 Preservice teacher lessons on social justice integrated with mathematics and science (grade level and number of lesson plans submitted is noted in parentheses in each cell). Pedagogical approach

Data collection, graphing, analysis (Exponential growth rates of disease, pollution; graphs and statistics) (n [ 10)

Social justice theme

System disparities

Diversity (n ¼ 2)

Human communities (recognition of diversity, oppression, and injustice)

Anonymously survey high school students about drug use & selfidentified social status. Graph results to break social stereotypes

Explore exponential growth of disease related to poverty.

Find meteorologists online, graph numbers of male versus female.

Graph statistics of women in the workplace

 Primary (2)

 Primary (1) Ratios of different fractions of school population & their implications.

 Secondary (1) Graph participation of men& women in Olympics over the years.

 Elementary (1) Graphing and comparing men’s and women’s salaries.

 Secondary (1) Graph numbers of women working then and now.

 Secondary (1)  Collect data on different race/ gender rations in different sections of high school  Secondary (1) Reading articles/ books/viewing videos and discussion (n [ 10)

In history (n ¼ 4)

Environment habitat (n ¼ 1)

Biodiversity (n ¼ 2)

Ecology integration in Native American Communities (political discussion, not scientifically based)

Anthropomor- phizing

 Secondary (1)

Poverty effects on resources for recovery from severe weather storms.

Decision-making related to genetic diseases & new scientific information.

 Primary (1) Medical treatment of poor

 Secondary (1) The impact of deafness on lifestyle & community life.

Marginalization of scientists from the non-dominant culture.

 Primary (2)

 Secondary (1)

 Secondary (1) Roles of government, big business, & working class poor in energy consumption

 Secondary (1))

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

Race/ethnicity gender (n ¼ 7)

 Secondary (1)

Disability (n ¼ 4)

Stewardship of earth (variable impacts on human communities)

Poverty (n ¼ 6)

 Primary (1)

 Secondary (1) Inequities arising because of high cost of energy  Secondary (1)) (continued on next page)

497

498

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499

Poverty (n ¼ 6)

Diversity (n ¼ 2)

Historical/librarybased research (n [ 2)

 Secondary (1)

 Secondary (1) Mathematicians of the non-dominant culture/ gender who made mathematical contributions

 Primary (1)  Primary (1)

Scientists of nondominant culture/ gender who discovered elements

 Primary (2)

Modeling the difficulties faced by a person who is blind or deaf

Disability (n ¼ 4) Race/ethnicity gender (n ¼ 7)

Comparing male & female scores in an online mathematics game to counter gender stereotyping Fractions of class with different characteristics, Tug of war teamwork that includes all Modeling of the situation (n [ 4)

(continued)

Pedagogical approach

In history (n ¼ 4)

Biodiversity (n ¼ 2)

Stewardship of earth (variable impacts on human communities)

Environment habitat (n ¼ 1)

System disparities

Human communities (recognition of diversity, oppression, and injustice)

Social justice theme

References Ackerson, V. L. (2005). How do elementary teachers compensate for incomplete science content knowledge? Research in Science Education, 35, 245–268. Ackerson, V. L., Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of young children’s ideas in science on teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 363–385. Barton, A. C. (1998). Teaching science with homeless children: pedagogy, representation, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 379–394. Barton, A. C., Tan, E., & Rivert, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 68–103. Bigelow, B., Christensen, L., Karp, S., Miner, B., & Peterson, B. (1994). Creating classrooms for equity and social justice. In B. Bigelow, L. Christensen, S. Karp, B. Miner, & B. Peterson (Eds.), Rethinking our classrooms: Teaching for equity and justice, Vol. 1. Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools. Bishop, A., Clarke, B., Corrigan, D., & Gunston, D. (2006). Values in mathematics and science education: researchers’ and teachers’ views on the similarities and differences. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26(1), 7–11. Bloom, J. (2005). Issues of science education for social justice and the environment. Available from: http://elsci.coe.nau.edu/readarticle.php?article_id¼57. Accessed 16.05.06. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chick, J. H., & Pegg, M. A. (2001). Invasive carp in the Mississippi River basis. Science, 292(5525), 2250–2251. Citadel School of Education, n.d. Conceptual framework. Available from: http://www. citadel.edu/education/about_us/conceptual_framework.html. Accessed 28.04.06. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. David O. McKay School of Education. (2005). Education: a moral endeavor. Conceptual framework for BYU educator preparation programs. Available from: http:// education.byu.edu/framework.html. Accessed 26.04.06. Denvan, W. M. (1992). The pristine myth: the landscape of the Americas in 1492. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 82(3), 369–385. Dickinson, V. L., & Flick, L. B. (1996). How to succeed in physics without really crying. Science and Children, 33(8), 37–38. Donnelly, J. (2006). The intellectual positioning of science in the curriculum, and its relationship to reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(6), 623–640. Eaton, P., Bell, I., Greenwood, J., & McCullagh, J. (2006). Who is teaching your child? The issue of unqualified subject specialists in Northern Ireland. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(4), 549–564. Empson, S. B. (2002). Is teaching mathematics for understanding sufficient? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(5), 589–602. Ferber, D. (2001). Invasive species: will black carp be the next zebra mussel? Science, 292(5515), 203. Frazier, W. M., & Sterling, D. R. (2005). What should my science classroom rules be and how can I get my students to follow them? Clearing House, 79(1), 31–35. Garmon, M. A. (2005). Six key factors for changing preservice teachers’ attitudes/ beliefs about diversity. Educational Studies, 38(3), 275–286. Gerofsky, S. (2006). Communication: simulation, reality, and mathematical word problems. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26(2), 30–32. Goldman, N. (2007). Making meaning for math teachers. Educational Leadership, 65(3), 75–76. Greshner, G. (2007). A study of mathematics anxiety in pre-service teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(2), 181–188. Gutstein, E. (2003). Teaching and learning mathematics for social justice in an urban, Latino school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(1), 37–73. Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for social justice. New York: Routledge. Gutstein, E. (2007). ‘‘And that’s just how it starts’’: teaching mathematics and developing student agency. Teachers College Record, 109(2), 420–448. Gutstein, E., & Peterson, B. (Eds.). (2005). Rethinking mathematics: Teaching social justice by the numbers. Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools. Harlen, W. (1997). The teaching of science in primary school. London: David Fulton. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: examing the ‘‘voice’’ of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(4), 344–369. Hind, A., Leach, J., & Ryder, J. (2001). Teaching about the nature of scientific knowledge and investigation on AS/A level science courses. Leeds: University of Leeds. Jaeger, E. (2006). Silencing teachers in an era of scripted reading. Rethinking Schools, 20(3), 39–41. Keeley, J. E. (2002). Native American impacts on fire regimes in California coastal ranges. Journal of Biogeography, 29, 303–320. Kennedy, M. M. (2006). Knowledge and vision in teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 205–211. Kolar, C. S., & Lodge, D. M. (2002). Ecological predictions and risk assessment for alien fishes in North America. Science, 298(5596), 1233–1236. Lesser, L. M., & Nordenhaug, E. (2004). Ethical statistics and statistical ethics: making an interdisciplinary module. Journal of Statistics Education, 12(3). [Online]. Linder, C., & Marshall, D. (2003). Reflection and phenomenography: towards theoretical and education development possibilities. Learning and Instruction, 13, 271–284.

B. Garii, A.C. Rule / Teaching and Teacher Education 25 (2009) 490–499 Marton, F., & Pong, W. Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(4), 335–348. Mayberry, M. (1998). Reproductive and resistant pedagogies: the comparative roles of collaborative learning and feminist pedagogy in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 443–459. McDonald, M. A. (2005). The integration of social justice into teacher education: dimensions of prospective teachers’ opportunities to learn. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(5), 418–435. McDonald, M. A. (2008). The pedagogy of assignments in social justice teacher education. Equity and Excellence in Education, 41(2), 151–167. Moscovici, H. (2003). Secondary science emergency permit teachers’ perspectives on power relations in their enviornments and the effects of these powers on classroom practice. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(2), 41–54. Mukhopadhuyay, S., & Greer, B. (2007). How many deaths? Education for statistical empathy. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, Monograph, 1, 119–135. NCATE. (2002). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. Norman, O. (1998). Marginalized discourses and scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 365–374. Office of Professional Preparation Programs, n.d. Approved teacher preparation programs. Available from: https://mdoe.state.mi.us/proprep/Programs.asp Accessed 20.06.08. Office of Teaching Initiatives. (2007). Approved teacher preparation program. Available from: http://www.highered.nysed.gov/tcert/certificate/teachrecommend.htm Accessed 20.06.08. Pace University. (2004). Conceptual framework. Available from: http://appserv. pace.edu/emplibrary/Conceptual-Framework.pdf. Accessed 28.04.2006. Pierce, K. M. (2006). Recognizing and resisting change: a teacher’s professional journal. Language Arts, 83(5), 427–436. Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two fourth-grade teachers’ use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331–350. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.

499

Richards, L. (2005). Handling qualitative data: a practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Romo, J. J., & Chavez, C. (2006). Border pedagogy: a study of preservice teacher transformation. The Educational Forum, 70(2), 142–153. Roth, W.-M. (2005). Ethnomethodology and the r/evolution of science education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 5(2), 185–198. Roth, W.-M. (2007). Toward a dialectical notion and praxis of scientific literacy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(4), 377–398. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2007). Problem solving in the United States, 1970–2008: research and theory, practice and politics. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39, 537–551. Stables, A. (2005). Multiculturalism and moral education: individual positioning, dialogue, and cultural practices. Journal of Moral Education, 34(2), 185–197. SUNY-Oswego School of Education. (2004). School of education, conceptual framework–December 1998. Available from: http://www.oswego.edu/academics/ colleges_and_departments/education/about/conceptual_framework.html. Accessed 26.04.2006. Teach Louisiana. (2008). Louisiana approved teacher preparation program providers. Available from: https://www.teachlouisiana.net/Programs/ApprovedPrograms. asp. Accessed 20.06.08. Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC). (2004). On some differences between TEAC and NCATE. Available from: http://www.teac.org/literature/ onsomedifferencesjan04.pdf. Accessed 1.05.06. Tyson, C., & Sung Choon, P. (2006). From theory to practice for social justice. Social Studies & the Young Learner, 19(2), 23–25. Westheimer, J., Kahne, J. (2002). Education the ‘‘good’’ citizen: the politics of school civic education programs. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA. Williams, N. L., Connell, M., & White, C. (2003). Real boats rock: a transdisciplinary approach for teacher preparation. Action in Teacher Education, 24(4), 95–102. Wise, A. E. (2006). A statement from NCATE on professional dispositions. NCATE News. Zevenbergen, R. (2000). Pathways: possibilities for reform and social justice. A reaction paper to Smith. Paper presented at the 2nd International Mathematics Education and Society Conference, Montechoro, Portogal.