Mapping teachers’ perspectives on culturally responsive pedagogy in mathematics: from academic achievement to insights and opportunities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the seminal work of Gloria Ladson-Billings, research on culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) has, in recent years, expanded significantly. Ladson-Billings proposes three elements of CRP: academic achievement, cultural competence, and sociopolitical consciousness. Nevertheless, in mathematics education research on CRP, the sociopolitical consciousness element is often under-explored or even absent. This paper began as an investigation of how Ladson-Billings’ three elements could be used to examine prospective and practicing teachers’ (PPTs') perspectives on CRP, prior to their participation in a professional development course on CRP in the mathematics classroom. Thirty-one participants from three separate offerings of the course responded in writing to a set of open questions about CRP (in general and in mathematics). Thematic data analysis pointed to the complexities of categorising the data based primarily on Ladson-Billings’ three elements. In addition, our analysis indicated five components underpinning participants’ responses: challenges; opportunities; fears; resistance; insights. We conclude with a revised conceptualisation of CRP for mathematics teacher education programmes aimed at supporting PPTs’ development of their CRP-related knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it