This article was downloaded by: [Adams State University]On: 04 November 2014, At: 08:56Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Action in Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20

Research on the Impact of TeacherPreparation to Teach Diverse Students:The Research We Have and the ResearchWe NeedChristine E. Sleeter a & Jenipher Owuor ba California State University–Monterey Bayb Ellis UniversityPublished online: 13 Apr 2012.

To cite this article: Christine E. Sleeter & Jenipher Owuor (2011) Research on the Impact of TeacherPreparation to Teach Diverse Students: The Research We Have and the Research We Need, Action inTeacher Education, 33:5-6, 524-536, DOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.627045

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2011.627045

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Action in Teacher Education, 33:524–536, 2011Copyright © Association of Teacher EducatorsISSN: 0162-6620 print/2158-6098 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01626620.2011.627045

Research on the Impact of Teacher Preparationto Teach Diverse Students: The Research We Have

and the Research We Need

Christine E. SleeterCalifornia State University–Monterey Bay

Jenipher OwuorEllis University

Scholars of multicultural education have outlined goals for preservice teacher preparation that includepreparing teachers to form relationships with students from backgrounds different from their ownbackgrounds, to bridge home and school cultures, to integrate multicultural content into the curricu-lum, to use pedagogy equitably in the classroom so they teach all students well, to reduce prejudiceand build relationships among students, and to be change agents who can recognize and challengeinjustice. In this chapter, first we briefly review research that supports these goals. Next, we analyzepreservice teacher education research from articles published between 1980 and 2009 to highlightdominant themes and identify any changes that may have taken place in the research. Then, we exam-ine research on how novice teachers use multicultural knowledge and skills from their preserviceprograms when they begin to teach to illuminate the extent to which their programs prepare themfor work in diverse settings during their first years of teaching. We concluded by recommendingdirections for future research.

Scholars of multicultural education have outlined goals for preservice teacher preparation. Thesegoals include preparing teachers to form relationships with students from backgrounds differ-ent from their own backgrounds, to bridge home and school cultures, to integrate multiculturalcontent into the curriculum, to use pedagogy equitably in the classroom so they teach all stu-dents well, to reduce prejudice and build relationships among students, and to be change agentswho can recognize and challenge patterns and practices of discrimination and injustice (Banks,2002; Cochran-Smith, 2001; Howard, 2003). These goals rest on research-validated practices thatpositively affect children and youth from historically marginalized communities.

In this chapter, first we briefly review research that supports these goals. Next, we analyzepreservice teacher education research from articles published between 1980 and 2009 to highlightthe dominant themes and identify any shifts or changes that may have taken place in the research.Then, we examine research on how novice teachers use multicultural knowledge and skills from

Correspondence should be addressed to Christine E. Sleeter, California State University–Monterey Bay, TeacherEducation, 118 1/2 Dunecrest Ave., Monterey, CA 93940. E-mail: csleeter@gmail.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 525

their preservice programs when they begin to teach, to illuminate to what extent their programsprepare them for work in diverse settings during their first years of teaching. We concluded byrecommending directions for future research.

IMPACT OF MULTICULTURAL TEACHING IN THE CLASSROOM

Research studies identifying classroom practices that make a difference with children and youthfrom diverse backgrounds have examined the impact of student–teacher relationships, teacherexpectations, and culturally responsive teaching on achievement of students from historicallymarginalized backgrounds,and the impact on students of processes and curriculum designed toreduce prejudice and build communication across differences. Teachers’ abilities to establishcaring relationships with students from historically marginalized backgrounds and to demonstratefirm beliefs that students can achieve academically is crucial. What teachers are willing to try inthe classroom, the relationships they build with students and their parents, and the extent to whichthey encourage students—all of which affect learning—grow out of expectations.

Based on a comprehensive review of research on race and teacher expectations, Ferguson(2003) maintained that, though teachers’ perceptions of students based on their past and presentacademic performance may accurately capture present performance, teachers often underestimatepotential by equating future performance with the present; when that happens, “teachers probablysearch with less conviction than they should for ways of helping Black children to improve andmiss opportunities to reduce the Black-White test score gap” (p. 494). Similarly, making judg-ments about students and families through a heteronormative lens affects academic learning oflesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) students or students from LGBT families (Bower &Klecka, 2009). Studies confirm that students of teachers who learn to build relationships withthem (and their families) tend to do better in school than students of teachers who do not doso (e.g., Bishop, Berryman, Cavanagh, & Teddy, 2009; Hawkins, Guo, Hill, Battin-Pearson, &Abbott, 2001).

Culturally responsive teaching is based on teacher–student relationships. Gay (2010) definedculturally responsive teaching “as using the cultural knowledge, prior experiences, frames ofreference, and performance styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning encountersmore relevant to and effective for them. It teaches to and through the strengths of these stu-dents” (p. 31). She concluded a review of research connecting culturally responsive teachingwith student achievement by saying:

When instructional processes are congruent with the cultural orientations, experiences, and learningstyles of marginalized African, Latino, Native, and Asian American students, their school achieve-ment improves significantly. This success is most evident in learning “spaces” where culturallyrelevant content, teacher attitudes and expectations, and instructional actions converge. (p. 213)

The impact of effective culturally relevant curriculum also has some research support. Zirkel(2008) found a few small-scale studies that suggest it helps students develop a strong ethnicor racial identity, and a robust body of evidence that students with a strong ethnic or racialidentity tend to achieve and persist in school. Gay’s (2010) review found that even curriculawith minimal culturally relevant content “improves student achievement, according to a varietyof indicators, across ethnic groups, grade levels, and subject or skill areas”; indicators include

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

526 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

“higher scores on standardized tests, higher grade point averages, improved student self-conceptsand self-confidence, and greater varieties and levels of student engagement with subject matter”(p. 173). Cammarota and Romero’s (2009) research finding a strong impact on the achievement,persistence, and graduation of low-income Latino students when taught a culturally-relevant andacademically challenging curriculum offers a powerful example.

Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescue, and Easton (2010) found culturally responsive teach-ing to be an important part of urban school reform. They studied 22 elementary schools inChicago that served mainly low-income students of color over a 6-year period to find out whysome schools undergoing reform substantially improved student achievement whereas otherschools did not. Their research identified five factors that, in combination, matter most: strongprincipal leadership, outreach to the parents and community, development of an orderly student-centered learning environment, organization of curriculum to build grade-level competence, anddevelopment of professional capacity. Teachers’ cross-cultural competence was important in theirabilities to engage with parents and their communities, tap into and work with students’ priorknowledge and culture in their classrooms, and engage students in interesting, student-centeredteaching that was intellectually challenging.

Bryk et al. (2010) pointed out that, “From the students’ perspective, when instruction becomesinteresting and has personal meaning, they are motivated to attend. Students are more likely tobe engaged in schools using an interesting curriculum, where they can take an active role ininstructional activities and exercise some choice in their work as well as be regularly exposed tonew problems and ideas” (p. 103).

Building communication and relationships among diverse students is also important.Cooperative learning, as well as other forms of learning communities (Zirkel, 2008), has astrong and consistent track record of improving student achievement and building student–studentrelationships across race, gender, and ability/disability lines (Cohen & Lotan, 2004; Gillies &Ashman, 2000; Johnson, Johnson, & Maruyama, 1983; Slavin, 1995).Banks (2002) and Zirkel(2008) each reviewed research on the impact of various other curriculum interventions, bothfinding quite a bit of research confirming their impact, especially when used with young children.

Zirkel (2008) also noted several studies at the college level that found open, facilitated dia-log about race and ethnicity in the classroom to positively affect students’ attitudes about otherstudents. Studies have found similar results when teachers integrate sexual orientation into cur-riculum. For example, Schall and Kauffmann (2003) found that fourth- and fifth-grade studentswho previously had routinely insulted each other with the words gay and fag, developed empathytoward LGBT people through a thematic unit that included children’s books with gay and lesbiancharacters.

What do we know from research about the extent to which preservice teacher education prac-tices prepare teachers to work with these strategies effectively in the classroom?This is the focusof the remainder of this chapter.

STUDIES ON PRESERVICE TEACHER PREPARATION FORDIVERSE CLASSROOMS

Subject matter preparation, though crucial, cannot alone adequately prepare prospective teach-ers who are predominantly White and who bring limited knowledge, skills, and experience with

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 527

diverse students. Teacher education research in the United States for the past three decades hassought to determine effective ways to prepare preservice teachers to embrace culturally respon-sive perspectives and practices. To what extent do the studies that have been conducted provideuseful guidance to the design of teacher education programs? We begin with findings from tworesearch reviews.

Hollins and Guzman (2005) reviewed 101 empirical studies published from 1980 to 2002.They identified two major themes emerging from the research: 1.) preservice teachers’ attitudes,beliefs, predispositions, and prior experiences with diverse groups; and 2.) impact of approachesto preparing teachers for diversity. Hollins and Guzman (2005) noted that a large body of thestudies focused on understanding preservice teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, predispositions, and priorexperiences with diverse groups. The aim of these studies was to examine the extent to whichmulticultural education coursework, often connected with a structured field experiences, changespreservice teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and levels of cultural awareness or competency to integratemulticultural concepts in their practice. Sleeter (2008) reviewed much the same body of research,with much the same focus, but included nine additional studies published between 2002 and 2005.

As stated in Sleeter’s review (2008), many studies show that White preservice teachers lackthe understanding of how racism has been institutionalized in the American education system andhow this action perpetuates inequalities in the distribution of education resources. Therefore, dis-cussions about racism, sexism, and White privilege can be viewed as a necessary step towarda liberating process that helps White preservice teachers to recognize oppressive forces thatmarginalize the education of many students. Teacher educators recommend helping preserviceteachers examine their own tacit assumptions, beliefs, and attitudes as basic foundations fromwhich to learn to identify injustices in schools and the wider society, and to build understand-ing of diverse cultural practices and perspectives (Howard, 2003; Villegas, 2007). Understandingthemselves is the basis from which preservice teachers can learn to understand their students’experiences and engage students in the process of constructing, deconstructing, and reconstruct-ing concepts in the learning process. To what extent does research find self-examination to makean impact on preservice teachers?

The two research reviews reported mixed results. Both reviews cited evidence of studies thatreported positive changes of attitudes and gains in cultural consciousness, with preservice teach-ers becoming more willing to work in diverse environments, highlighting factors that led to gains.Courses that demonstrated positive results used multiple strategies such as engaging preserviceteachers in writing autobiographies, reflective journals, and postexperience essays, and preparingindividualized action plans for implementing multicultural education throughout the program.Such courses also engaged preservice teachers in discussions around issues perceived to be con-troversial such as racism and discrimination to help them share perspectives and to explore beliefsand preconceived assumptions about other groups. Structured field experiences placed preserviceteachers in school and/or community settings that were culturally different from their own set-tings and engaged them in investigation activities and reflections that prompted them to examinetheir prior beliefs.

However, though the reviews reported courses and programs that successfully influencedprospective teachers’ perspectives toward other cultures, because of the short-term duration ofmost studies, it is not clear that the preservice teachers will integrate multicultural or culturallyrelevant curriculum and pedagogy when they begin to teach. This outcome makes it necessaryto engage in research that follows up on novice teachers during their first years of teaching to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

528 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

establish their preparedness to work with diverse learners and their resilience to the sociopoliticalchallenges likely to be experienced.

Studies reviewed by Hollins and Guzman (2005) also indicated that some teacher preparationcourses and programs had either little or no significant influence on preservice teachers’ under-standing of diversity issues, engagement in the development of equity pedagogy, or integrationof culturally diverse perspectives in the curriculum during the field experience. These programstended to be short term, lasting one year or less. The programs included short seminar coursesaddressing multicultural issues combined with a few weeks (mostly 3 to 4) of field experience.

Sleeter (2008) found that short-duration field experiences with minimal engagement in actualclassroom teaching is not sufficient to provide prospective teachers with the exposure and culturalconnections they need to make with students as they work in diverse classroom settings. Suchprograms fail to change most White preservice teachers’ earlier beliefs about students of colorand their parents and may reinforce existing stereotypes. Also evident from the reviews was that amajority of White preservice teachers in such programs failed to connect the relationship betweenoppressive structures in education institutions and the macroenvironment. Short programs short-change providing a broad knowledge base on sociopolitical issues that would move preserviceteachers beyond awareness and enable them to challenge the taken for granted and normalizedcultural values embedded in education institutions.

Hollins and Guzman (2005) provided evidence of differing perspectives of preservice teacherson issues of diversity and how these perspectives were influenced by their personal experiences,political ideologies, beliefs about urban or suburban schools, and views on the roles of teachers.Some studies showed that preservice teachers were willing to work in urban schools, althoughthey had reservations about the nature of such schools, and their responses indicated negative per-ceptions of minority students and parents. Some studies reported that preservice teachers wereuncomfortable working with parents from minority groups, indicating inability to forge relation-ships with people of color as a major barrier. This dynamic reflects continuing stereotypes ofminority students and their families, which is a major barrier to teaching diverse students well(Sleeter, 2008; Villegas, 2007). Equity pedagogy involves preservice teachers using constructivistpedagogical approaches to teaching that incorporate students’ prior life and cultural experienceswhen teaching content and skills in the disciplines.

Findings from studies Hollins and Guzman (2005) reviewed revealed major barriers forpreservice teachers’ implementation of equity pedagogy, including inflexibility in their think-ing, limited background experiences, and socialization processes. This concurs with Sleeter’s(2008) observation that “the power of prior socialization and on-going everyday life experi-ences of White people in a racist society” (p. 567) poses a significant challenge for Whitepreservice teachers to recognize and change patterns of racism. In addition, findings from studiesreviewed by Hollins and Guzman indicated the challenges of preservice teachers in integratingcross-cultural knowledge during the practicum, especially in science, because of how preserviceteachers understand subject matter.

Hollins and Guzman (2005) identified several consistent limitations in most of the researchthey reviewed that affects validity and reliability of findings. These limitations stem from studytype, methodologies, sample sizes, and reporting procedures. A majority of the studies weresmall-scale quantitative studies using self reporting survey questionnaires, without additionalresearch techniques such as observation, interviews, or further analysis of documents. Some stud-ies lacked data on initial dispositions or awareness, making it difficult to make clear reference to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 529

changes in preservice teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, or cultural awareness and to determine howsignificantly the coursework and field experiences influenced them. Hollins and Guzman alsoquestioned the validity and reliability of findings from studies that used researcher-developedinstruments that lacked validation procedures in their reporting and thereby had not establishedthe extent to which the instruments actually and consistently measure what they intend. Theyrecommend the use of mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) as a way to provide in-depthunderstanding on teachers’ beliefs and attitudes, as well as program impacts.

Other limitations Hollins and Guzman (2005) cited were small sample sizes used in someof the studies that were not representative of the general population, limiting generalizabilityof findings. Not all studies are conducted for purposes of generalization; in some instances, thepurpose of the inquiry may be to enhance understanding on a specific issue, improve a program,or expand knowledge base in the field of study (Richardson, 1994).

However, teacher–educators need guidance from research as to what approaches are mostlikely to lead preservice teachers to become practicing teachers who can build relationships withstudents from diverse backgrounds, maintain high expectations for their learning, use equitableand culturally responsive pedagogical practices, create multicultural curricula, and build commu-nication among diverse students in the classroom. In our view, longitudinal follow-up studies thatcompare and contrast program models would yield higher predictive results as to what mattersmost at the preservice level and whether change in attitudes, beliefs, and practices persist whenpreservice teachers become practicing teachers.

Because the two reviews take us up to research published in 2005, we looked at four recentlypublished studies to find the extent to which more recent work addresses limitations of earlierresearch. The four studies examined how multicultural coursework combined with a field expe-rience influenced preservice teachers’ predispositions and cultural consciousness, and, in somecases, their use of culturally relevant pedagogical practices.

Barnes (2006) aimed to determine how 24 preservice teachers used culturally responsiveteaching to teach reading to urban elementary school students who scored between low and inter-mediate level in a state reading examination. The study reported that preservice teachers had amore positive view of minority students’ abilities to read after their field experiences than beforetheir field experiences, as reported on a pretest. Preservice teachers now believed that teacherscan nurture minority students’ potential through love, individualized attention, and reinforcementthrough verbal feedback.

Changes in their perspectives were attributed to the nature of their preparation during the fieldexperience. The preparation involved 4 weeks of intensive planning whereby preservice teachersworked closely with their professor and graduate assistant to (1) engage in discussions aroundculturally and linguistically diverse issues through activities such as writing autobiographicalpoem writing and sharing understanding of culture and experiences,(2) design lesson plans thatincorporated multicultural children’s literature and culturally relevant strategies in assessing read-ings,and (3) engage in microteaching to demonstrate skills in developing effective multiculturalpedagogical strategies and understanding of diverse learning styles. All these activities aimedat building in-depth understanding of how sociocultural experiences of students influence indi-viduals’ identity, literacy development, and general educational progress. In the structured fieldexperiences, preservice teachers implemented knowledge and skills acquired during the prefieldpreparation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

530 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

In a pretest–posttest study of 92 White elementary school preservice teachers, Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) studied the impact of a diversity seminar and field experience ina reading/language arts course on preservice teachers’ beliefs and awareness of diverse cultures,assessment strategies, and multicultural pedagogy. Prior to the field experience and seminar,the preservice teachers had completed two multicultural courses. One course addressed issuesaffecting formal education of Blacks, Latinos, and American Indians, whereas the other courseaddressed the social, historical, and multicultural foundations of education. In the diversity sem-inar, preservice teachers discussed issues around racial, linguistic, and economic diversity andengaged with a series of guest speakers involving classroom teachers, principals, and administra-tors who were working in diverse schools where the preservice teachers were placed. The fieldexperience was aimed at providing preservice teachers with opportunities to work with studentsfrom diverse backgrounds across different levels of education (K–eighth grade); it lasted 30 hoursspread across the 10 seminar sessions.

During the field experience, preservice teachers participated in the following activities:(1) taught two lessons or completed equivalent teaching activities, in which they were expected toincorporate multicultural components; (2) participated in classroom observations; and (3) assistedclassroom teachers. Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) found the preservice teachers tobecome more culturally aware and sensitive and less likely to refer students of color for spe-cial education testing after the practicum and seminar than before the practicum. The preserviceteachers learned to recognize that students’ differences emanate from their cultural and linguisticexperiences that should not be viewed as deficits or used to refer them into special educationprograms.

Findings reported by Barnes (2006) and Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) support find-ings from the two reviews (Hollins & Guzman, 2005; Sleeter, 2008) that multicultural teachereducation courses that adopt a self-reflective approach and use structured field experienceshelps preservice teachers to examine their beliefs and enhance understanding of diverse stu-dents. However, neither study identified the specific experiences during the practicum changedpreservice teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about students of color most powerfully. Sleeter (2008)suggests several skills that tend to benefit preservice teachers during the practicum such asactively (1) listening to and learning from members of the community in cases of communitybased learning,(2) participating in community activities,and (3) teaching collaboratively withclassroom teachers.

Siwatu, Polydore, and Starker (2009) administered a self-efficacy instrument to 104 preserviceteachers to examine their beliefs regarding culturally responsive teaching in their classrooms.These preservice teachers had already completed two courses on cultural diversity and a fieldexperience. Findings revealed that the preservice teachers felt efficacious in their abilities to forgepersonal relationships, create learning environments that would incorporate learners’ interest, andfoster trust and sense of belonging.

A majority of the preservice teachers (87%) said that after the courses on cultural diversityand field experience, they now preferred to work in public schools. However, they indicatedlow self-efficacy in their abilities to integrate culturally responsive curriculum in their practices.In particular, math and science preservice teachers indicated low ability to integrate cultural con-tributions into their disciplines. This outcome led the researchers to conclude that preserviceteachers were less likely to incorporate in their future classrooms critical aspects of culturally

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 531

responsive teaching. Because the study did not administer a pretest, one cannot determine howthe program influenced their responses.

Mysore, Lincoln, and Wavering (2006) studied 40 elementary and middle-school levelpreservice teachers in a master of arts teaching program to determine the impact of multiculturalcoursework combined with field experience on their attitudes toward multicultural issues. Resultsfrom quantitative and qualitative data indicated a significant positive impact, but there wasgreat variety in how preservice teachers’ positive attitudes influenced their uses of multiculturalcurriculum during their field experiences.

Some preservice teachers did not incorporate multicultural issues, citing lack of flexibilityfrom the mentoring teachers as a hindrance. A few preservice teachers incorporated culturalknowledge in their practices to varied degrees such as engaging learners in a variety of peda-gogical approaches or displaying posters of different cultural groups in their classrooms. Otherpreservice teachers integrated cultural perspectives only in specific disciplines like civics courses,reporting positive responses from their students when they integrated coursework.

The researchers were concerned with responses by participants who indicated having avoideddiscussions on topics perceived as sensitive, and in their views, having potential to upset somestudents. (Similar concerns have been raised by Sleeter, 2008, and Howard, 2003; regardinghow preservice teachers often find discussions on issues such as racism, religion, and sexualorientation as challenging for fear of being viewed as being insensitive or politically incorrect.)

Another concern Mysore et al. (2006) found was that many preservice teachers indicated theywould integrate cross-cultural issues in their future classrooms only if they had students fromdifferent cultural groups. This finding highlights questions raised by Siwatu et al. (2006) aboutprospective teachers’ abilities to effectively implement constructivist approaches that build on allaspects of students’ backgrounds across race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Our review of the four recent studies confirmed the two earlier reviews that teacher educationresearch is still dominated by small-scale investigations of preservice teachers’ beliefs, attitudes,background experiences, cultural awareness, and conception of multicultural issues. Well-planned multicultural courses connected with structured field experiences enhance preserviceteachers’ awareness of issues and their attitudes toward historically marginalized students, atleast as gauged from before and after coursework and fieldwork.

What happens when they leave their teacher preparation programs and begin to teach as regularfull-time teachers is not clear from this body of research. In addition, the research has focusedmore on race and ethnicity rather than on social class or sexual orientation. How preserviceteachers interpret poverty, for example, is rarely the focus of attention.

Although the research as a whole reflects levels of success by multicultural teacher educa-tion programs on increasing preservice teachers’ cultural consciousness, it also indicates thatthere remain major tasks ahead for teacher educators to move preservice teachers beyond cul-tural awareness. It appears that teacher education programs have not had significant impact onhelping preservice teachers integrate multicultural content in the curriculum, indicating a substan-tive challenge to preservice teachers as they transition into schools and classrooms. We concurwith Hollins and Guzman (2005) and Siwatu et al. (2009) that cultural awareness of preserviceteachers may not be a predictor of their abilities to integrate culturally relevant curriculum. Thequestion is whether they can sustain cultural consciousness as they enter their future classrooms,use and build on their preparation in multicultural curriculum and equity pedagogy, and chal-lenge social inequalities that limit education achievements of historically marginalized students.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

532 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

Because these outcomes are important, we extended our discussion to review studies that focuson novice teachers’ first years of teaching.

NOVICE TEACHERS SUCCESS AND CHALLENGESIN FIRST YEARS OF PRACTICE

We reviewed three studies that focused on novice teachers’ experiences in the classrooms andschools during their first 4 years of teaching. Generally these studies revealed deep strugglescaused by standardized curriculum, standardized testing, school policies, time constrains, andpressures from administration and teaching colleagues. However, studies also showed that whennovice teachers feel that they are well prepared by their teacher education programs, they join theteaching force with optimistic views and enthusiasm that they can become change agents. Suchteachers are more likely to engage in constructivist or culturally responsive teaching approachesand challenge those policies they view as hindrance to students’ learning.

However, the question remains regarding the degree of resilience before novice teacherssuccumb to the pressures encountered in the school system. Two of the studies (Agee, 2004;Athanases & Oliveira, 2008) followed novice teachers into their first three years of teaching,whereas one (McNeal, 2005) followed up novice teachers who were at the beginning of their 4thyear of teaching. All three studies adopted a qualitative research methodology.

Agee (2004) examined experiences of an African American high school English teacher as sheintroduced multicultural literature while using a constructivist approach. During her first year ofteaching, she succeeded in enhancing students’ understanding of racial and cultural differencesand was helped by great support from the school district administration and the department. In hersecond year, with policy changes and more focus on standardized testing, the novice teacherfound herself in the middle of epistemological dilemma that resulted from a mismatch betweenher envisioned identity as a change agent and the demands from high-stakes tests that pressuredthe department to standardize their approach to teaching literature.

She struggled to reconcile how to incorporate multicultural literature using constructivistapproach and with covering content to help students pass the exams. Eventually she realized thatstudents’ academic success will be measured based on passing the mandated departmental andstate tests rather than on their abilities to understand and build cross-cultural and cross-racial rela-tionships. By the end of her 2nd year, the novice teacher succumbed to the pressures, thwartingher vision of becoming a change agent.

McNeal (2005) studied experiences of two novice high school English teachers (one AfricanAmerican, the other White) in their 4th years of teaching who indicated having successfullyimplemented several multicultural components into their practices. The data were collectedthrough interviews, analysis of lesson plans, teaching and learning materials, and portfoliosprepared during their teacher education programs and observation of 16 teaching sessions.

The novice teachers said that they incorporated multicultural literature, applied classroomconcepts to real-life experiences of students, used active learning, created a conducive classroomenvironment, engaged students in group activities, and used critical pedagogy. For example oneteacher indicated that students were engaged in critical examination of the sociopolitical plotsdepicted in the class texts. The classroom observations documented considerable consistencybetween what the two teachers said they were doing and what they actually did. Their practices

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 533

differed from each other in that one of the teachers was not observed integrating multiculturalliterature in her practice, and the other teacher was not observed using cooperative learning.The teachers indicated that their success in integrating multicultural aspects in their teachingwas supported partly by their earlier background experiences, especially their positive schoolexperiences that exposed them to enriched learning environment and quality education, inspiringthem to share similar experiences with their own students.

These experiences partly guided their decisions to work in a culturally diverse setting as theyperceived their experiences as providing them with an understanding of challenges and strug-gles facing students. At the same time the teachers indicated that, despite the challenges facingstudents, the teachers have the capability to provide meaningful learning experiences to addressstudents’ challenges and set higher expectations. The limitation of this study was its short dura-tion that made it difficult to conclude whether the teachers incorporated multicultural componentsin their practices routinely or only during this period of the study.

Athanases and Oliveira (2008) conducted a follow-up study of 38 graduates from a credentialprogram to illuminate how well they were prepared to advocate for educational equity in theirclassrooms, school contexts, and society. Participants, who varied by ethnicity, years of teaching,grade levels taught, and subject area, took part in focus groups. Findings revealed that 50% of theparticipants carried out advocacy activities beyond their classrooms to the school and communitycontexts such as addressing those policies that seemed to limit instructional materials, and testingconditions that disadvantage students with special needs.

The other 50% of the teachers made changes within the safety of their own classroomswhere they had more control. For example, six teachers indicated addressing learning needsof students with learning disabilities by individualizing the learning process, and eight teach-ers discussed having to resolve linguistic conflicts among White and Spanish students byengaging them in class discussions on importance of all languages. The success of the noviceteachers in challenging the status quo came from their teacher preparation during which theydiscussed how to navigate the system by building relationships through diplomacy, effectivelycommunicate, marshal resources, and align themselves with key players with political andeconomic clout.

As stated by these teachers, they came out of the program equipped with political and literacyskills that supported their advocacy. Although the novice teachers experienced success, someof them reported frustrations due to resistance from the school administration, colleagues whowanted to maintain the status quo, and pressures of curriculum coverage and testing.

These studies reveal that becoming change agents creates conflicts and dilemmas as noviceteachers wrestle with ethical, political, cultural, and economic issues within the school system.The question is whether multicultural teacher education programs prepare prospective teach-ers for the challenges they are likely to face within the school context that is dominated bystandardized curriculum and testing. Findings from these studies reveal that the components ofmulticulturalism that novice teachers implement depends partly on those components empha-sized during their teacher preparation; there is variation in the extent to the components teachereducation programs prepare teachers in key aspects of multicultural education.

Integrating multicultural content into the curriculum appears to be the most challenging aspectfor preservice and novice teachers. We agree with Agee’s (2004) and Athanases and Oliveira’s(2008) observation that the context in which the novice teachers work has significant influencein shaping and constraining the implementation of their multicultural goals and defining their

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

534 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

practice. Therefore, teacher education has to take into consideration the context where preserviceteachers will work when preparing them.

THE NATURE OF RESEARCH NEEDED TO INFORM TEACHER EDUCATION

A majority of teacher education candidates in the United States come from White, female, het-erosexual, middle-class backgrounds, which are increasingly at odds with the backgrounds ofstudents. Although all prospective teachers need preparation to teach diverse students well, thediscrepancy between the backgrounds of the majority of preservice teachers and realities of publicschools creates challenges to teacher education programs.

Research on teacher education suggests that some program components and practices do mat-ter, including engagement of preservice teachers in ongoing reflection about issues of diversityand social justice, and engaging them in structured field experiences in which they learn to iden-tify and build on cultural and linguistic strengths of students and to identify and address patternsof discrimination. But, as we have noted, preservice teachers tend to leave teacher educationprograms at an awareness level, whereas students they teach need teachers who have developedsome expertise in reaching and teaching them well. Therefore, understanding how teacher edu-cation programs can equip such teachers with the necessary attitudes, skills, and knowledge toenable them teach students from different backgrounds as they enter the teaching force should bea continued priority.

The research we reviewed continues to be limited by the prevalence of small-scale studiesthat mainly use quantitative survey methods, limitations that have dominated teacher educationresearch for the past three decades. Any progress reported on changes in preservice teachers’multicultural skills, knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs cannot be assumed with certainty to besustainable over a long period of time. This result makes it difficult to assume that findingsfrom studies of preservice teachers while they are enrolled in their teacher education programscan predict their abilities to form relationships with students from backgrounds different fromtheir own backgrounds, bridge home and school cultures, integrate multicultural content into thecurriculum, use pedagogy equitably in the classroom to teach all students well, build relation-ships among students, and recognize and challenge patterns and practices of discrimination andinjustice. In addition, because most multicultural teacher education research is not designed tocompare and contrast the impact of different forms or models of teacher preparation, it is difficultto identify definitively the components or practices matter most.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We need research that follows teachers through their teacher preparation programs and into theirfirst years of teaching so we can determine the extent and ways multicultural teacher preparationhelps them to become better teachers. Such research would also help preservice programs tofocus more directly on the needs of teachers and the barriers they confront during their earlyyears of teaching.

We also need research that compares and contrasts different models of multicultural teacherpreparation. For example, what kinds of field experiences matter most? Is it more powerful to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHER PREPARATION TO TEACH DIVERSE STUDENTS 535

infuse multicultural content through a program or to offer distinct coursework? Finally, ratherthan continuing to produce small-scale case studies, researchers should construct studies withmixed methods approaches that yield predictory long-term results that would inform the directionof multicultural teacher candidates’ preparation. Although case studies have great value in illu-minating practice and probing issues, we also need generalizable data that can help in advocatingfor teacher preparation policy and in program design.

REFERENCES

Agee, J. (2004). Negotiating a teaching identity: An African American teacher’s struggle to teach in test driven contexts.Teachers College Record, 106(4), 747–774.

Athanases, S. Z., & Oliveira, L. C. D. (2008). Advocacy for equity in classrooms and beyond: New teachers’ challengesand responses.Teachers College Record, 110(1), 64–104.

Banks, J. A. (2002). An introduction to multicultural education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Barnes, C. J. (2006). Preparing preservice teachers to teach in culturally responsive way. Negro Educational Review,

57(1/2), 85–100.Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Cavanagh, T., & Teddy, L. (2009). Te Kotahitanga: Addressing educational disparities facing

Maori students in New Zealand. Teaching and Teacher Education 25(5), 734–742.Bower, L., & Klecka, C. (2009). (Re)considering normal: Queering social norms for parents and teachers. Teaching

Education, 20(4), 357–374.Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescue, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Cammarota, J., & Romero, A. (2009). The social justice education project. In W. Ayers, T. Quinn, & D. Stovall (Eds.),

The handbook of social justice in education (pp. 465–476). New York, NY: Routledge.Cochran-Smith, M. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The discourse reform in teacher education. Education

Researcher, 30(8), 3–18.Cohen, E.G., & Lotan, R.A. (2004). Equity in heterogeneous classrooms. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Ed.),

Handbook of research in multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 736–750). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Ferguson, R. F. (2003). Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the Black-White test score gap. Urban Education

38(4), 460–507.Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Gillies, R. M., & Ashman, A. F. (2000). The effects of cooperative learning on students with learning difficulties in the

lower elementary school. Journal of Special Education, 34(1), 19–27.Hawkins, J. D., Guo, J., Hill, K. G., Battin-Pearson, S., & Abbott, R. D. (2001). Long-term effects of the Seattle Social

Development intervention on school bonding trajectories. Applied Developmental Science, 5(4), 225–236.Hollins, E., & Guzman, M. T. (2005). Research on preparing teachers for diverse populations. In M. Cochran-Smith & K.

Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp.477–548). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection. Theory into Practice,42(3), 195–202.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Maruyama, G. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneousand homogeneous individuals. Review of Educational Research, 53(5), 51–54.

McNeal, K. (2005). The influence of a multicultural teacher education program on teachers’ multicultural practices.Intercultural Education, 16(4), 405–419.

Mysore, A. R., Lincoln, F., & Wavering, J. M., (2006). Attitudes of preservice teachers toward issues in multiculturaleducation. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 21(1), 73–85.

Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 8–10.Schall, J., & Kauffmann, G. (2003). Exploring literature with gay and lesbian characters in the elementary school. Journal

of Children’s Literature, 29(1), 36–45.Siwatu, K. O., Polydore, C. L., & Starker, T. V. (2009). Prospective elementary school teachers’ culturally responsive

teaching self-efficacy beliefs. Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 4(1), 1–15.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

536 CHRISTINE E. SLEETER AND JENIPHER OWUOR

Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning and intergroup relations. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbookof research in multicultural education (pp. 628–634). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Sleeter, C. E. (2008). Preparing White teachers for diverse students. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, &J. McIntyre (Eds.),Handbook of research in teacher education: Enduring issues in changing contexts (3rd ed.,pp. 559–582). New York, NY: Routledge.

Villegas, A. M. (2007). Dispositions in teacher education: a look at social justice. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(5),370–380.

Walker-Dalhouse, D.,& Dalhouse, A. D. (2006). Investigating White preservice teachers’ beliefs about teaching inculturally diverse classrooms. Negro Educational Review, 57(1/2), 69–84.

Zirkel, S. (2008). The influence of multicultural education practices on student outcomes and intergroup relations.Teachers College Record 110(6), 1147–1181.

Christine E. Sleeter, Professor Emerita in the College of Professional Studies at CaliforniaState University–Monterey, Bay, currently serves as president of the National Associationfor Multicultural Education. Her research focuses on antiracist multicultural education andmulticultural teacher education; she has published more than 100 journal articles, book chapters,and books, most recently Professional Development for Culturally Responsive and Relationship-Based Pedagogy.

Jenipher Owuor, PhD, is an adjunct faculty member at Ellis University Chicago, College ofEducation. She holds a doctorate in curriculum and instruction from the University of BritishColumbia. Her recent research focused on Kenya’s teachers’ perception of diversity given theunique challenges impacting the country’s education due to poverty and HIV Aids pandemic.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ada

ms

Stat

e U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

56 0

4 N

ovem

ber

2014