For that reason, I believe I have achieved course field experience competencies B.: "... assess and recognize the role of school and community resources in maintaining an equitable classroom environment that values relationships and is responsive to culture, gender, language, and ability, supporting the needs..." As this course oversaw that I wrote my first lesson plans, the processes involved in writing were entirely dependent upon preparative thinking about how students could incorporate their identities into the lesson, organizing those strategies, and then editing them so that they were both respectful and fruitful for discussions that would benefit the lesson. I learned to scaffold through Dr. Gleason's preferred methods, importing in my lesson plan a cohesive learning target that clearly states audience, behavior, condition, and degree of mastery so that the involved incorporation would lead the lesson rather than simply be touched upon. For a lesson to be truly culturally responsive pedagogy, the lesson would need to be led by the identities. It was an essential step while writing the learning target to evaluate how the learning target, especially the degree of mastery, would be attained by diverse learners.

​

The philosophy that I have described also implements course field experience competency F., which is: "report on and recognize how knowledge of unique student learning needs and positive learning environments enable them to differentiate instruction and communicate with families and communities to ensure that all learners, particularly those traditionally underserved, are valued in schools."

 

Continuing, it was consistently helpful to use Dr. Gleason's advice to English education students in reading through state standards before preceding with lesson plans. He shared at the beginning of the course that, in his opinion, English and Langauge Arts standard CC.1.3.11-12 B would be the most useful sample standard for our two lesson plans. His opinion was significant to reference because this sample standard emphasizes finding textual evidence and analysis, which I worked to incorporate into my lesson plans, as it is very significant for students to develop skills in both those aspects of English education at all stages of learning and all grade-levels.

​

​

​

​

​

​

Through reading Nieto and the experiences of English language educators from Larson and Keiper, I have been able to define and clearly identify the interpersonal value of culturally responsive pedagogy in the classroom. Its practices require the educator to discuss race, ethnicity, and culture with their students, as well as with their families. From those discussions, the educator will have to take time researching the ways of the cultures to then better comprehend how the cultures should lead lesson plan-writing. I worked to describe this process of work in my essay on culturally responsive pedagogy:

​

"Defining, Supporting and Challenging, and Contextualizing Culturally Responsive Pedagogy

​

          Whiteness has conquered and colonized secondary-level English reading throughout the history of education. Secondary-level reading, in its whiteness, largely centers the lives of people of European-descent and readers who are equally of European descent, with limited room for stories and readers who are culturally diverse-- should any room be provided. Recent scholarship in education suggests that pedagogy be structured through an intersectional framework that reads, inclusively, a worldview of all cultures, races and ethnicities, and abilities. It is this pedagogy, culturally responsive pedagogy, that reforms current secondary-level English reading through the scholarship of Sonia Nieto, Cynthia Levine-Rasky, and Hassan J. Alnawar. Students would then be offered an array of texts that provide representation. To understand culturally responsive pedagogy, educators must identify the rich definition and compare it to whiteness studies, identify policies and practices that culturally responsive pedagogy supports and challenges, and then contextualize how culturally responsive pedagogy could be practiced in a secondary-level English classroom such as my own.

          The journey to reform education’s structure, to, therein, offer a more inclusive worldview, is considered achievable through culturally responsive pedagogy, as suggested by scholars of education. To understand culturally responsive pedagogy, it must be first defined. Sonia Nieto (2013) writes in her Finding Joy in Teaching Students of Diverse Backgrounds that culturally responsive pedagogy is 'taking students’ identities into account when interacting with them' with 'critical care,' which imports 'a historical understanding of students’ lives and their sociopolitical realities' as educators’ structures or frameworks for educating (Nieto, 2013, p. 34). To Nieto (2013), this approach to students with care is not limited to financial perceptions of the sociopolitical but includes many aspects of students’ welfare. She writes that educators may apply 'critical care' to: 'poverty, limited curricular and extra-curricular opportunities, poor health care and nutrition, stressors in the home, the nature of the community, among others' (Nieto, 2013, p. 35). This structure and framework elucidates cultures, races, and ethnicities as they have and continue to exist. It not only allows educators the application of care but additionally allows them to provide greater services and accesses for students who may be disadvantaged within one or more intersectional aspects of their welfare. To provide for them where they are otherwise disadvantaged, educators cannot be 'colorblind' (Nieto, 2013, p. 34) but must be wholly able to recognize culture as a reality that actively influences the classroom. There are many structures that can demonstrate these qualities within teaching. However, Nieto (2013) describes in her Finding Joy in Teaching Students of Diverse Backgrounds the work of educator Angeles Peréz who reconciled and reformed language instruction to serve a more intersectional array of students. Educators who understand the definition of culturally responsive pedagogy must then equally reconcile and reform whiteness in education and identify examples.
          After educators understand the definition of culturally responsive pedagogy, they must subsequently acknowledge whiteness within education, as a structure and framework that serves white students. It takes place in perhaps all subjects, no less secondary-level English reading and language classes. Cynthia Levine-Rasky (2002) writes of reforming whiteness in English academia in her Working Through Whiteness. She writes that its ambition is 'to reduce social distance, dominants must acknowledge that agency is linked to identity,' as educators must 'recognize the disjuncture between their self-ascribed egalitarianism and their actual behavior' (Levine-Rasky, 2002, p. 135). Many language instructions, such as secondary-level English reading lists, suffer from 'disjuncture,' as described by Levine-Rasky (2002), in that they only provide literature about white people written by white people, all in the English language, rather than offer a more intersectional array of texts that provide representation to students. An Arab or sub-Arab identity student should be provided texts that serve and access his or her identity as an Arab, for example. Again, educators are able to more acutely provide for students when they acknowledge or recognize the agency of culture within education’s whiteness. Nieto (2013)and Levine-Rasky’s (2002) structure for culturally responsive pedagogy should, therein, be interpreted as anti-'colorblind' and pro-'[color].' These sentiments echo Angela Davis and her University of California, Santa Cruz’s Institute for Social Transformation (UCSC, 2020). Culturally responsive pedagogy practices can take many forms to be anti-'colorblind' and pro-'[color],' such as in activities that are inclusive of different cultures and languages. Nieto describes the work of Angeles Peréz as demonstrative of this pedagogy.
          Nieto (2013) writes that Peréz actively chose to teach at a disadvantaged multilingual school with the ambition of supporting its students for the reason that they were disadvantaged, acknowledging the influence of systemic oppressors in the quality of students’ performances like in language emersion. Nieto (2013) describes this educator’s process in reforming education’s structure and framework to serve students who suffered language-confusion with English, specifically. During her teaching, Peréz observed 'students who are reluctant to raise their hand in class because they feel that their English is not good enough' (Nieto, 2013, p. 39). Peréz would assure students that, while she '[respected] their feelings,' she would '[find] other ways to access them and, eventually, [help] them feel comfortable enough to participate in a more public way' (Nieto, 2013, p. 40). Through the critical care of her culturally responsive pedagogy for bilingual students, many of whom Nieto (2013) describes as being early and emerging second-language learners, Peréz established non-English methods of class participation. Peréz’s non-English methods were even extended into standardized tests preparation that resulted in students performing highly at the end of the year in their state test (Nieto, 2013, p. 40). Educators should structure pedagogy similarly to Peréz in viewing the cultures of students as linked to identity and necessary in providing services and accesses, therein, the instruction being anti-'colorblind' and pro-'color,' and incorporate a more intersectional representation. Continuing, educators may identify the different policies and practices that support culturally responsive pedagogy and its intersectional representation.
          Educators may identify the numerous policies and practices from which culturally responsive pedagogy stems. While there are many available policies and practices that educators may choose to use, many are commonly identifiable and performed in instruction, at times, regularly. The greatest example is Peréz’s implementing individualized educational plans, communicating their importance to students’ parents, and thereafter establishing an understanding of strengths and weaknesses as a community. Nieto (2013) writes that Peréz can then '[address goals] and how long the services will be provided' (Nieto, 2013, p. 98). Through communication, the culturally responsive pedagogy is importantly sustainable. Students’ communities are able to cultivate an environment where their cultural strengths and weaknesses are understood to reason the support systems necessary for the strengths to continue and be refined, as well as weaknesses be retaught. Ultimately, policies and practices must sustain the culturally responsive pedagogy to demonstrate richly effective performances from students. Hassan J. Alnawar (2015) writes in his 'Raising Techers’ Cultural Knowledge of Middle Eastern Students in The Classroom,' which specifies its research of culturally responsive pedagogy on instructing students who are Arab and of sub-Arab identities, that teachers must communicate with the students’ community and the understanding of:
                    'their students’ lives, such as students’ immigration history, family makeup, and favorite activities, to be able to teach     

                    CRP [or culturally responsive pedagogy] in a meaningful engaging way' (Alnawar, 2015, p. 11).
When educators apply practices, as Peréz utilized implementing individualized educational plans, they are able to recognize students’ diverse cultural backgrounds individually from the understanding of the students’ community, from both within the school and outside of the school when communicating with parents, to ultimately sustain their pedagogy. It will allow for the classroom to be a safe place of unique development where students can creatively risk-take to learn. Additionally, Alnawar (2015) highlights how policies and practices like individualized educational plans 'demonstrate the inadequate traditional instructional approaches that failed to provide' (Alnawar, 2015, p. 11). When the 'traditional instructional' fails students of diverse cultural backgrounds, the individualized has been studied to produce more successful results from students. It is insightful for educators to be provided with policies and practices that are supported by culturally responsive pedagogy—however, educators must equally identify those that culturally responsive pedagogy challenges.
          In identifying policies and practices that are challenged by culturally responsive pedagogy, educators will be bettered when actively instructing their students. These thoughts are shared by Nieto (2013) and Levine-Rasky (2002), as well as Alnawar (2015). Alnawar elucidates in his 'Raising Teachers’ Cultural Knowledge of Middle Eastern Students in The Classroom' that the structure and framework of instruction must be reformed to be not only aware of cultures and all diversity taking place in the classroom but to also reflect it. For this reason, culturally responsive pedagogy should incorporate the cultures of the classroom into instruction rather than simply including it or referencing it. He writes that it is deficient to only '[acknowledge] and [recognize] the voices and knowledge of diverse ethnic groups' (Alnawar, 2015, p. 4) without structuring instruction in ways that it influences the learning as a whole. In comparison, Peréz offers educators a significant example in structuring instruction so that it reflects the students, as she taught bilingual students in their native languages and provided them services and accesses that were relevant to their cultures, therefore influencing their learning as a whole. These actions promote more successful results. It is not enough to simply acknowledge cultures in classrooms. Instruction that only acknowledges culture and does not restructure itself to its students cultures does not cultivate sustainable culturally responsive pedagogy but demotes the potential of the students’ performances. Alnawar (2015) writes, for example, that this demotion frequently occurs when educators 'lack of interest' (Alnawar, 2015, p. 32) in restructuring instruction based on the cultures. It may occur in any educator, as exemplified by Nieto’s (2013) inclusion of Yoland Harris. Harris worked as a teacher’s assistant to dedicate time and research into learning more of students’ cultures to then offer her knowledge with others educators. By doing so, Yolanda witnesses the importance of this knowledge and its effects in classrooms where this knowledge does not restructure instruction and educators remain disinterested (Nieto, 2013, p. 93). In his 'Raising Teachers’ Cultural Knowledge of Middle Eastern Students in The Classroom,' Alnawar (2015) describes this disinterest as challenging real learning. One of his disinterested educator interviewees admitted to perpetuating this challenge, writing:
                    'I am open to learning more about this growing community of Middle Eastern learners but, honestly, am concerned

                    about having time to do so. The little contracted time we have to collaborate, plan, and assess is already seriously

                    hampered by meetings for new technology, curriculum, and other obligations…' (Alnawar, 2015, p. 32).
Alnawar (2015) uses this interview to demonstrate the illogic in perpetuating a classroom where culture does not influence learning. It is, perhaps, even more foolish when the educator admits it. For these reasons, acknowledging cultures without restructuring instruction challenges culturally responsive pedagogy, as well as its ability to cultivate sustainability amongst students. The  cultures of students import that the educator acknowledges their cultures and structure instruction from that knowledge. It is work that I, as a secondary-level English educator, will certainly practice.
          I will implement this understanding of culturally responsive pedagogy, as all educators must, into my secondary-level English classroom. There must be an awareness of its definition and comparison to whiteness, policies and practices that both support it and challenge it, and, by contextualizing its knowledge into my own future practices, I can detail my ideas for acknowledging and structuring cultures into pedagogy. I would begin by inquiring throughout the first week of instruction each student for information on their cultures and cultural backgrounds, through activities and personal quizzes. This information will lead me to communicate with families or guardians and friends to more directly learn acute aspects of students’ identities. As I am Iranian and Turkish, which are both, technically, sub-Arab identities, I can see myself working to establish a representational role to other Arab and sub-Arab identities in the classroom, both to students and perhaps their families or guardians and friends. I would then restructure reading and the evaluation of the class’ readings. Tellingly, I can presume that my understanding their cultures and restructuring pedagogy to serve and access their cultures will require that I instruct the class with an array of intersectional texts and discuss postcolonial theories of those texts. A counterargument that I can visualize at this time is the idea that by suggesting I be representational of Arab and sub-Arab students I conflate the Arab and sub-Arab identities because there is not a monolithic experience, rather all are unique. In this case of representation, I would not be achieving in building-relationships or self-esteem. I would be, instead, conflating them into compartments that theorize they are similar to me. I believe that this case is ultimately avoided by shaping instruction so that it is personalized to the student’s culture, as suggested by culturally responsive pedagogy, because it allows the educator to research the uniqueness of one experience from another. To that extent, my instruction can perhaps relate to similar experiences from other Arab and sub-Arab identities as my own—bond over similar family stories, locations, holiday proceedings, and, naturally the delicious foods of the Middle East. These are all modern and, perhaps, non-traditional aspects of instruction that I am greatly interested in, meaning there will always be interest and effort in sustaining culturally responsive pedagogy in my classrooms. However, I am most hopeful that the classroom will include Arab and sub-Arab students so that I can incorporate the knowledge of my own life into their learning, which was demonstrated by Peréz when she was opportune to teach equally bilingual students. I will use my knowledge of students’ cultures to first restructure instruction so that students are reaching high-level texts of their own cultures and secondly apply post-colonial theories to these texts so that students may critically and creatively evaluate the texts themselves. These are the contexts of my future practice of culturally responsive pedagogy.
          Whiteness has conquered and colonized secondary-level English reading throughout the history of education, including secondary-level reading. However, recent scholarship in education has suggested that pedagogy be structured through an intersectional framework that reads, inclusively, a worldview of all cultures, races and ethnicities, and abilities. This scholarship is culturally responsive pedagogy. To understand culturally responsive pedagogy, educators must identify the rich definition and compare it to whiteness studies, identify policies and practices that culturally responsive pedagogy supports and challenges, and then contextualize how culturally responsive pedagogy could be practiced in a secondary-level English classroom such as my own. It is a restructuring of instruction for which I am prepared."

 

Works Cited

Alnawar, Hassan J. 2015. “Raising Teachers’ Cultural Knowledge of  Middle Eastern Students in The Classroom.” Digital

          Commons at California State Univ. California State University, Monterey Bay, California State University, Monterey Bay,

          2015, digitalcommons.csumb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1500&context=caps_thes.

Levine-Rasky, C. (Ed.). 2002. Working through whiteness: International perspectives. ProQuest Ebook Central

          https://ebookcentral.proquest.com.

Nieto, Sonia. 2013. Finding Joy in Teaching Students of Diverse Backgrounds: Culturally Responsive and Socially Just

          Practices in U.S. Classrooms. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann Publishing.

University of California, Santa Cruz. 2020, September 14. Anti-racism and Criminal Justice Reform Resources. UCSC Institute

for Social Transformation. https://transform.ucsc.edu/anti-racism-resources/.