Search results

There are very few Black children in programs for gifted children when both historical and contemporary research indicate that such environments contain elements very similar to those described as advantageous for Black children. Presented here is an overview of the research regarding Black children’s learning styles, multiple intelligences, and cultural expectations around adult-child interactions and a comparison to characteristics of gifted (and potentially gifted) children. In addition, the evolution and refinement of the definition of giftedness is outlined along with the impact of those definitions on Black children. The identification, assessment, and testing processes used to place students in gifted programs are outlined along with policies (e.g., universal screening) and practices (e.g., more multicultural education and gifted education in teacher in-service and pre-service education) that can transform gifted programs into diverse and inclusive learning environments where gifted Black students learn, grow, and thrive. Finally, classroom practices that cultivate the genius and giftedness of Black children are presented – practices that give teachers an opportunity to add to their repertoire of strategies and pedagogy in order to increase their ability to create more inclusive learning environments that benefit all children in general and Black children in particular.

This chapter challenges the notion that Black males in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are missing from the discipline and proposes a model that presents underrepresentation as a function of Black males being both intentionally undiscovered and/or deliberately disconnected from particular academic disciplines. Our work offers a tangible and implementable yet aligned theory/method/exemplar for supporting the STEM genius of Black males through a hip-hop development (HHD) approach that aligns with a unique pedagogical method rooted in hip-hop culture.

In this chapter, we describe a hip-hop based science program as an intervention that combats STEM undiscovery and disconnectedness. We suggest that this program (through its theoretical and methodological roots) provides a set of practices that have the potential to bolster both academic content knowledge and knowledge of self. We argue that this program supports the development of the students' full socioemotional selves – which is a necessary prerequisite to pursuing academic content knowledge.

A collaborative autoethnography (CAE) conducted by six Belizean educators in a US-based PhD program in Language, Literacy, and Culture Education and one of their faculty members is presented in a creative, dialogic format in this chapter. The group of educators embarked on this reflective self-study to explore how their programmatic language and literacy education knowledge was taken up, remixed, rejected, indigenized, or transformed into local Belizean pedagogies and curricula. Using CAE methods of narrative data generation and dialogic analysis and reflection, the educator-researchers examined the degree to which their program met the expectations of Tierney's (2018) global meaning making endeavor. They found that being vulnerable learners and building their own disciplinary confidence and competence enabled them to take up the new ideas they were encountering, and that new learning led to transformative shifts in their pedagogical philosophies that included culturally relevant and proactive pedagogies. They also innovated and remixed pedagogies in their teaching contexts while wobbling with how to create sustainable changes. This work indicates that Western, US-based universities and programs can, with intentional macro- and micro-curriculum design and ongoing critical reflection, facilitate cross-cultural, international language and literacy programs that enact decolonizing and emancipatory curricula and practices.

Diagrams are ubiquitous in economics and are uncontestably among the most used, if not the most important workhorses of economists, though they come in many forms. This essay examines the different uses of graphs and diagrams in the pioneering work of two Victorian economists, Stanley Jevons and Alfred Marshall. We stress the difference between their use as representations and as visual reasoning tools, a difference that became obscured in the twentieth century with the rise of econometrics.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is about understanding and acknowledging when racism has impacted a policy, person, system, and our history. This chapter examines CRT as a tool to understand what has happened in our history and educational system and as a tool to dismantle our current system to bring about true inclusive and authentic schools. It serves to analyze the practical use of CRT in our current public K-12 educational system. The purpose is to fast forward our discussion on race and to explicitly illustrate the dire need for an inclusive education fundamentally girded in an abolitionist mindset for school systems, educators, parents, and students. Although CRT has branched out to be inclusive of many populations, the core purpose was to examine anti-Blackness in America and how that has stained our education system. Inspired by the dissertation conducted by Ayanna Blackmon-Balogun, the aim of this chapter is to draw our attention to that essential purpose of CRT so that schooling can become more liberatory and meaningful to all.

Despite the plethora of instructional programs and strategies emanating from research, our current efforts have not produced results that could prove to us that our approach in addressing the needs of English learners (ELs) is working adequately. We believe that aside from the lively and rigorous standard-based teaching that is designed by teachers and others involved in educating students, it is imperative to view the impact of teaching on student learning which would be indicative of how ELs are connected in the process based on what their backgrounds are, who they are with regards to social and cultural identities, and how they learn. We put forth the idea that the lack of progress in the language development and academic achievement of ELs is not solely due to the body of knowledge related to curriculum and instruction but influenced by a variety of factors that pertain to language and race. We think race matters in working with ELs because teachers like any other people may have prejudgmental ideological stances and cultural and racial biases that might influence their perceptions of their students as learners. Several equity-related matters such as identity recognition, sense of belonging, critical consciousness, and hope are viable considerations as well in teaching ELs. However, prejudice against students based on race reinforced by institutionalized language policies related to teaching and testing and microaggressions may turn out to be the culprit in causing the disengagement of English language learners.