http://jte.sagepub.com/Journal of Teacher Education

http://jte.sagepub.com/content/56/3/248The online version of this article can be found at:

 DOI: 10.1177/0022487105275920

2005 56: 248Journal of Teacher EducationJennifer E. Obidah and Tyrone C. Howard

and Practices as Effective Teacher EducatorsPreparing Teachers for ''Monday Morning'' in the Urban School Classroom: Reflecting on Our Pedagogies

  

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of: 

  American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE)

can be found at:Journal of Teacher EducationAdditional services and information for    

  http://jte.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

 

http://jte.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:  

http://jte.sagepub.com/content/56/3/248.refs.htmlCitations:  

What is This? 

- Apr 8, 2005Version of Record >>

at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

10.1177/0022487105275920Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005

PREPARING TEACHERS FOR “MONDAY MORNING”IN THE URBAN SCHOOL CLASSROOMREFLECTING ON OUR PEDAGOGIES ANDPRACTICES AS EFFECTIVE TEACHER EDUCATORS

Jennifer E. ObidahTyrone C. HowardUniversity of California–Los Angeles

Research focuses on the need to prepare teach-ers effectively to serve the diverse populationof students in public schools and particularlyschools serving economically disenfranchisedcommunities and communities of color(Cochran-Smith, 2003; Darling-Hammond,2003; Milner, 2003; Oakes, Franke, Quartz, &Rogers, 2002). The articles in this special issuediscuss myriad perspectives regarding the poli-tics of preparing teachers to fill this great needin our society today. In this article, we extendthe discussion to the classroom door; that is, weask this of ourselves and our colleagues: Re-gardless of the politics of how, where, and un-der what conditions—those we choose andthose that are imposed on us—are we effec-tively training teachers to teach in today’sschools, particularly those located in the mostdifficult of social, political, and economicrealities of urban life?

During the past 10 years, a number of issuespertaining to teacher educators’ reflections ontheir pedagogies and practices have appearedin teacher education literature. This article dis-cusses some of the dilemmas teacher educatorsface pertaining to addressing racial, socioeco-nomic, and cultural differences between teach-ers and students in our preparation ofpreservice teachers. These issues have enor-mous implications for our endeavors to effec-tively prepare teachers to teach in urban schoolswhere unquestionably, the need is greatest forteachers who are well trained and confident in

their ability to effectively nurture the academicwell-being of their students.

Given the diverse population of students intoday’s public schools and the population ofstudents entering teacher education programs,how are we, as teacher educators, addressing inour university classrooms this impact of com-pounded differences in the K-12 classroom? Forthe new teacher, these differences are usuallymanifested in their struggle with classroommanagement. Their struggle begs a relatedquestion for us: How do we, as teacher educa-tors, address the issue of classroom manage-ment, particularly as the issue enters our class-rooms through the mouths of teachersdescribing the behaviors of students who arefrom different races and class backgrounds thanthemselves? Lastly, how do we, as teacher edu-cators, convince our preservice teachers that theacademic excellence of these students is possi-ble if the preservice teachers have neither wit-nessed nor been provided with any evidence ofsuch an occurrence within the populations ofstudents they serve in the urban school context?In other words, as we establish the harsh realityof disproportionate failure in urban schools,how do we simultaneously convey the possibil-ity of improving academic achievement in thesecontexts? Can we, as teacher educators, con-vince our students of this possibility if we havenever witnessed it ourselves? How do we culti-vate a pedagogy of achievement pertaining tolow-income and minority students in ourselvesand then “teach” it to our students in the pro-

248

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 248-255DOI: 10.1177/0022487105275920© 2005 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education

at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

cess of preparing them to be effective teachersfor these students? These issues will be dis-cussed in broad strokes to provoke further dia-logue in light of the politics of teacher educationhighlighted throughout this special issue.

We begin by laying out the social, political,economic and cultural contexts of urban inner-city living and schooling—terrains that areoften unfamiliar to the majority of teachersadmitted into our teacher education programsand yet teachers whom we are required to pre-pare to teach in these settings. More important,yet often not addressed, is the fact that these ter-rains are often unfamiliar to many teacher edu-cators as well. Ultimately, we conclude with thequestion, What does it mean to effectively pre-pare teachers to teach in schools and contextswith which we as teacher educators are alsounfamiliar? We conclude with suggestions ofways to interrogate our own pedagogies andpractices so that we may commence on the jour-ney of knowing, learning, and teaching along-side our students.

THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL, ANDECONOMIC REALITIES OF INNER-CITYLIVING AND SCHOOLING

In 2001, 17% of American children livedbelow the poverty level. This number of chil-dren living in poverty increases to 24% ofschool-aged children attending inner-cityschools in large metropolitan areas, and 44% ofstudents attending schools located in the innercities of large and midsize metropolitan areas(National Center of Educational Statistics, p. 20).In short, the majority of economically disadvan-taged students and families of color live in theinner cities of America. Although the percent-age of African Americans living in poverty hasdecreased, African American and Hispanic chil-dren are more likely than are White children tolive in poverty. Orfield (1994) pointed out thatsegregated, high-poverty communities havebecome a way of life in America. He noted thatin metropolitan areas where most Americanslive, housing remains significantly segregated.Current segregation is now more betweenschool districts of differing racial composition.Orfield concluded that American society would

continue to have communities segregated byracial and socioeconomic status.

What does living in poverty mean in terms ofthe day-to-day lives of families? In terms ofneglect by economic and political structures, itmeans lack of banking services; banks that arenot located in urban neighborhoods and institu-tions that would not give loans to residents tobuild and, thus, improve their environments.Banking policies make it difficult for low-income people and people of color to procureloans to purchase homes in or out of their neigh-borhoods (Drake & Cayton, 1945; Haymes,1995; Massey & Denton, 1993). The disinvest-ment of central-city neighborhoods is reflectedin “steep declines in property values and a pat-tern of disrepair, deterioration, vacancy andabandonment” (Massey & Denton, 1993, p. 55).Living in poverty means abandoned, boardedup buildings with the most successful smallbusinesses being liquor stores and funeralhomes; trash built up from infrequent schedulesof collection, poor sewer systems, and express-ways and highways built to delineate sectionsof poor cities (Davis, 1996; Kozol, 1991).

In inner-city urban areas, a declined tax baseresults from less property taxes because of fewerhome owners than in suburban areas and lesstax from businesses whose exodus from urbancenters has significantly increased in the pastfour decades (Anyon, 1997). Ironically, locatedin these communities are a disproportionatenumber of tax-free institutions—universities,hospitals, and art museums. Moreover, the citi-zens living close to these institutions, especiallyuniversities and art museums, are far less likelyto benefit from the opportunities that residewithin these buildings (Kozol, 1991). For exam-ple, although ivy league universities such asColumbia and Yale are located in the heart ofhigh-poverty cities, the children who live inpoverty and who attend the urban schools sur-rounding such universities are more apt toattend these institutions as low-leveled, low-skilled workers (janitors, cook, clerks, and gar-deners) than as students of higher learning.More so than in other communities, urban citi-zens’ hope for a better life lie in their youth. Formany of these youth, education is the only via-

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 249 at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

ble way to overcome the sobering circum-stances in which many of them live. Unfortu-nately, the schools they attend also suffer tosome degree from the circumstances of theirlocation.

Urban Schools

The National Center of Educational Statisticsdefined the poverty level of public schools bythe percentage of students eligible for subsi-dized lunch. They reported that schools withmore than 50% of their students eligible for sub-sidized lunch had on average lower math scoresand higher drop-out rates, and only 7% of thesechildren were expected to complete a bachelor’sor higher degree. In 2001, more Hispanic chil-dren dropped out of school than any other racialgroup. Importantly, the authors of this reportnoted that

the difference in achievement by school-level pov-erty exists whether or not the students were person-ally eligible for the school lunch program. Forexample, among students who were not personallyeligible for the school lunch program, students inschools with more than 50 percent of their studentseligible for the program had a lower [math] scorethan those in school with a quarter or fewer eligible.(National Center of Education Statistics, p. 33)

The highest poverty schools had higher rates ofstudent absenteeism and failure. In urbanschools, children of color compose the largestpercentages of students who are suspended orexpelled. These students are often cited as thebehavior problems in schools and the reason forteacher burnout and the overall educationalfailure in urban schools. Minority males, in par-ticular African American males, are mostlycited as behavioral problems in urban class-rooms (Howard, 2003). The failure of public ur-ban schools to educate low-income andminority students has been noted as a nationalcrisis (Kozol, 1991; Lipman, 1998).

In terms of students’ academic needs in theseschools, there are often no science and computerlabs, or those that do exist are in disrepair. Thereare few bilingual and other language programsfor students who need them. Teachers lackresources such as chalk, paper, and textbooks.There are often more students than the class-

rooms are able to accommodate. Rather thanbuilding new buildings, urban schools have cre-ated a booming industry for modular compa-nies who supply the portable buildings visibleon the grounds of urban schools in cities acrossthe nation. Although in the short term portablesmay be considered an appropriate response toclassroom shortage, we wonder if, in the longterm, the lease price coupled with the cost ofrepairs and replacements of structures designedfor temporary use may exceed the cost of invest-ing in permanent facilities built specifically tomaximize academic endeavors. Currently, themodular industry continues to flourish, seem-ingly without any reflection of a long-term cost-benefit analysis of how urban school districts’funds for building maintenance and repairs arebeing spent. School curricula are structured toinclude only a few honors and advanced place-ment classes. If magnet schools exist at theseschools, they are often exclusive enclaves withthe express purpose of attracting parents andstudents (upper middle class and sometimesWhite and Asian students) who ordinarilywould not attend these schools because of theeducational opportunities (or lack thereof)provided to the general student population.

The facilities of most urban school buildingsare in major disrepair with leaking roofs, oldbuildings, nonworking bathrooms, and poorventilation, most as a result of lacking the eco-nomic and property tax base needed to providethe funds for repairs. Inner-city urban schoolsoften lack sports facilities for students beyondconcrete slabs with basketball poles and rungsmissing the net. In short, urban schools areaffected by economic issues as well as districtand state policies that, in turn, affect whatoccurs in the classroom.

Teachers who serve the students in theseschools have the lowest rates of expertisegained through certification, and these schoolsstruggle to retain credentialed teachers, particu-larly in the areas of math and science (Darling-Hammond, 1997; Lippman, Burns, & McArthur,1996). For example, in 2000, the North CarolinaAssociation of Educators polled the state’s pub-lic school teachers. Of respondents, 69% saidthat if given the opportunity, they would not

250 Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 251

volunteer to work in a low-performing school.Similarly, in New York City, more than 2,000 cer-tified teachers turned down job offers in 1 year,choosing not to teach rather than be assigned toa low-performing school (Grace, 2001). Recentstudies conducted in California (Carroll,Reichardt, Guarino, & Mejia, 2000), Texas(Hanushek, Kain, & Rivkin, 2001), and NewYork (Lankford, Loeb, & Wyckoff, 2002) showthat teachers systematically move away fromschools with low levels of achievement andhigh concentrations of poor children of color. Asteacher educators, we are forced to grapple withpreparing teachers to effectively educate stu-dents who live and attend schools in such debil-itating circumstances. As indicated in the previ-ous studies, new teachers are often reluctant orchoose not to teach rather than teach at theseschools. Thus, our teaching agenda mustaddress the reasons why teachers feelunderprepared (despite their training) to teachin urban, inner-city communities.

Unfortunately, urban schools’ woes are pri-marily stacked on the shoulders of the parentsand children who attend these schools. Policymakers, schools administrators, and teachershighlight the high rates of student failure andbehavioral problems in urban classrooms asproof of these students’ inability to succeed inschool. The problem of classroom managementis often discussed in terms of how this issueaffects the amount of time teachers spendattending to controlling students’ behaviors,teachers’ pedagogical decisions, and the overallquality of teachers’ instructional time, andscholars have shown that students are still theprimary group to which blame for the problemis assigned (D’Amato, 1996; Everhart, 1983;McNeil, 1988; Watkins & Wagner, 1987). Otherstudies examine the deficit perspectives thatteachers attribute to their students’ race, socio-economic status, home environment, and soforth (Aronson, 1995; Jacob & Jordon, 1996).Clearly, racial and cultural differences betweenteachers and students contribute to the ways inwhich teachers view students’ behaviors as dis-ruptive as well as teachers’ perceptions of theirability to effectively serve the needs of these stu-dents. The university teacher education class-room may be the only space where teachers can

explore these issues and dilemmas and worktoward viable solutions.

As such, teacher educators’ avoidance of dis-cussions about racial differences between teach-ers and students renders student teachers help-less in addressing the major dilemmas and fearsthat are often held by teachers who are of a dif-ferent race than their students. For example, thefear of some teachers of being called a racist intheir attempts to address students’ behaviorsrenders many of them paralyzed in the face ofstudents’ obviously inappropriate behavior.Consequently, the internal dilemma that ensuesat the moment of indecision usually leaves thestudent’s misbehavior not addressed. Studiesempirically demonstrate this point (Ballenger,1992; Delpit, 1995; Obidah & Teel, 2001).

So what more can we do besides blame thestudents and their families for the ills of urbanschools, including discipline/lack of classroommanagement? As educators, we cannot changethe current poverty status of urban school stu-dents and families (although we could changethis status for future generations of familiesthrough educating them). We cannot change thepossible reality of alcoholism and drug abuse inthe families, if these issues do exist. We cannotchange the living situations of students or theirparents’ unemployment. We cannot change thefact that some of our students were bornexposed to prenatal HIV and drugs. These arethe realities of urban life for many students. Sowhat can we change? Our only recourse is tochange ourselves: our preconceived (consciousand unconscious) derogatory perceptions aboutour students and, most important, our will toeffectively educate our students.

Students and parents know what it means tolive as they do. However, those parents whocannot afford to send their children elsewheresucceed in sending them daily to school. In turn,we as teacher educators, district and schooladministrators, counselors, and teachers mustuphold our responsibility to parents and takebetter care of their children for the short time(relative to the number of hours in a day) thatwe have them.

We posit that preparing teachers for urbanschool classrooms can in part be addressedthrough processes involving three areas of

at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

growth in individual teachers. These areas are(a) teachers’ reflections on their beliefs abouttheir students and subsequent changes in teach-ing and discipline practices, (b) teachers’ devel-opment of an action-oriented pedagogy that isinformed by the dynamics of teacher-studentinteractions and reflections on their classroompractices, and (c) teachers’ subsequent imple-mentation and maintenance of effective teach-ing practices. Outcomes should be sought in thebroad categories of knowledge, attitudes, andskills; classroom environment; instructionalprocesses; and curricular materials. Systematicchanges in these areas ultimately affect powerdynamics in the social instructional context ofthe classroom. Moreover, these areas of growthshould begin when teachers enter credentialprograms. In addition, teacher educators mustbegin their own journey of reflecting on theirpedagogies and practices to better serve theneeds of our preservice teachers.

ADDRESSING RACIAL, SOCIOECONOMIC,AND CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEENTEACHERS AND STUDENTS IN OURPREPARATION OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS

Today, more than ever, there is a great needfor teachers who can effectively serve diversestudent populations. The role of teacher educa-tion programs in preparing such teachers isvital. Studies show that the majority of prospec-tive teachers who enter certification programshave little knowledge about diverse groups inthe United States (Cochran-Smith, 1991;Evertson, 1990; Goodwin, 1997; Melnick &Zeichner, 1997). Overall, teacher candidates andbeginning teachers know little about the histo-ries and cultures of varying groups in theUnited States and the discrimination and disen-franchisement that they have encountered.Thus, in preparing teacher candidates to effec-tively serve diverse student populations inurban public schools, teacher education pro-grams must attend to student teachers’ lack ofprior knowledge in their curriculum. In ourown work, we have found that in attemptingthis task, we have to be prepared to address notonly our students’ biases but also our ownbiases that evolve from both macro-level (as

members of a class- and race-biased Americansociety) and micro-level (our childhood andadult lives we have lived up to the entry intoteacher education programs) consciousness,where we incur certain perceptions of ourfuture students’ socializations.

First is a brief contemplation of a macro-levelconsciousness of difference in American societybased on racial, socioeconomic, and cultural dif-ferences. In a critical discussion of race and thelaw, Lawrence (1995) delineated a legacy of rac-ism in American society. Lawrence effectivelyargued that inherent in the doctrine of discrimi-natory purpose—which requires plaintiffs whochallenge “racially neutral laws” to prove dis-criminatory intent on the part of those who areresponsible for enacting the law or in theadministration of the law—is a failure toaddress the depth of how affected our society isby the disease of racism. Lawrence purportedthat to address racial discrimination, the legalsystem has to take into account that “racism isboth a crime and a disease” (p. 237). He elabo-rated on his argument by critiquing the role ofrace and racism in all spheres of American life,including the neutral legal system.

For example, Lawrence (1995) argued thattraditional legal notions of intent cannot en-compass the psychological aspects of racialthought that influence decisions in Americansociety. He continued,

Americans share a common historical and culturalheritage, in which racism has played and still plays adominant role. Because of this shared experience, wealso inevitably share many ideas, attitudes, and be-liefs that attach significance to an individual’s raceand induce negative feelings and opinions aboutnonwhites. To the extent that this cultural belief sys-tem has influenced all of us, we are all racists. At thesame time, most of us are unaware of our racism. Wedo not recognize the ways in which our cultural ex-perience has influenced our beliefs about race or theoccasions on which those beliefs affect our actions.In other words, a large part of the behavior that pro-duces racial discrimination is influenced byunconscious racial motivation. (p. 237)

In this quote, Lawrence outlined a theory en-compassing the premise that racial thought andaction evolve from a common American historyand cultural heritage that leads to an uncon-scious privileging of White identity and a si-

252 Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 253

multaneous devaluing of non-White identities.He also asserted that racism operates on an un-conscious level because it is so embedded in theAmerican psyche. Lawrence argued that dis-crimination exists even when it is not con-sciously intended and as such, the law mustrecognize racism’s primary source, which is ourcollective culture, not individual human behav-ior. Lawrence contended that “we cannot beblamed for unconsciously harboring attitudesthat are inescapable in a culture permeated byracism. . . . [As such,] understanding the culturalsource of our racism obviates the need forfault . . . without denying our collective respon-sibility for racism’s eradication” (p. 239). Nota-bly, Lawrence argued against assigning blamefor racism while still asserting the need forAmerican society to acknowledge the effects ofthis disease in all spheres of American life andespecially, the negative effects of this disease onthe lives of non-White Americans.

Similar arguments can be made regardingour preparation of teachers to teach in urbanschools. In our university classrooms, we can-not ignore the issues that young teachers willcome face-to-face with sooner than later in theurban school context. However, as teacher edu-cators, we have the responsibility of caring forall of our students even as we challenge theirlong-held, often-negative beliefs about theirfuture K-12 students.

In terms of addressing race, class, and cultureon a level of teachers’ micro consciousness, theactual processes of teacher preparation must beexplored. We feel that teacher educators mustdevelop practices that assist novice teachers inbecoming more aware of the biases and preju-dices they may have about the students they arebeing trained to teach. In teacher educationclassrooms, the knowledge about low-incomeand minority students that these novice teach-ers have acquired and used in their personal,familial, schooling, and other social interactionsmust be examined. As teacher educators our-selves, we recognize that this task is much easiersaid that done. Other scholars have also studiedthe challenges that teacher educators face whileengaging their students in discussions on theseissues in the university classroom, in particularwhen our preservice teachers resist the knowl-

edge we try to impart (Berlak & Moyenda, 2001;King, 1991; McIntyre, 1997; Tatum, 1997).

In continuing to study her university class-rooms, Obidah (2004) put forth the notion ofstudents’ resistance as a self-protective copingmechanism from a “truth” that is so radicallydifferent from individual novice teachers’ long-held truth that accepting this new truth wouldcause these individuals to experience social andemotional pain. Using examples from oneteacher education class studied during a 2-yearperiod, Obidah discussed how, as a result ofexamining their belief systems in the universityclassroom, student teachers began to interro-gate their familial and familiar relationships.These interrogations resulted in conflictbetween them and their loved ones and threat-ened the support previously gained from theserelationships. This “cost,” oftentimes unantici-pated, may be too high a price for student teach-ers to pay to become a good teacher for studentswho these teachers are, deep down, really notsure can learn even with their best efforts. Forultimately, how can teachers who have neverwitnessed the successful academic achievementof low-income students and students of color,primarily African American and Latino stu-dents, be convinced that such success is possibleand that they, as teachers, can be facilitators ofits development when everything they havebeen taught about this population points to thecontrary?

For preservice teachers to constructively andeffectively assist students from diverse ethnic,racial, and cultural backgrounds, preserviceteachers must be given opportunities duringthe course of their preparation to thoroughlyexplore and comprehend their own cultural andpersonal values, their identities, and their socialbeliefs (Weiner, 1993). Informing preserviceteachers about the lives and cultures of studentsfrom different racial and cultural differencesthan themselves, conjoined with opportunitiesfor them to explore their own cultural and per-sonal values and biases, effectively preparesthese teachers to work with students academi-cally. Attention to these areas in teacher educa-tion programs also aids these teachers inaddressing discipline dilemmas that inevitablyarise in K-12 classrooms. In addition, although

at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

254 Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005

many theoretical perspectives have been devel-oped (e.g., Delpit, 1995; Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1994; Tatum, 1997), more real-time, inthe moment experiences (e.g., Diaz-Gemmati,1999; Fecho, 2004; Obidah & Teel, 2001) need tobe documented and disseminated for use inteacher education programs.

In the meantime, we have found the follow-ing teachable moments in our university class-rooms have alerted us to the times when weneed to reflect on our practice and ascertainwhether we are practicing what we preach interms of modeling for our teacher educationstudents how to be effective educators for theirstudents. Elsewhere, Obidah (1998, 2000) hasposited the notion of “uncomfort” zones inwhich teacher educators may find themselves.Uncomfort zones are zones where one’s credi-bility may be challenged as a knowledge giverand where the act of challenging students’ long-held beliefs may be a challenge in and of itself.We conclude with a brief list of the classroommoments that indicate a need for us to reflect onour practice at particular moments of classroominteractions, which in turn leads to reflectionson our pedagogy that it is hoped will result inbetter practices in the future.

As teacher educators, you are in youruncomfort zone

� If you hear yourself talking about an unresolved is-sue that occurred in your classroom between youand your student(s) with no commitment on yourpart to return to your classroom and resolve theissue.

� If you disparage your students who are from a differ-ent racial and cultural background than you, insteadof modeling the care for students that you profess tobe teaching to preservice teachers with regard totheir interactions with their future K-12 students.

� If preservice students of color (usually) raise an issueor offer an opinion in the class that is ignored or inother ways not addressed because you disagree ordo not understand their point and you are afraid topush the student further on the topic.

� When fear (e.g., of being called a racist, of not know-ing) affects your pedagogy.

Teacher educators have to challenge their ownassumptions about the students with whomthey are engaged in this process. As members ofthe same race- and class-based society as ourstudents, we bring our own biases and expecta-

tions about the different racial and ethnicgroups of students who come before us to be ed-ucated. Only when we are committed to thecontinuous development of our own pedagogyand teaching practices can we be sure that weare doing our best to prepare our preserviceteachers to teach all of the students who comebefore them in the K-12 urban school classroom“come Monday morning.”

REFERENCESAnyon, J. (1997). Ghetto schooling: A political economy of

urban educational reform. New York: Teachers CollegePress.

Aronson, E. (1995). The social animal. New York: Freeman.Ballenger, C. (1992). Because you like us: The language of

control. Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), 199-208.Berlak, A., & Moyenda, S. (2001). Taking it personally: Rac-

ism in the classroom from kindergarten to college. Philadel-phia: Temple University Press.

Carroll, S. J., Reichardt, R. E., Guarino, C. M., & Mejia, A.(2000). The distribution of teachers among California’sschool districts and schools (MR-1298 O-JIF). SantaMonica, CA: RAND.

Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Learning to teach against thegrain. Harvard Educational Review, 61, 279-310.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Teaching quality matters. Jour-nal of Teacher Education, 54(2), 95-98.

D’Amato, J. (1996). Resistance and compliance in minorityclassrooms. In E. Jacobs & C. Jordan (Eds.), Minorityeducation: Anthropological perspectives (pp. 181-207).Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1997, November). Doing what mat-ters most: Investing in quality teaching. Retrieved fromNational Commission on Teaching America’s FutureWeb site http://www.tc.columbia.edu/

Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers:Why it matters, what leaders can do. Educational Leader-ship, 60(8), 6-13.

Davis, M. (1996). (Ed.). Fortress LA. London: Routledge.Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in

the classroom. New York: New Press.Diaz-Gemmati, G. M. (1999). “And justice for all”: Using

writing and literature to confront racism. In S. W. Freed-man, E. R. Simons, J. S. Kalnin, A. Casareno, & the M-Class Teams (Eds.), Inside city schools: Investigating liter-acy in multicultural classrooms. New York: TeachersCollege Press.

Drake, S., & Cayton, H. R. (1945). Black metropolis: A study ofNegro life in a northern city. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Everhart, R. B. (1983). Classroom management, studentopposition, and the labor process. In M. W. Apple & L.Weis (Eds.), Ideology and practice in schooling (pp. 169-191). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Evertson, C. M. (1990). Bridging knowledge and actionthrough clinical experiences. In D. D. Dill (Ed.), What

at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from

teachers need to know: The knowledge, skills, and valuesessential to good teaching (pp. 94-107). San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Fecho, B. (2004). Is this English? Race, language and culture inthe classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, researchand practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Goodwin, A. L. (1997). Historical and contemporary per-spectives on multicultural teacher education: Past les-sons, new directions. In J. E. King, E. R. Hollins, & W. C.Hayman (Eds.), Preparing teachers for cultural diversity(pp. 5-22). New York: Teachers College Press.

Grace, M. (2001, April 24). Teachers ducking certificates:Fear being assigned to bad schools. New York DailyNews. Retrieved from http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nydailynews/index.html?ts=1038787382

Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001, Novem-ber). Why public schools lose teachers. Retrieved fromNational Bureau of Economic Research Web site: http://www.nber.org/papers/w8599

Haymes, S. N. (1995). Race, culture and the city: A pedagogyfor Black urban struggle. Albany: State University of NewYork Press.

Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingre-dients for critical teacher reflection. Theory Into Practice,42(3), 195-202.

Jacob, E., & Jordon, C. (1996). (Eds.). Minority education:Anthropological perspectives. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

King, J. (1991). Dysconscious racism: Ideology, identityand the miseducation of teachers. The Journal of NegroEducation, 60, 133-146.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities. New York: Basic Books.Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful

teachers of African American children. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sortingand the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.

Lawrence, C. R. (1995). The id, the ego and equal protec-tion: Reckoning with unconscious racism. In K.Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, & K. Thomas (Eds.),Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the move-ment (pp. 235-256). New York: New Press.

Lipman, P. (1998). Race, class, and power in school restructur-ing. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Lippman, L., Burns, S., & McArthur, E. (1996). Urbanschools: The challenges of location and poverty. Retrievedfrom National Center for Educational Statistics Website: http://nces.ed.gov.pubs/96184all.pdf

Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). American apartheid:Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

McIntyre, A. (1997). Making meaning of Whiteness: Exploringracial identity with White teachers. New York: State Uni-versity of New York Press.

McNeil, L. M. (1988). Contradictions of control: School struc-ture and school knowledge. New York: Routledge.

Melnick, S., & Zeichner, K. (1997). Enhancing the capacityof teacher education institutions to address diversityissues. In J. E. King, E. R. Hollins, & W. C. Hayman(Eds.), Preparing teachers for cultural diversity (pp. 23-39).New York: Teachers College Press.

Milner, H. R. (2003). Reflection, racial competence, andcritical pedagogy: How do we prepare pre-serviceteachers to pose tough questions? Race, Ethnicity, andEducation, 6(2), 193-208.

Oakes, J., Franke, M. L., Quartz, K. H., & Rogers, J. (2002).Research for high-quality urban teaching: Defining it,developing it and assessing it. Journal of Teacher Educa-tion, 53(3), 228-234.

Obidah, J. E. (1998). Black my-story: Literate currency ineveryday schooling. In D. E. Alvermann, K. A.Hinchman, D. W. Moore, S. F. Phelps, & D. R. Waff(Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents’ lives(pp. 51-74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Obidah, J. E. (2000). Mediating boundaries of race, class,and professional authority as a critical multiculturalist.Teachers College Record, 102, 1035-1060.

Obidah, J. E. (2004, April). Learning about cultural identity(their own) in teacher education: Exploring novice teachers’literate currency about teaching urban school students.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

Obidah, J. E., & Teel, K. M. (2001). Because of the kids: Facingracial and cultural differences in schools. New York: Teach-ers College Press.

Orfield, G. (1994). The growth of segregation in Americanschools: Changing patterns of segregation and povertysince 1968. Equity and Excellence in Education, 27(1), 5-8.

Tatum, B. D. (1997). Why are all the Black kids sitting togetherin the cafeteria? New York: Basic Books.

Watkins, C., & Wagner, P. (1987). School discipline: A whole-school approach. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.

Weiner, L. (1993). Preparing teachers for urban schools: Lessonsfrom thirty years of school reform. New York: Teachers Col-lege Press.

Jennifer E. Obidah is an associate professor of educa-tion at the University of California–Los Angeles. Herresearch examines the sociocultural contexts of teacher-student interactions in urban classrooms, school and com-munity violence, and urban school reform. She is coauthorof Because of the Kids: Facing Racial and CulturalDifferences in Schools (Teachers College Press, 2001).

Tyrone C. Howard is an assistant professor of educa-tion at the University of California–Los Angeles. Hisresearch interests are concerned with teacher education forurban schools, multicultural education, and the social andpolitical contexts of education.

Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 56, No. 3, May/June 2005 255 at TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY on November 20, 2014jte.sagepub.comDownloaded from