danaxparty.blogg.se

1. CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING AND THE BRAIN PLUS YEARS AS
2. CULTURALLY RESPONSIVE TEACHING AND THE BRAIN HOW TO BE LITERATE

Instead, educators like to focus on the affective elements.Culturally Responsive Teaching and The Brain. This isn't an aspect of CRT we talk about a lot. Board member Zaretta Hammond is one of our best thought partners in this work, consistently pushing our thinking and challenging us to do better.Culturally responsive teaching builds students' brain power by Improving information processing skills using cultural learning tools. Culturally responsive instruction has shown promise, but many teachers have struggled with its implementationuntil now.At Collaborative Classroom, we’re dedicated to transforming the school experience, developing students, and empowering educators by deepening their teaching practices. A bold, brain-based teaching approach to culturally responsive instruction To close the achievement gap, diverse classrooms need a proven framework for optimizing student engagement.

How do you sort through the various components of the equity question?Zaretta Hammond: There are a couple of important but separate things in this question. The term equity itself is worth taking the time to unpack and define before entering into discussion, especially since people use it in a variety of ways, with subtle but important distinctions. She lists 6 'brain rules' and discusses their implications on culturally responsive teaching.Collaborative Classroom: Equity has become a prominent topic in conversations about education reform.

To make progress in educational equity, we need leaders, teachers, and other stakeholders to understand the different aspects of equity and how, when put together, they create more equitable outcomes for children.To make progress in educational equity, we need leaders, teachers, and other stakeholders to understand the different aspects of equity and how, when put together, they create more equitable outcomes for children.Once we get clear on our definitions and different aspects of equity work, we have to figure out how we enter into conversations that prepare us to transform instruction. Each man is accurately describing the part he’s touching, and yet each description on its own is incomplete and even misleading. As each man describes the one part of the animal that he is touching—a tail, an ear, a trunk, a leg, and so on—each arrives at a significantly different description of what an elephant is. I like the National Equity Project’s definition of educational, or instructional, equity: reducing the predictability of who succeeds and who fails, interrupting reproductive practices that negatively impact students, and cultivating the gifts and talents of every student.When people define equity as if it had only one dimension, it’s akin to the parable of the six blind men describing an elephant. In reality, equity is a multifaceted and complex issue.

Here is where things get a little tricky. This facet of equity work requires us to remember that we are trying to improve instruction for diverse students who have historically been marginalized.Here the equity conversation has to re-focus on helping underperforming students of color, immigrant students, and poor students of any color build their skills and become powerful learners. That’s where conversations about instructional equity and culturally responsive teaching will come in. But this type of equity conversation by itself is insufficient in improving outcomes of diverse students.Then there is the “equity question” related to instruction. That said, the adult community in a school should engage in this work to become aware of the messages rooted in deficit thinking about the capacity and motivation of diverse students and families. This path into equity has its limits because there’s typically no pivot to instruction.

This is a hard truth that many people don’t want to acknowledge when we start having the “equity conversation.”Let’s take the case of literacy development. Instead, we keep thinking schools that once worked got broken at some point, and now we need to fix them.The reality: These systems are doing exactly what they were designed to do from the beginning, which is to churn out inequitable outcomes that create racial stratification in terms of who is college- and career-ready. But we often don’t look at those institutional elements as part of our equity inquiry and conversations. Even today, these design elements are hardwired into our public school systems, resistant to superficial changes.

“Separate, but equal” continued this practice de facto. That’s an extension of our country’s history of “anti-literacy” laws that penalized those who taught people of color to read. There is a historical pattern of putting the least prepared teachers with neediest students.

Culturally Responsive Teaching And The Brain Plus Years As

But they are not interchangeable and not all will get you to educational equity. The biggest problem is they treat these three as if they are interchangeable, do the same things for student learning, and have the same impact on student outcomes. They are confronted with a new dilemma: distinguishing between multicultural education, social justice education, and culturally responsive education so they understand how each approach will (or won’t) get them to instructional equity and the closing of the achievement gap. This is a critical element to bring into equity conversations.What I have seen out in the field in my 25-plus years as an educator, a teacher educator, and coach is that once a school team agrees that equity is important, they are challenged to get clear on the best approach when it comes to instruction.

The social justice paradigm would have us only talking about issues of inequity, bias, or how we become non-racist.But we know that’s not enough the tendency is for that to get reduced into diverse books about boycotts and basketball or injustice topics of the day. To comprehend texts with critical literacy and critical consciousness, students must be equipped with that deep background knowledge. But the misunderstanding that some educators have is, “If I simply discuss issues of oppression, read books about civil rights, their leaders, and people who worked against oppression, then my students’ cultural identity will be affirmed.”Here’s a thought to consider: Second graders don’t want to talk about oppression, and when we as educators make that our sole focus, we’re doing students a disservice.Instead we must build their background knowledge across a wide array of topics. Instead they focus on social justice education. Many think having a multicultural classroom library makes them culturally responsive educators.It’s magical thinking to believe that despite not knowing how long vowels work, when students see a brown face in a book, somehow that will be a catalyst, and students will begin reading with greater fluency and comprehension.In general, educators, especially at the elementary level, don’t interrupt this wishful thinking around multicultural books because it’s easy and appealing, especially when grappling with institutional equity around reading practices feels too complex.Other educators have come to understand that multicultural education has its limits when it comes to instruction. When people believe multiculturalism leads to equity, they’re usually envisioning a chain reaction: exposure to diverse books will encourage and inspire students, and therefore they’ll acquire more self-esteem, and that self-esteem will cause students to lean in and achieve.Many people think, “If we have lots of multicultural books, that will create conditions for equity and learning.” It’s the belief that diverse, multicultural texts create some kind of motivation that gets diverse students to engage and pay attention to the instruction offered.

Culturally Responsive Teaching And The Brain How To Be Literate

We focus on the cognitive development of underserved students and teach them how to be literate, competent readers and writers. This instructional approach leverages the science of learning by exploiting (for good) the cultural schema—or funds of knowledge—students come in with to make learning “sticky.” When we build instructional practices around opportunities to process information in ways that make learning sticky, then students become able to carry more of the cognitive load that leads to doing more rigorous work. Gloria Ladson-Billings framed it is the heart of instructional equity. On their own they are not sufficient for effectively promoting instructional equity.I believe that culturally responsive teaching as Dr.