0004744157 1299..1319 - Home - Springer

Community-Engaged Teacher Preparationand the Development of Dispositions forEquity and Social Justice

58

Eva M. Zygmunt, Kristin Cipollone, and Susan Tancock

ContentsCultivating and Assessing Dispositions for Social Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303

Program Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1303Community-Engaged Pedagogies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1304Community Learning with Mentor Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1305Critical Service Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1306Classroom Teaching and Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1307Reflective Pedagogies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1307Dialogue Journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1308Courageous Conversation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1309Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1310Photovoice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1311Culminating Assessment: Defense of Dispositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1312Culturally Responsive Classroom Manifesto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1312

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1314References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1316

AbstractDrawing upon the 10-year history of a program of community-engaged teacherpreparation situated in a predominantly marginalized/minoritized neighborhood,this chapter focuses upon the development of teacher dispositions for equity andsocial justice. The authors highlight how a program, alongside a cadre of com-munity mentors, cultivates the requisite dispositions to become culturally respon-sive educators and ensure a socially just and equitable educational experience forthe children they teach and from whom they are profoundly privileged to learn.The chapter details community-engaged and reflective pedagogies institutedwithin the context of an integrated and interdisciplinary semester of coursework,

E. M. Zygmunt (*) · K. Cipollone · S. TancockBall State University, Muncie, IN, USAe-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020R. Papa (ed.), Handbook on Promoting Social Justice in Education,https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14625-2_135

1299

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/978-3-030-14625-2_135&domain=pdf

mailto:[email protected]



https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14625-2_135

wrapped around a practicum experience in local schools. The authors assert theplausibility of assessing dispositions toward equity and social justice and call fora mandate to include them in the language of teacher preparation accreditationstandards if the vision of education equity is to become a reality.

KeywordsDispositions · Teacher preparation · Community-engaged · Equity · Socialjustice · Critical service learning · Dialogue journals · Courageous conversation ·Interdisciplinary coursework · Conceptual framework

It has been nearly two decades since the National Association of Colleges forTeacher Education instituted policy requiring programs of educator preparationseeking accreditation to assess not only candidates’ knowledge and skill set butalso their dispositions toward teaching and learning (NCATE, 2002). This was notwithout controversy. As the field wrestled to cultivate consensus on the definition ofa common set of dispositions integral to effective teaching, it also grappled with thequestion of whether mechanisms could be developed through which such evasivemeasures could be reliably assessed (Borko, Liston & Whitcomb, 2007).

Restraint in espousing particular political ideologies and a morality mandate(Wilkerson, 2006) informed the emerging conversation regarding educator disposi-tions. Exemplars of behaviors originally provided by NCATE included terms such as“caring and honesty” and commitments to constructs such as “equity and socialjustice” (NCATE, 2002) were later scuttled. It is important to note that the term“social justice” has been politically polarizing in the field, fueled by a fear thatincreasing rights for the marginalized means decreasing what is available to themajority (Landorf & Nevin, 2007). Ironically, it is this mindset that scholars who arewed to dispositions for social justice seek to extinguish in future teachers.

In part due to pressure to adopt a posture of political neutrality, NCATE, coun-tering the criticism and counsel of social justice-committed scholars (Banks, 2004;Cochran-Smith, 1999; Zeichner, 2006), made the controversial decision to omit theterm “social justice” in its glossary of potential dispositions to assess in thoseseeking entrance into the teaching profession (Wise, 2006). While distinct special-ized professional associations (SPAs) responsible for vetting data provided for thepurposes of program accreditation have included the term social justice among thedesirable dispositions for teachers (notably the National Council for Teachers ofEnglish; see Burns & Miller 2017), the Council for the Accreditation of EducatorPreparation (CAEP), NCATE’s progeny, has yet to restore the term in the manualwhich guides programs of teacher preparation throughout the country. Similarly,while CAEP, (2018) defines dispositions as “the habits of professional action andmoral commitments that underlie an educator’s performance” (p. 110), they referreaders to the InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards (CCSSO, 2013) for elabo-ration – another document that is void of the vocabulary of social justice.

Although a mandatory component in the accreditation of programs of educatorpreparation is documentation of the assessment of candidate dispositions, there is

1300 E. M. Zygmunt et al.

little consensus in the field on the specifics of which are required in order toprovide a just and equitable education for all children. CAEP has provided animprecise and somewhat nebulous definition of the term dispositions; thus theexact nature of such attitudes, values, and beliefs is left in the hands of programs ofeducator preparation to explicate. The result is a field with a vast continuum ofmission-dependent emphases ranging from those purely professional and practi-cal, to those with more nuanced foci on issues of critical consciousness, culturalfluency, and equity/social justice.

There exists a compelling argument that dispositions toward social justice areessential to the underlying foundation of public education – that being the guar-antee that all children have access to a collective body of knowledge required toengender their active participation in a truly democratic society. The assurance ofsuch requires the belief in the capacity of all children to learn, along with the willto enact pedagogies which are culturally relevant, responsive, and sustaining (Gay,2002; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2017). Such dispositionsadditionally necessitate the desire to address structural and systemic inequities thatcompromise many children’s access and opportunity, leading to achievementdifferentials between culturally, socioeconomically, and linguistically non-domi-nant learners and their dominant peers that continue to plague the educationallandscape.

While there is research to support that pre-service teachers with documenteddispositions toward social justice have high expectations for all children, enactpedagogies that build on their cultural resources, and are advocates for larger effortsfor social change (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009), there exists contention amongscholars in the field regarding the plausibility of programs of educator preparationto develop such dispositions in candidates. In his work on the development ofteachers with the dispositions required to reach and teach children emerging withinthe context of traditionally minoritized and marginalized communities (thoseteachers he coined as “stars”), Martin Haberman (1991) wrote:

Thus far the direct teaching of [beliefs required to be successful in such contexts] has provenelusive if not impossible. My fervent advice is to select those with star teacher beliefs tobegin with and stop trying to demonstrate that college coursework or teacher developmentactivities have significant impact on teachers’ belief systems. (p. 18)

While Haberman alleges the improbability of coursework and teacher developmentactivities as mechanisms through which to instill in candidates the requisite dispo-sitions toward working with culturally and economically diverse populations ofstudents, others believe that an intentional, constructivist approach can be effectivein preparing teachers. Specifically, Diez and Murrell (2010) assert that dispositionscan be cultivated and developed. They state:

dispositions are neither invisible aspects of a teacher’s psyche, nor fixed personality traits.They are commitments of habit and thought and action that grow as the teacher learns, acts,and reflects under the guidance of teachers and mentors in a preparation program and in thefirst years of practice. (p. 14–15)

58 Community-Engaged Teacher Preparation and the Development of. . . 1301

While many individuals in the field of educator preparation cling to the notion ofdispositions as easily observable professional behaviors (see Watermark, 2019),others have elevated distinct values and orientations required in order to be worthyof teaching children in a socially just and equitable fashion – dispositions, whichwe believe require more in-depth field experience that interface with traditionallyminoritized communities in order to effectively assess (see Bondy, Beck, Curcio,& Schroeder, 2017; Howard, 2009; University of Michigan, 2009; University ofMinnesota, 2017; Villegas, 2007). Howard (2009), for example, articulates theembodiment of dispositions toward difference, dialogue, disillusionment, anddemocracy as essential in working with an increasingly diverse populations ofchildren and families if an equitable education is to be realized. Similarly, Bondyet al. (2017) developed dispositions for “critical social justice teaching andlearning” including radical openness, humility, and self-vigilance – all connectedwithin a “justice as praxis” framework illuminating the structural injustice andinequity that shape our communities and schools. The University of Michiganemploys an evaluation of candidates’ “ethical obligations” including dispositionstoward care and commitment, competence, equitable access, difference and diver-sity, capacity for learning, personal responsibility, power and authority, respect,and subject matter integrity – all within an emphasis on privileging diverseperspectives, cultural backgrounds, and worldviews as resources with which toconnect for the purpose of instruction. Similarly, the University of MinnesotaEducator Disposition System (MnEDS) emphasizes the development of candi-dates “ethical agency” as they work toward teaching for greater equity in schools.Importantly, Villegas (2007) urged the field to consider that a lack of emphasis ondispositions for social justice in future educators cements the notion that “theprimary goal of public education is to prepare students with the knowledge andskills needed to serve as productive workers in the stratified socioeconomic systemas it currently exists” (p. 379) rather than one we can collectively envision asproviding equitable access to all its members.

In 1999, Cochran-Smith declared the three principal emphases of teachereducation to be social responsibility, social change, and social justice. Similarly,in 2000, Sonia Nieto argued for equity to be placed at the forefront on teachereducation. Nearly two decades have passed since these declarations, and somecould argue that the field is further distanced from these precepts now than wewere at what seemed to be a potential tipping point in the direction of commitmentto equity. A competing neoliberal agenda thwarting Cochran-Smith and Nieto’svision has reinforced the persistent “achievement gap,” played out throughunequal access and opportunity and plaguing predominantly Black and Brownand low-income students and their communities. We argue that the vision ofsocial justice in teacher education has been “disrupted, but not displaced”(Brodie, 2007), and a resurgence in commitment and conviction is on the horizon,fueled by a rectifying resolve to develop a new cadre of teachers with the willand skill to enact pedagogies informed by a moral and ethical obligation to endsocial inequity.


Cultivating and Assessing Dispositions for Social Justice

While a sect of the field is clearly committed to assessing candidates’ dispositionsfor social justice, the means through which to operationalize experiences that bothcultivate and evaluate such dispositions has been less clearly articulated. Theremainder of this chapter outlines one such example, notably a program ofcommunity-engaged teacher preparation at a mid-sized, midwestern North Amer-ican university. With a decade-long history of preparing culturally responsive,equity-focused, socially just future teachers, the program provides an exemplar onhow dispositions toward social justice and equity can be cultivated and howconvictions and commitments can be assessed.

Program Description

The highlighted program of community-engaged teacher preparation removes pre-service teachers from campus and immerses them in a historically minoritizedcommunity setting for an entire semester’s coursework. This community-engagedapproach introduces and engages future early childhood and elementary schoolteachers in the complex interplay of factors that influence children’s learning. Theterm “community-engaged” underscores the joint nature of collaborative effort withthe neighborhood. A community-engaged model is comprised of distinctive ele-ments that contribute both to the development of culturally responsive teachers andassist in furthering the priorities of the communities in which candidates work.Operationalized through candidates’ situated learning in historically marginalizedcommunities, community-engaged teacher preparation emphasizes the concertedcultivation of collaborative relationships between universities, communities, andschools; the elevation of funds of knowledge and community cultural wealth; andan in-depth analysis of social inequality, positionality, and the intersections betweenthe two, as essential knowledge for future teachers. As a means through which toaddress the persistent “achievement gap” between racially, socioeconomically, andlinguistically non-dominant and dominant students, community-engaged teacherpreparation is presented as a prototype through which to advance educational equity(Zygmunt et al., 2018).

At the local community center, and under the direction of six faculty members,candidates complete 18 credits in content related to classroom management, literacy,educational foundations, motivation and assessment, and social studies methods, allof which is integrated in order to provide a seamless experience. Additionally,candidates participate in a practicum placement in an early childhood program orelementary school, spending 10 hours per week participating in classroom life andexperiencing school culture. They plan and teach lessons under the guidance of acooperating teacher and participate in additional family engagement activities. Atleast 1 day per week, candidates plan and implement enrichment experiences forchildren in the after-school program at the elementary school.


Each candidate is matched with a community mentor or mentor family whoengages the candidate in a process of “facilitated acculturation” (Lee et al., 2013).Research demonstrates the benefit of community mentors as cultural ambassadors(Catapano & Huisman, 2010; Lee, 2013; Szasz, 1993; Zygmunt & Clark, 2016).Absent this guidance, candidates are likely to misinterpret experiences, applyingtheir own “cultural map,” which is likely to be inadequate and possibly damaging.Volunteer mentors, many of whom have been acting in this role since the program’sinception, were recruited from neighborhood churches and the local neighborhoodcouncil. With their mentors, candidates attend family gatherings, worship services,and community meetings and events, gaining additional perspective and experiencewith children’s lives outside of school and garnering insight into the values offamilies within the community. The inclusion of mentor families in our model wasconceived by members of the local neighborhood council as a means to welcomecandidates and impart essential knowledge about children’s lived experience. Men-tor families are positioned as essential members of our team of teacher educators.

Throughout the semester, candidates also participate in critical service learning(Mitchell, 2008; Rosenberger, 2000) alongside their mentors and members of theneighborhood community council. This model provides the vehicle through whichthe typical “outside-in” view of a community can be transformed. Differentiatedfrom more traditional models of university service learning characterized by “doingfor,” and which tends to favor those who serve over those being served (Sandy &Holland, 2006; Tryon & Stoecker, 2008), candidates participate with and alongsideresidents in programs and projects integral to community revitalization identified bymembers of the neighborhood. Critical service learning provides an opportunity toposition candidates as coagents of social change. Reflection on this participationwithin the frames of race, power, and privilege provides additional opportunities forsignificant and meaningful learning.

Through the various components of this program of community-engaged teacherpreparation experience, candidates have the opportunity to demonstrate what theyknow and can do, but above and beyond theory and practice, through candidates’daily experience in the program, they are demonstrating their emerging dispositions– dispositions which impact their ability to successfully navigate the complexities ofbecoming a community-engaged, culturally responsive, critically conscious, equity-focused, and socially just future teacher. Triangulation of data collected from thesources indicated below – a portfolio of community-engaged experiences coupledwith significant opportunities for reflection – inform faculty evaluation of candi-dates’ dispositions toward equity and social justice and therefore their endorsementof candidates as they move into the student teaching experience. The demonstrationof these dispositions positions them well for success in student teaching and beyond,as they set about the venture of making educational equity a reality for all children.

Community-Engaged Pedagogies

A common refrain shared with candidates is the following: No significant learninghappens outside of the context of a significant relationship. Driving the various


community-engaged pedagogies employed is the belief in the power of relationshipsto transform education, relationships with children, families, and community. Can-didates come to see that in order to successfully teach, they must better understandthe contexts shaping children’s lived experiences. This process is certainly hum-bling; candidates often undergo a process of disequilibrium and disillusionment asthey come to learn about the legacies and current realities resulting from societaloppression – legacies and realities of which many had the prior privilege to ignore.This work requires operationalizing authentic care (Rolón-Dow, 2005) as facultymediate and negotiate this process of deconstruction of prior schema and rebuildinga new lens through which to view the world – work that can challenge candidates’cognitive, emotional, and spiritual bandwidth. It also requires a variety of strategiesthrough which to assemble experiences in order to maximize candidates’ opportu-nities for growth throughout the semester. Taken together, the community-engagedpedagogies detailed below facilitate opportunities to develop dispositions that willcompel them toward a pedagogy of cultural responsiveness and social justice.

Community Learning with Mentor Families

Candidates consistently cite their relationship with their mentor as significant to theirlearning. As Zygmunt et al. (2018) argue, mentors provide students with authenticpathways to participation in the community, scaffoldings candidates’ contextualcognizance of community, families, children, and community values. The criticalcomponent of this relationship, however, is the care afforded to students by theirmentors. It is due to this care – wherein candidates feel deeply and authenticallycared for – that candidates are then able to more fully care about the children withwhom they work in culturally responsive and authentic ways (Zygmunt et al., 2018).

Mentors’ role as educators is made apparent to candidates immediately. Withinthe first week of class, mentors facilitate discussions about the community and leadcandidates and faculty on a community walk, wherein they share the history of theneighborhood and point out places of pride. Mentors also serve as curriculumconsultants, working with candidates to select culturally responsive literature, advis-ing candidates on how to engage difficult conversations around race and racialoppression with children, and conferring with candidates on a civil rights unit thatthey conduct with children in the after-school program. In this way, mentors aremore than community guides; they are co-members of the educational team.

Candidates are carefully matched with mentor families in order to maximize fitfor both the mentors and the candidate. After some intensive community building,which begins in the spring and summer prior to the semester, candidates’ interestsand personality are carefully assessed in order to make a strong pairing. A mentorbreakfast at the conclusion of the first week of the program is hosted whereinintroductions are made and the candidates and mentors have some time to get toknow one another. While formal mentor events are held throughout the semester, theexpectation is that candidates and mentors will continue to build the relationshipwithout faculty facilitation. Mentors are advised to simply go about their daily routinesand invite candidates to participate rather than plan special events – candidates are


invited to attend school and sporting events, family game nights, community events,and church (if the student feels comfortable so doing), and in turn, candidates ofteninvite mentors to dinner and to meet their families.

Critical Service Learning

The opportunity for authentic engagement in this program of community-engagedteacher preparation is extended through candidates’ participation in critical servicelearning (Mitchell, 2008; Rosenberger, 2000) alongside members of the neighbor-hood community council, whose ambitious agenda and strategic plan outline neigh-borhood mobilization priorities. Contrasted with a more typical “doing for”orientation of traditional service-learning practices common in universities, thenotion of “doing with” differentiates a critical service-learning approach, affordingsignificantly increased opportunities for meaningful learning.

Traditional service learning, defined by Neururer and Rhoads (1998), is “avehicle for connecting students and institutions to their communities and the largersocial good, while at the same time instilling in students the values of communityand social responsibility” (p. 321) and has been criticized for its potential benefitimbalance, favoring those who serve versus those being served (Sandy & Holland2006; Tryon & Stoecker, 2008; Vernon & Ward, 1999). According to Hess et al.(2007), students participating in traditional service learning may benefit fromincreased self-worth, but such sentiment can reinforce feelings of power and priv-ilege, thereby reinforcing negative stereotypes of already marginalized/minoritizedcommunities.

Differentiated from traditional service learning, Mitchell (2008) presents criticalservice learning as a means through which to address this imbalance of power andincrease the mutuality achieved alongside members of communities. Generallyinitiated from the identification of injustice, this critical service learning positionsparticipants as agents of social change, creatively working together toward equitablesolutions. In the spirit of this ethic, students are encouraged to deeply and criticallyreflect on their attitudes, work with and not for, address community-identified needs,and study of the social policies/problems that contribute to “need” (Rosner-Salazar,2003). As such, through these experiences, university students develop both the skilland the will to reinterpret the very contexts in which their work is situated, criticallyexamining social, cultural, racial, and economic stratification and reimagining thepossibility and potential of a more equitable enterprise (for an example of projects,see Zygmunt and Cipollone 2018).

The development of a critical consciousness through which to view the socialissues that their service addresses, as well as the “impact of their personal action orinaction in maintaining or transforming these problems” (Mitchell 2008, p. 54),drives this pedagogy and its potential impact on candidates’ development. Withadditional research to support such learning experiences in teacher preparation(Hannah, Tinkler, & Miller, 2011), participation in both organized and emergentcritical service-learning projects contribute significantly to the dispositional devel-opment of future educators.


Classroom Teaching and Learning

Throughout the semester, candidates spend approximately 10 hours per week prac-tice teaching in a classroom at a K-5 elementary school or early childhood program,under the direction of a classroom teacher. This practicum experience – one ofcandidates first in their program of educator preparation – familiarizes them withthe logic of the school day, gives them practice with lesson planning and implemen-tation, and affords them the opportunity to develop relationships with individualchildren. Additionally, 1 day per week, candidates teach in an after-school programin which they provide individual literacy tutoring. In the after-school – an environ-ment that has less restrictions than the traditional school day – candidates have theopportunity to run literacy centers, as well as develop and teach a week-longintegrated unit. In sum, candidates complete approximately 150 h in the combinedpractical experiences, gaining valuable experience in teaching.

When they are not in the school setting, candidates’ coursework is delivered at thelocal community center by six faculty representing four departments and twocolleges. Together, these colleagues weave 18 credits of interdisciplinary courseworkinto a seamless, interdisciplinary experience for candidates. Coursework, including ajunior-level practicum, classroom management, literacy instruction, educationalfoundations, educational psychology, and social studies methods, is integratedthematically in order that topics can be approached from distinct disciplines in acohesive and connected fashion. Faculty meet once per week for a planning sessionduring which a theme for the week ahead is determined based on candidates’experience during the previous week, thus modeling for candidates’ how contentcan be made relevant and responsive. Content is varied, delivered through numerousinteractive and engaging pedagogies, and often team taught. Faculty are frequentlyon-site, while other faculty are teaching and are thus able to build explicit connec-tions between content. Curriculum is rigorous and designed to intentionally interro-gate issues of power, privilege, and oppression.

Reflective Pedagogies

Engaging deeply in the community absent meaningful, mediated, and sustainedreflection will not result in the transformation of dispositions needed to become aculturally responsive educator; and, in fact, it may lead to a reproduction of the verydispositions and assumptions that we seek to dislodge. Candidates are frequentlyexposed to messages which reinforce the notion that “you can’t teach who you can’tsee,” and it is impossible to truly see children without first understanding one’s owncultural lens and how this affects the ways in which one interprets the world.Candidates learn that social identities and positionality profoundly influence howone moves through the world, shaping values, beliefs, and what one does and doesnot “see.” Thus, critical reflection is an essential component to candidates’ develop-ment. Ample and varied opportunities for reflection are embedded within theprogram experience to support the deconstruction and reconstruction of candidates’schema. The semester begins with a reflective exercise, titled “My Eyes Were


Made,” constructed from a passage of the work of Ta’Nehisi Coates (2015) whereinhe discusses an experience in Paris that was influenced by his eyes, which he says“were made in Baltimore”:

A few weeks into our stay [in Paris] I made a friend who wanted to improve his English asmuch as I wanted to improve my French. We met one day out in the crowd in front of NotreDame. We walked to the Latin Quarter. We walked to a wine shop. Outside the wine shopthere was seating. We sat and drank a bottle of red. We were served heaping piles of meats,bread, and cheese. Was this dinner? Did people do this? I had not even known how toimagine it. And more, was this all some elaborate ritual to get an angle on me? My friendpaid. I thanked him. But when we left, I made sure he walked out first. He wanted to showme one of those old buildings that seem to be around every corner in that city. And the entiretime he was leading me, I was sure he was going to make a quick turn into an alley, wheresome dudes would be waiting to strip me of . . . what, exactly? But my new friend simplyshowed me the building, shook my hand, gave a fine bonne soiree, and walked off into thewide-open night. And watching him walk away, I felt that I had missed part of the experience- because of my eyes, because my eyes were made in Baltimore, because my eyes wereblindfolded by fear. (p. 126)

After analyzing the preceding passage, candidates are encouraged to reflect upon themany factors that have contributed to shaping the person they are today. Candidatesare asked to consider family members, friends, experiences, traditions, ideas,hobbies, their home, schooling, values and beliefs, as well as what was happeningin the world and include the things that are essential to their being, both what isspecial/unique about them and what is mundane. Candidates then transform thisbrainstorm into a free-form poem. Candidates and faculty read these poems aloud,and it is a powerful first experience, bringing attention to our lens and our experi-ences as cultural beings, as well as highlighting both our diversity of experiences andhow little we actually see when we encounter one another.

Below, modes of reflection are detailed through which candidates’ dispositionsfor equity and social justice are nurtured.

Dialogue Journals

The pedagogy of dialogue journaling (Bode, 1989) is situated within the framework ofVygotsky’s sociocultural theory (Vygotsky, 1978), which emphasizes theinterdependence of social and individual processes in the construction of knowledge.Candidates write weekly reflections, which they share with all program faculty,informed by their experiences in the community and classroom, course readings, andtheir prior schema. Candidates are explicitly advised to put forth a thoughtful examina-tion of their meaning-making process in relation to the week rather than a summativeaccount of the week’s events. Faculty read and respond to candidates’ reflections, usingmultiple strategies to scaffold candidates in the process of accommodating new learninginto existing schema (Piaget & Cook, 1952; Wadsworth, 2004). A great deal ofindividualized, responsive teaching happens within this space. For example, faculty


encourage candidates’ positive growth, challenge candidate proclamations, interrogatecandidates’ questions, and finally juxtapose candidates’ concerns with additionalresources (both historical and contemporary) to which they are directed and throughwhich to expand the breadth and depth of their knowledge on particular issues andconstructs. Candidates are expected to read and respond back to faculty and thus adialogue ensues. These dialogic interactions would not be possible without the level ofauthentic community engagement engendered by this experience or the role of ethicalcare afforded to candidates by faculty. The impact of such intersections of communitylearning in cannot be overemphasized relative to the richness of their reflections.

Courageous Conversation

Based upon the work of Singleton and Linton (2005) and Singleton and Hays (2008)regarding how to have critical dialogue about race, Courageous Conversation is aweekly practice wherein candidates, faculty, and sometimes mentors and communitymembers come together to have brave conversations about relevant and currenttopics. This is a space in which to practice critical listening and radical honesty.Guided by the principles outlined by Singleton and colleagues (1998; 2005) (to stayengaged, to expect and lean into discomfort, to speak one’s truth, and to expect andaccept a lack of closure), participants gather into a circle and are prompted to sharewhat lay on their heart and mind. While one person speaks, all others listen intently.Hand-raising is discouraged while others are speaking to encourage listening tounderstand rather than listening to respond. Speakers call upon one another andshare the moderating role. While frequently a video clip, a short article, or an eventstart the conversation, the dialogue moves where participants take it.

This practice is significant for several reasons: it builds community and solidarity;it develops empathy; and it creates a space where candidates can practice speakingup, negotiating conflict, accepting challenge (and be challenged), and listen. Ratherthan cultivating a “safe space,” Courageous Conversation becomes a “brave space”(Fox & Fleischer, 2004) wherein “we can speak openly, envision possibilities, askauthentic questions, listen to each other well, reflect, theorize, revise our thinking,and grow” as educators and as human beings (p. 3).

This practice assists candidates in developing their dispositions toward dialogueand democracy (Howard, 2009). A truly pluralistic and democratic society is not freefrom strife and conflict. For the most part, candidates in this program have beenraised on the mantra of “if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything”and have been advised to avoid rocking the metaphorical boat at all costs. Theirdefault is to feign agreement for the sake of consensus, believing it is better to be“nice” than to be contentious. Yet silence, in the face of oppression, is a form ofcomplicity, either tacitly or explicitly; “nice” racism is still racism, arguably a moreinsidious version. Thus, if candidates are to become the culturally responsiveeducators we seek to prepare, they must learn to wade into conflict effectively, totruly value multiple perspectives, and to accept the messiness that is democracy.


Conceptual Framework

Jonassen (1996; 2006) suggests that conceptual change can be modeled through theuse of different technologies. Technologies such as databases, spreadsheets, conceptmapping, and specialized software serve as “intellectual partners of learners.”Concept mapping can act as cognitive constructions of the internal processes takingplace and make them external so others may understand how the person is conceiv-ing the world around them. Candidates are charged with creating construct semanticmaps of their learning and development thought their experience in our program ofcommunity-engaged teacher preparation. These maps serve as intellectual partnersfor candidates and a comprehensive assessment for faculty. Construction and use of asemantic map of candidates’ learning and development serves as a model of theirinternal cognitive processes and conceptual understanding over time. It allowscandidates to make their thinking visible to others and serves as a reflective toolfor candidates to identify what may be causing them to have cognitive dissidence, totest the comprehensibility of additional information, and to make decisions aboutwhether alternatives are plausible alternatives to their existing conception. Forfaculty, the maps serve as a means for assessment to see how candidates are makingsense of the experience and how they are making connections between theory andpractice.

Candidates are introduced to free, web-based software applications to use as toolsto create their conceptual frameworks of their learning and development throughoutthe community-based teacher education program experience. Candidates construct asemantic concept map of their preexisting conceptions of the community, school,families, and children and then develop the map over the course of the semester tocritically examine and reflect on how their experiences, readings, concepts, activi-ties, and interactions are connecting with one another and developing their concep-tual framework of teaching and learning over time. Candidates are able to add audio,video, images, and hyperlinks to their maps. This provides candidates a variety ofways to represent the factors that held meaning to them and/or represented anincident that caused them to be reflective about an existing conception. They arealso able to graphically draw connections between experiences and concepts and addtext or audio to articulate the significance of the connection they are making.Candidates provide faculty with the URL to their frameworks and submit weeklyscreenshots to faculty who monitor their progress throughout the semester. Thedevelopment of these maps takes place within the context of a variety of previouslymentioned activities and assignments that frequently end up as elements within thesemantic map.

Candidates work on their frameworks throughout the 16-week semester andpresent them to faculty in a final meeting where they have the opportunity to sharethe most meaningful aspects of the semester and to verbalize the connectionsbetween instructional experiences, course content, community engagement, andtheir experiences teaching. These meetings also provide opportunities for facultyto ask additional questions about those connections and how candidates have made


meaning of their experiences throughout the semester relative to their developmentas culturally responsive, socially just, equity-focused teachers.

Parker Palmer (1999) wrote, “Before you tell your life what you intend to do withit, listen for what it intends to do with you. Before you tell your life what truths andvalues you have decided to live up to, let your life tell you what truths you embody,what values you represent” (p. 3). The conceptual framework exercise providescandidates important opportunities to practice metacognitive processes, resulting inthe accommodation of varying elements of their experience into their cognitiveschema. By doing the hard work of “listening to their life,” candidates are wellpositioned to clarify their values and convictions and how they lead them to thedevelopment of personal truths which will light their way as they embark on theprivileged position of being an educator.

Photovoice

Photovoice is a form of participatory action research wherein, participants are invited todocument aspects of their lives through photography and then provide written or oralaccounts of the images they create. Designed to situate participants as experts on theirlives and their experience, photovoice is a power and visceral approach to policy change.(Latz 2017, n.p.)

Adapting this method as a metacognitive device to reflect on the process ofbecoming a community-engaged educator, candidates document their journey bytaking two or three photographs a week, which they caption and hashtag withrelevant codes and upload to a private digital platform. On a bi-weekly basis,candidates work in groups to thematically analyze the photographs across weeks,developing categorization schema to develop a theme for the week. Candidates areprovided with the printed photographs and are asked to independently identifypotential codes and themes. Then, with their small group, they negotiate appropriateidentifiers for the photographs, placing them in categories, sometimes double andtriple coding them. Candidates then must develop explanations and justification fortheir codes, followed by the creation of an overarching theme. At the end of thesemester, the candidates look across the codes to develop a series of findingsregarding what it takes to become a community-engaged educator, and they willpresent these findings to stakeholders.

This project engages candidates on multiple levels. First, candidates must deter-mine their most significant learning during a given week and then develop metaphorsto represent these takeaways. Then, in the process of coding, candidates mustnegotiate difference and conflict as they build consensus when determining codesand themes. In the process, candidates develop the language to articulate theirprocess of becoming a community-engaged, culturally responsive educator.

Photovoice, while a powerful metacognitive tool, is also instrumental to thedevelopment of dispositions for democracy, social justice, and action. As Picower(2012) reminds us, we must practice what we teach. Becoming educators with


dispositions for equity and social justice means educating in a way that focuses onstudent individual and collective empowerment, something that cannot be done ifeducators are not themselves engaged in the messy work of democratic change.

Culminating Assessment: Defense of Dispositions

Practicing what one preaches and teaches means articulating a clear set of pedagog-ical values and developing a plan to enact it. As such, the culminating assessment forcandidates is a manifesto in which they state their core beliefs and values aseducators, create a plan to put said beliefs and values into action, and formulate apledge to hold themselves accountable. By articulating their convictions, commit-ments, and ethics and detailing how they plan to make them actionable, faculty areable to assess candidates’ dispositions toward the work of culturally responsiveteaching.

Culturally Responsive Classroom Manifesto

A description of the assignment follows:

As Gloria Ladson-Billings reminds us ‘we teach what we value.’ Understanding what youvalue and how you will enact these values through your pedagogy and management isessential to your development as culturally responsive, socially-just, equity-focused educa-tors. If we are to be worthy of this profession (Howard, 2009) and our future students, wemust work diligently and intentionally. This comprehensive assignment is designed to helpyou define and refine your teaching philosophy, craft a plan to enact it, and lastly devise away to hold you accountable to your beliefs and actions.

Directions: Prepare a comprehensive statement of philosophy that articulates thefollowing. These will be the SUBHEADINGS for your finished manifesto:

• Your core beliefs and values as an educator• A plan to put these values and beliefs into practice• Your personal pledge to hold yourself accountable

It is one thing for a group of pre-service candidates, cocooned within an intensive16-week program wherein they are surrounded by like-minded folk who are livingand breathing the work of community engagement and social justice, to profess acommitment to social justice and equity; it is an entirely different thing to put thesevalues into practice once candidates leave this space. In this way, the CulturallyResponsive Classroom Manifesto is designed both as an assessment of candidatelearning and dispositions as well as an opportunity for candidates to construct a roadmap that can guide them in enacting their identities as culturally responsive educa-tors as they transition into the field. Candidates are advised to consider this anevolving document; one they should keep close as they move into the field. In this


assignment, candidates are required to draw extensively from course readings andmaterials to inform and offer support for their beliefs and values as educators. Twofaculty members first independently review the assignments and then do so collab-oratively. Candidates are given ample feedback and are encouraged to revise tofurther strengthen their statement.

Through their development of a culturally responsive teaching manifesto, candi-dates articulate what it takes and what it means to be a worthy teacher. As anexpression of their convictions, commitments, and core beliefs, the manifesto forcescandidates to distill a semester of coursework into statements of passion and purposethat shall serve as a guidepost moving forward. The manifestoes provide clearevidence of candidates’ dispositions, wherein they passionately articulate an under-standing of and commitment to the practices of culturally responsive practice.Candidates take as given that society, and hence schools, are fundamentally unequal,shaped by oppressive forces that work to disadvantage marginalized and minoritizedstudents while benefitting the dominant groups. And, they take as given that it istheir duty, as worthy teachers, to disrupt these oppressive practices on multiplelevels: with individual students, curriculum, schools, and ultimately, themselves.

The manifestoes provide clear evidence that candidates understand that relation-ships matter significantly; that in fact, relationships are the fulcrum upon whichlearning turns. While accrediting bodies and traditional programs of teacher prepara-tion tend to focus on professionalism and technical aspects of teaching (e.g., writinglesson plans), candidates’ visions speak to an understanding that a well-written lessonplan is only a “good lesson” insofar as it relates to the children in one’s classroom.

While not indicative of what they will actually do upon entering the classroom –more research is needed to assess how candidates are able to actualize their creeds –as part of this assignment, candidates are asked to write personal pledges that willguide them as they transition to the field. Candidates’ responses include statementssuch as “I pledge to immersive myself in the community of my students to under-stand the context of students’ lives,” “I pledge to stay active in organizations andcauses that fight for social justice and equity in the world – specifically in education,”and “I pledge that if I ever become unworthy of teaching our children, that I will stepout of the teaching field, as to never become part of the problem instead of thesolution.” Such statements further demonstrate their understanding of what it takesto operationalize this notion of worthy teacher. Candidates are under no illusions thatthis work is easy; their pledges illustrate the scope of the work and the tenacityneeded to tackle it, as well as their commitment to work for justice and change.

As Picower (2012) reminds us:

Rather than allowing the term to be abandoned or co-opted, it is critical for those of us whosee education as a vehicle for liberation to be clear about what we mean when we say socialjustice education (SJE). The first is for teachers to have a recognition and political analysis ofinjustice and how it operates to create and maintain oppression on multiple levels. Thesecond is teachers’willingness and ability to integrate this analysis into academic teaching inthe classrooms. The third is that teachers must have the mindset and skillsets to expand theirsocial just work outside the classroom as activists, with students and on their own, to combatmultiple forms of oppression. (p.3–4)


Taken together, candidates’ pledges and philosophical statements take seriously avision of social justice teaching that aligns with the tenets Picower outlines above.While putting their dispositions into practice will be difficult, candidates are com-mitted to reimagining a more humanizing education that disrupts the oppressive,white supremacist project that education has been to date. It is easy to teachcandidates how to write a lesson plan or how to align standards with objectivesand assessment – that has been the task of teacher education for some time, and theresult has been a cadre of educators ill-equipped to address the inequality perpetu-ated in and through schools, who often do more harm than they realize to thechildren with whom they work. The work of cultivating dispositions for socialjustice, for equity, and for democracy, on the other hand, is much more difficult,but it is the only ethical option there is.

Conclusion

Paulo Freire (2014) wrote, “Ethicalness is a concrete attitude that does not comefrom abstract discourse, but rather from living it in all its fairness and plentitude”(p. 30). In this program of community-engaged teacher preparation, candidateshave the opportunity and privilege to live their way to the ethics that will guidetheir practice, developing the dispositions required to be culturally responsive,equity-focused, socially just future teachers. As described throughout this chapter,this work is done by providing the opportunity for situated learning in a predom-inantly marginalized/minoritized community, rigorous and integrated coursework,and intentional and intensive reflection. The construct of authentic care (Rolón-Dow, 2005) is emphasized as an umbrella under which all teaching and learning ismade possible and through which the construction of truth can be realized. Thiscare is instrumental in mediating candidates’ direct participation in experiences inand out of the classroom in which injustice is illuminated and through opportuni-ties for intentional reflection to devise strategies to counter a culture which hasunacceptably acquiesced to inequity.

Freire (1994) reminds us that hope requires an “anchoring in practice” if it is tobring about social transformation, and McInerney (2007) reinforces that this work issustained by conviction and moral purpose – a “robust hope” – alert to the inherenttensions and difficulties of the task ahead. Thus, this work is moored in the practiceof authentically engaging future teachers in the spaces and places through whichthey develop conviction and moral purpose while experiencing, understanding, anddeveloping the resilience and resolve they will require in addressing the tensions andtumult of the task ahead.

Duncan-Andrade (2009) articulates the construct of “critical hope,” which is notcharacterized by naïve optimism, but rather by active struggle and commitment toaddress injustice. This construct is further elaborated as grounded in rigorousacademic pedagogy which connects content to students’ lived experience, expresslyestablished in the preservation of students’ humanity, and resolutely rooted in the


audacious resistance of “the dominant ideology of defense, entitlement, and preser-vation of privileged bodies at the expense of the policing, disposal, and disposses-sion of marginalized ‘others’” (p. 190). Duncan-Andrade’s counsel that such hope isrequired when “growing roses in concrete” speaks to the dispositions necessary tonavigate current systems of oppression, in and outside of classrooms – dispositionswhich compel the creation of spaces that inspire healing rather than injecting harm –dispositions which inform a vision that the singular option is a posture of love. Parisand Alim (2017) offer that this requisite love “can help us see our young people aswhole versus broken when they enter schools and can work to keep them whole asthey grow and expand who they are and can be through education” (p. 14).

Lest it remains unclear; the work presented in this chapter emphatically arguesthat the development, cultivation, and assessment of dispositions toward socialjustice are a necessary mandate for the field of educator preparation. As Howard(2009) articulates:

It is true that all U.S. citizens have the First Amendment right to remain imprisoned in theirown cultural narrowness. This luxury of ignorance, however, is not available to us asteachers. Ours is a better calling, and for the sake of our students and their world, we mustacquire more adaptive human qualities including dispositions for difference, dialogue,disillusionment, and democracy. These will enable us to thrive as a species. These renderus worthy to teach. (p.197)

The model of community-engaged teacher preparation described in this chapterprovides an innovative path through which dispositions for social justice requiredof those “worthy to teach” can be fostered, along with pedagogies through whichsuch dispositions can be both cultivated and authentically assessed. With a 10-yearhistory during which this paradigm has been honed, and in which the development ofcandidates’ consistent demonstration of dispositions for social justice has beendocumented (Zygmunt et al., 2018a, b; Zygmunt & Cipollone, 2018; Zygmunt &Clark, 2016), it is clear that community-engaged teacher preparation is a compellingand justifiable direction for the field of educator preparation.

Nobel Prize winner Gabriela Mistral wrote, “We are guilty of many errors andmany faults, but our worst crime is abandoning the children . . . Many of the thingswe need can wait. The child cannot” (published in Castleman, 1984). Consideringthe urgency of children’s need for teachers equipped with dispositions required toheal and transform an educational system fraught with inequity, the inclusion ofdispositions toward equity and social justice in the specific language of teacherpreparation accreditation standards is imperative. No other mechanism can broadlyelicit the collective will and creative muster necessary to ensure opportunity for allstudents to realize their promise and potential. As Cochran-Smith et al. (2018) urge,it is time that we reclaim accountability in teacher education to realize the democraticgoals of schooling. Measures of timeliness and use of a “appropriate” language is notwhat makes one a truly effective teacher; rather, we need educators committed to theeradication of injustice and oppression and willing to do the work to transformschools and society.


The potential for all new teachers to be equipped with dispositions for equity andsocial justice holds the promise of children’s liberation, disrupting and replacing thedeficit perspectives which inform how teachers frequently see children and thestandards of excellence to which they are held. This potential has the capacity toinform teachers’ responsibilities to work to not only understand the systemic oppres-sions that undermine educational equity but to actively advocate for rectifyingpractices and reparative policies that advance children’s voice and vision. Teacherdispositions for equity and social justice hold the promise of reframing the view ofmarginalized and minoritized communities from broken spaces to those with signif-icant funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzales, 1992) and culturalwealth (Yosso, 2005), whose members are integral to the generation of solutionsinstead of propagative of the problem. Such dispositions require the cognizance thatour liberation from our harmful past is bound together, and we must work together inorder to realize a new tomorrow. As our collective futures hang in the throes, time ismost certainly of the essence. For far too long, teacher education has focused on thetechnical aspects of teaching. While content knowledge and pedagogy cannot bediminished in importance, the focus on professionalism as indicative of teacherdispositions over moral and ethical convictions has allowed an oppressive systemto remain intact at the expense of children’s lives. It is time to insert social justiceback into dispositions and back into programs of teacher preparation if a moreequitable and liberatory vision of education is to be cultivated.

References

Banks, J. A. (2004). Teaching for social justice, diversity, and citizenship in a global world. TheEducational Forum, 68(4), 296–305.

Bode, B. (1989). Dialogue journal writing. The Reading Teacher, 42, 568–571.Bondy, E., Beck, B., Curcio, R., & Schroeder, S. (2017). Dispositions for critical social justice

teaching and learning. Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis, 6(3), 1–16.Borko, H., Liston, D., & Whitcomb, J. (2007). Apples and fishes: The debate over dispositions in

teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(5), 359–364.Brodie, J. (2007). Reforming social justice in neoliberal times. Studies in Social Justice, 1(2),

93–105.Burns, L., & Miller, S. J. (2017). Social justice policymaking in teacher education from conception

to application: Realizing standard VI. Teachers College Record, 119(2), 1–38.Castleman, W. (1984). Beauty and the mission of the teacher: The life of Gabriela mistral of

Chile–teacher, poetess, friend of the helpless, Nobel laureate. Exposition Pr of Florida.Catapano, S., & Huisman, S. (2010). Preparing teachers for urban schools: Evaluation of a

community-based model. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education, 7(1), 80–90.Coates, T. (2015). Between the world and me. New York: Speigel and Grau.Cochran-Smith, M. (1999). Learning to teach for social justice. In G. Griffin (Ed.), Ninety-eighth

yearbook of the national society for the study of education (pp. 114–144). Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.

Cochran-Smith, M., Shakman, K., Jong, C., Terrell, D., Barnatt, J., & McQuillan, P. (2009). Goodand just teaching: The case for social justice in teacher education. American Journal ofEducation, 115(3), 347–377.


Cochran-Smith, M., et al. (2018). Reclaiming accountability in teacher education. New York:Teachers College Press.

Council for the Accreditation of Education Preparation. (2018). CAEP handbook for initial levelprograms. Washington, DC: Author.

Council for the Chief City School Officers. (2013). InTASC model core teaching standards andlearning progressions for teachers 1.0. Washington, DC: Author.

Diez, M., &Murrell, P. (2010). Dispositions for teacher education: Starting points for consideration.In P. Murrell, M. Diez, S. Feiman-Nemser, & D. Schussler (Eds.), Teaching as a moral practice:Defining, developing, and assessing professional dispositions in teacher education (pp. 7–26).Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.

Duncan-Andrade, J. (2009). Note to educators: Hope required when growing roses in concrete.Harvard Educational Review, 79(2), 181–194.

Fox, D. L., & Fleischer, C. (2004). Toward “brave spaces” in English education. English Education,37(1), 3–4.

Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of commitment. New York: Routledge.Freire, P., & Freire, A. M. A. (1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. New

York, NY: Continuum.Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2),

106–116.Gloria Ladson-Billings, (2016). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Edu-

cational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.Haberman, M. (1991). Can cultural awareness be taught in teacher education programs? Teaching

Education, 4(1), 25–31.Hannah, L., Tinkler, B., & Miller, E. (2011). Helping teacher candidates develop a critical

perspective in a foundations course: A Freirian look at how teacher candidates interpret theirservice-learning. In B. Porfilio & H. Hickman (Eds.), Critical service learning as revolutionarypedagogy: A project of student agency in action (pp. 203–222). Charlotte: Information Age.

Hess, D., Lanig, H., & Vaughan, W. (2007). Educating for equity and social justice: A conceptualmodel for cultural engagement. Multicultural Perspectives, 9(1), 32–39.

Howard, G. (2009). Dispositions for good teaching. In M. Fehr & D. Fehr (Eds.), Teach boldly:Letters to teachers about contemporary issues in education (pp. 189–198). New York, NY: PeterLang.

Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Columbus:Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Jonassen, D. H. (2006).Modeling with technology: Mindtools for conceptual change. Upper SaddleRiver: Prentice Hall.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educa-tional Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

Landorf, H., & Nevin, A. (2007). Social justice as a disposition for teacher education programs:Why is it such a problem? In S. M. Nielsen & M. S. Plakhotnik (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixthannual College of Education Research Conference: Urban and international education section(pp. 49–53). Miami: Florida International University.

Latz, A. (2017). Photovoice research in education and beyond: A practical guide from theory toexhibition. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lee, R., Showalter, B., & Eckrich, L. (2013). Beyond the ivory tower: The role of contextuallybased course redesign in a community-embedded urban teacher preparation model. In Noel, J.(Ed.), Moving teacher education into urban schools and communities (pp. 56–72). New York:Routledge.

McInerney, P. (2007). From naïve optimism to robust hope: Sustaining a commitment to socialjustice schools and teacher education in neoliberal times. Asia-Pacific Journal of TeacherEducation, 35(3), 257–272.

Mitchell, T. (2008). Critical service learning as social justice education: A case study of the citizenscholars program. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40(2), 101–112.


Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using aqualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2002). Professional standardsfor the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education (2002 ed.). Washington,DC: Author.

Neururer, J., & Rhoads, R. A. (1998). Community service: Panacea, paradox, or potentiation.Journal of College Student Development, 39(4), 321–330.

Nieto, S. (2000). Placing equity at the front and Centre. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3),180–187.

Palmer, P. (1999). Let your life speak: Listening to the voice of vocation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, andpractice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.

Paris, D., & Alim, S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning forjustice in a changing world. New York: Teachers College Press.

Piaget, J., & Cook, M. T. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: InternationalUniversity Press.

Picower, B. (2012). Practice what you teach: Social justice education in the classroom and thestreets. New York/London: Routledge.

Rolón-Dow, R. (2005). Critical care: A color(full) analysis of care narratives in the schoolingexperiences of Puerto Rican girls. American Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 77–111.

Rosenberger, C. (2000). Beyond empathy: Developing critical consciousness through servicelearning. In C. O’Grady (Ed.), Integrating service learning and multicultural education incolleges and universities (pp. 23–43). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

Rosner-Salazar, T. (2003). Multicultural service-learning and community-based research as a modelapproach to promote social justice. Social Justice, 30(4), 64–76.

Sandy, M., & Holland, B. (2006). Different worlds and common ground: Community partnerperspectives on campus-community partnerships. Michigan Journal of Community ServiceLearning, 13(1), 31.

Singleton, G. E., & Hays, C. (2008). Beginning courageous conversations about race. In M. Pollack(Ed.), Everyday antiracism (pp. 18–23). New York: New Press.

Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2005). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide forachieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Szasz, M. (Ed.) (1993). Between Indian and White worlds: The cultural broker. Norman, OK:University of Oklahoma Press.

Tryon, E., & Stoecker, R. (2008). The unheard voices: Community organizations and servicelearning. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 12(3), 48.

University of Michigan. (2009). Ethical obligations. Ann Arbor: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.soe.umich.edu/academics/bachelors/elementary-teacher-education/ethical-obligations/

University of Minnesota. (2017). Minnesota education disposition system. Minneapolis: Author.Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/a/umn.edu/umn-dispositions-assessment-framework/

Vernon, A., & Ward, K. (1999). Campus and community partnerships: Assessing impacts andstrengthening connections. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 6(1), 30.

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

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wadsworth, B. J. (2004). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development: Foundations ofconstructivism. New York: Longman Publishing.

Watermark. (2019). The educator disposition assessment. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from:https://www.watermarkinsights.com/educator-disposition-assessment/

Wilkerson, J. R. (2006). Measuring teacher dispositions: Standards-based or morality-based?Teachers College Record.


http://www.soe.umich.edu/academics/bachelors/elementary-teacher-education/ethical-obligations/

http://www.soe.umich.edu/academics/bachelors/elementary-teacher-education/ethical-obligations/

https://sites.google.com/a/umn.edu/umn-dispositions-assessment-framework/

https://www.watermarkinsights.com/educator-disposition-assessment/

Wise, A. (2006). Response to George Will’s column “the truth about teaching”. Newsweek.Yosso, T. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural

wealth. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 8(1), 69–91.Zeichner, K. (2006). Reflections of a university-based teacher educator on the future of college and

universitybased teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 336–340.Zygmunt, E., & Cipollone, K. (2018). A pedagogy of promise: Critical service learning as praxis in

community-engaged, culturally responsive teacher preparation. In M. Dowell & T. Meidl (Eds.),Service learning initiatives in teacher education programs (pp. 333–354). Hershey: IGI Global.

Zygmunt, E., & Clark, P. (2016). Transforming teacher education for social justice. New York:Teachers College Press.

Zygmunt, E., Cipollone, K., Tancock, S., & Clark, P. (2018a). Community-engaged teacherpreparation. In Oxford encyclopedia of global perspectives on teacher education. New York:Oxford University Press.

Zygmunt, E., Cipollone, K., Tancock, S., Clark, P., Clausen, J., & Mucherah, M. (2018b). Lovingout loud: Community mentors, teacher candidates, and transformative learning through apedagogy of care and connection. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(2), 127–139.


Documents

0004744157 1299..1319 - Home - Springer