Identifying Key Features of Equity-Centered Professional Learning

Abstract

To address the inequities within the educational system, there are calls for teachers to have an intentional focus on equity. Unfortunately, teachers often do not receive enough preparation within their certification programs or during in-service trainings to center equity- driven practices. This study provided insight into the features that one group of teacher leaders relied upon and found essential when working to enact high-quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers, and researchers utilized these findings to develop a framework for equity-centered professional learning. The context for this research was teacher leader-led professional learning within the context of a job-embedded professional learning experience for teacher leaders. Data collection included professional learning lesson plans, written reflections by teacher leaders after the professional learning sessions, and field notes. Findings point to five features of professional learning focused on equity that teacher leaders utilized. These include: (1), Safe, trusting community grounded in relationships, (2) Dialogue to explore and critically reflect upon biases, beliefs, and experiences, (3) Active learning opportunities that promote dissonance, (4) Authentic connections to equity within the local context through inquiry, and (5) Responsiveness to participants’ varied experiences and understanding of equity. The findings have implications for routines of practice that can be utilized to enact these essential features and how an equity lens can permeate the design of professional learning.

Keywords

professional development teacher leadership equity teacher learning school improvement

School-aged students across the globe continue to face disparities, bias, and marginalization. One of the factors contributing to these disparities is that while schools reflect such vibrant diversity, teacher demographics remain largely White, monolingual, and female (European Commission, 2017; NCES, 2017). Therefore, teachers often have very different cultural backgrounds and experiences from their students (Gay, 2010; Irvine, 2003). These “cultural conflicts can cause inconsistencies and incongruence between teachers and students, which can make teaching and learning difficult” (Milner, 2010, p. 14) as teachers rely on “problematic representations of people of color” (DiAngelo, 2018, p. 2) as well as operate from a deficit rather than asset-based view of students (European Commission, 2017; Goldenberg, 2014; Gorski, 2018).

One way of addressing these inequities at a micro level is for students to have access to high-quality, certified teachers who can promote greater equity in schools (Creasey et al., 2016; Gorski, 2018). Equity within schools can be described as both a lens and a commitment to action to ensure that all students, regardless of race, language, class, gender, and so on, have “a fair or equitable distribution of access and opportunity” in their education and lives (Gorski, 2018, p. 19). To achieve equity, schools should work to actively identify and eliminate bias, and develop “policies, practices, and cultures” that promote justice (Gorski, 2018, p.19). Promoting equity within education involves examining and questioning access and power structures (e.g., Cochran- Smith et al., 2009; Grant & Agosto, 2008; McDonald, 2007) and how schools “structurally produce and perpetuate inequity, poverty, and cultures of apathy” (Milner, 2010, p. 27). To be equity-centered, educators must become equity-minded or have an equity frame of reference or lens to view self, schools, and society as well as equity-driven by actively trying to respond to and redress issues of inequity through individual and collective action (Gorski, 2018; Jacobs & Burns, 2021). Unfortunately, teachers across the globe often do not receive enough preparation within their initial certification programs or through inservice professional learning to be able to center equity within their practice (Acquah et al., 2016; Carter Andrews & Richmond, 2019; Burns & Shadoian-Gersing, 2010; Cochran-Smith et al., 2009; European Commission, 2020; Riordan et al., 2019; Poekert et al., 2020). If teachers are to play a pivotal role in helping to develop a more equitable educational experience for PK-12 students, then ongoing professional learning must occur.

Professional learning for inservice teachers comes in all shapes and sizes. However, not all professional learning experiences are effective or impactful (Guskey & Yoon, 2009; Patton et al., 2015). Simply sitting and listening to an outside expert lecture about equity will not have the impact on the development of equitable classrooms for PK-12 students (Carter Andrews & Richmond, 2019; Kohli et al., 2015). High quality professional learning is job-embedded and related to the needs and lived realities of the school (Desimone, 2009; Patton et al., 2015; Poekert et al., 2020). We wondered how the features of high-quality professional learning adapted or evolved when the focus was on equity rather than another content area such as mathematics or science. To do so, we studied a job-embedded professional learning context where teacher leaders engaged in and led professional learning about equity. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the features that one group of teacher leaders relied upon and found essential when working to enact high-quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers, and to use these findings to develop a framework for equity-centered professional learning.

Relevant Literature

If teachers are to play a pivotal role in helping to develop a more equitable educational experience for PK-12 students, then ongoing professional learning must occur. Within this section, we discuss the relevant literature around high quality professional learning as well as the literature specific to equity-centered professional learning.

Teacher Professional Learning

Teacher professional learning has evolved from didactic, one-time trainings to collaborative, job-embedded professional learning (Foster 2022). Teachers do not need to be “developed;” rather, they should be engaged in lifelong professional learning. Thus, professional learning for today’s teachers is active, research-based, and provides opportunities for teachers to connect what they are learning with the realities of their classrooms; it is “thoughtfully planned and well-implemented” (Guskey & Yoon, 2009, p. 497).

High-quality teacher professional learning involves teachers participating in theory-driven learning communities with peers. These learning communities involve learning about human developmental theory and aligning practices with educational standards (Hirsh, 2019; Foster 2022). High-quality teacher professional learning leverages robust instructional materials (Hirsh, 2019), and integrates opportunities for teachers to develop knowledge in, of, and for practice by coupling knowledge with effective coaching (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; Yendol-Hoppey & Dana, 2010). By bringing in outside experts and then following through with supported facilitation, schools are pairing outside and inside expertise to create powerful professional learning opportunities (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Foster 2022; Yendol-Hoppey & Dana, 2010). Thus, high-quality professional learning for teachers is not learning “best practice,” but rather, it is an adaptation of practices to meet the needs of specific contexts (Guskey & Yoon, 2009).

High-quality teacher professional learning takes time (Guskey & Yoon, 2009). It also requires vision and leadership to thoughtfully plan a curriculum for teacher learning that is scaffolded and designed to meet their developmental needs (Glickman et al., 2018; Foster 2022). Professional learning experiences should use data from multiple perspectives and sources to plan, critically assess, and evaluate its effectiveness to ensure quality (Foster 2022). In essence, high-quality professional learning: (1) is based on teachers’ needs and interests, (2) recognizes learning is a social process, (3) is collaborative, engaging educators in communities of practice, (4) is ongoing and sustained, (5) actively engages teachers, (6) deepens both content and pedagogy, (7) is facilitated with care, and (8) is linked to student learning (Patton et al., 2015).

Equity-Centered Professional Learning

Professional learning is an important vehicle to promote more equitable schooling experiences for K-12 students (e.g. Crockett & Buckley, 2009; Kose, 2007; Novak et al., 2020; Prenger et al., 2017). Riordan et al. (2019) argue:

… without explicit attention during professional learning to systemic issues of power, race, gender, class, ethnicity, and other areas of equity and injustice, teachers are unlikely to find coherent and consistent ways to support students in addressing those issues in classrooms and in their own lives. (p. 341)

The call for equity-centered professional learning is not only from within the United States, but policy reports from the European Commission have named cultural diversity and equity as key areas for teacher professional learning not only within the inservice years (European Commission, 2017, 2020). The 2013 and 2018 OECD Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS) of 45 countries reported teaching for diversity and within multicultural settings as one of the main areas where inservice teachers need professional development. Additionally, the study reported that 33% of teachers on average feel they are unable to cope with the challenges of a multicultural classroom (OECD, 2018). The European Commission (2020) advocates for utilizing professional development to support teacher Intercultural Competence (IC), or the “the ability to mobilise and deploy relevant attitudes, skills, knowledge and values in order to interact effectively and appropriately in different intercultural situations” (p.48).

We know from the literature that high-quality professional learning should promote reflection and a shift in thinking beyond just gaining skills and knowledge (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 2011; Patton et al., 2015). However, equity-centered professional learning takes that rethinking a step further to be much more critical in nature. Kohli et al. (2015) define critical professional development as a process “where teachers are engaged as politically-aware individuals who have a stake in teaching and transforming society” (p. 9). The underpinnings of equity are not aligned with top-down, technical approaches that rely on a banking or dehumanizing model. Instead, equity-centered professional learning is more problem-posing and transformative in nature (Kohli et al., 2015). Equity-centered professional learning involves opportunities for teachers to learn from each other, values teachers’ expertise, promotes collaborative problem-solving, and promotes choice and ownership over one’s learning (Ezzani, 2019; Riordan et al., 2019; Skerrett et al., 2018). This professional learning is often framed through a critical pedagogy approach that involves raising questions, critique, and reflecting issues of power (Riordan et al., 2019). Approaching professional learning from this stance “allows teachers to experience more equitable educational practices in their own learning” (Riordan et al., 2019, p.330).

Equity-centered professional learning “becomes not only about gaining new knowledge, but also about taking on new ways of talking, relating, and acting in relation to students and the teaching” (Battey & Franke, 2015, p.441). Therefore, professional learning is not just building subject matter content expertise but building equity expertise as well (Battey & Franke, 2015; Kose, 2007). Due to the nature of equity content, the research on equity and professional learning notes the need for critical self-reflection and inquiry in relation to identity (Bianchini et al., 2015; Brown & Crippen, 2017; European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport, and Culture, 2017; Kohli et al., 2015; Kose, 2007; Novak et al., 2020; Poekert et al., 2020; Shuali Trachtenberg et al., 2020). Teachers need to become critically conscious or try to “achieve a deepening awareness of the social realities which shape their lives and discover their own capacities to recreate them” (Darder et al., 2009, p. 14). This unveiling or awakening may begin with critical reflection about what is immediately in one’s reality with reflection on identity, analyzing power, and looking deeply into one’s own assumptions (Freire, 1970). This critical reflection can then move outward to identifying structures, practices, and policies that serve to oppress and marginalize students (Freire, 1970).

Equity-centered professional learning is often designed within the context of a professional learning community (Carter Andrews & Richmond, 2019; Kohli et al., 2021; Leonard & Woodland, 2022; Picower, 2011) that includes opportunity for critical dialogue (Galloway & Ishimaru, 2019; Kohli et al., 2015) and critical debate (Novak et al., 2020). By engaging in dialogue, professional learning can challenge and reframe beliefs and behaviors away from deficit narratives toward advancing anti-oppressive practices (Battey & Franke, 2015; Bristol, 2015; Ezzani, 2019; Nicholson & Kroll, 2015). Learning within a community of practice promotes relationships and collaboration within a network (Novak et al., 2020; Riordan et al., 2019; Skerrett et al., 2018). Additionally, if equitable outcomes for students are to result from engaging in equity-centered professional learning, there must be a move toward action and change or praxis in the classroom. Teachers need opportunities to see practices modeled as well as” try out” new pedagogical skills learned within the professional learning experience (Novak et al., 2020; Riordan et al., 2019). Action research or practitioner inquiry is a vehicle to support equity and leadership development for teachers through problem-posing, data collection, and action grounded in the specific needs of the school context (Bianchini et al., 2015; Jacobs et al., 2014; Poekert et al., 2020). Equity-centered professional learning is not just about consciousness-raising, but engaging in praxis or reflective action (Freire, 1970).

While there has been a surge of literature on equity-centered professional learning within the last 5–7 years, there is significantly less literature focused on equity and professional learning for inservice teacher learning across both the United States and transnational Europe as opposed to the wealth of information on equity and preservice teacher learning (Forghani-Arani et al., 2019; Guenther & Wexler, 2021; Leeman & van Koeven, 2018; Poekert et al., 2020). This study serves to add to this literature on inservice professional and learning and equity but brings the unique perspective of being job-embedded and facilitated by teacher leaders (TLs). The findings can provide insight into the design and approach needed to enact equity-centered professional learning.

Conceptual Framework

An outcome of equity-centered professional learning is what Gorski (2018) describes as equity literacy. Equity literate teachers can “recognize, respond to, and redress conditions that deny some students access to educational and other opportunities enjoyed by their peers” (Gorski, 2018, p. 6). Recognizing means the ability to see bias that may be “normalized” and invisible, especially as a member of the dominant group. Within schools, teachers must be able to recognize inequities within “classroom dynamics, school cultures, policies, and the broader society, and how these biases and inequities affect students and their families'' (p. 20). Responding involves taking action to challenge biases and inequities in the moment. This could include having a conversation with a fellow teacher or intervening on behalf of a student. Responding includes addressing the inequity in the moment and often is interpersonal in nature. Redressing is more of a transformative action that involves getting at the root cause of an inequity or bias. This includes taking action to change more institutional structures and culture within a school. In order to recognize, respond, and redress inequities, teachers cannot simply learn skills or strategies, but have to develop an equity lens or a way of viewing or framing the world (Gorski, 2018; Poekert et al., 2020; Wager & Foote, 2013).

Methodology

This study was framed as a case study to identify features of equity-centered professional learning for teachers. Case studies usually examine either the ordinary or the extraordinary (Stake, 1995). This study was a case of elementary TLs who designed and facilitated equity-centered teacher professional learning for the rest of the school staff, which was made possible by the award-winning school-university partnership that collaborated to prepare TLs over an extended period of time. The TLs were prepared to lead professional learning through a Teacher Leader Academy that was co-planned and co-taught at the school by two professors-in-residence, one designated lead teacher from the school, and two doctoral students. The collaborative planning team was able to design and modify the curriculum for the TLs so that it was responsive to the needs of the school. TLs earned advanced credentials, including a graduate certificate in teacher leadership and a master’s in elementary education or an educational specialist degree in education. Case studies are bounded entities (Stake, 1995). This study has three boundaries: context, time, and content.

Boundary 1: Context

This study is bounded by context. This study occurred in one elementary school located in the southeastern United States. The elementary school, Hope Elementary (pseudonym), is a community school situated in one of the largest school districts in the country. Hope’s student population ranges from 850–1000+ students depending upon the year. The school serves predominantly students and families of color, with the majority of the student body being Hispanic (65%) followed by Black or African American (25%). Thirty-four percent of students are identified as English language learners; and 94% of students are eligible for free/reduced lunch. As a community school, Hope has strong relationships with its parents, local business leaders, and university partners as it aims to be the community resource hub to address challenges associated with living in poverty. Ninety-seven percent of Hope’s students receive free and reduced lunch.

Hope has had a longstanding relationship with the local research university, Urban Research University (URU), and particularly its college of education. For almost a decade, Hope has been hosting and mentoring teacher candidates from the elementary education program. Hope is also home to a Teacher Leader Academy, which is a unique school-university partnership that aims to: (1) develop equity-centered TLs, and (2) simultaneously integrate teacher professional learning and university-based graduate coursework. As a part of this program, TLs enroll in graduate coursework at URU. Both the school’s data (i.e. achievement, climate surveys, etc.) and teacher/administrator voices are key contributors to the development of the curriculum for these courses. Through this coursework, teachers can earn advanced credentials, like a graduate certificate in teacher leadership. The program aims to support TLs’ development of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to: (1) systematically study their own practice by developing essential data literacy skills, (2) effectively coach teacher candidates and inservice teachers to improve student learning, (3) skillfully facilitate professional learning to improve instructional practice, and (4) intentionally develop a lens of equity in themselves and others to address educational inequities (See Author 2 et al., 2019; Author 2 et al., 2020; Author 1 et al., 2020). About one third of all of Hope’s teachers are enrolled in, or are alumni of, the Teacher Leader Academy. Teacher leaders design and facilitate professional learning for the rest of the staff, and their ability to skillfully lead professional learning serves as their performance assessments for their graduate courses.

Boundary 2: Time

This study is bounded by time. The data were gathered over the course of one academic year.

Boundary 3: Content

This study is bounded by content. Although professional learning occurs every year at the school, data were gathered during the one particular year where the school’s priority was to address equity issues by developing teachers’ knowledge and understanding of key equity concepts (i.e., bias, privilege, hegemony).

Prior to this year the TLs engaged in job-embedded coursework themselves where they were learning about equity concepts and developing an equity lens (Jacobs et al., 2020). The subsequent year (the focus of this case), the TLs then led their colleagues in equity-centered professional learning. The TLs utilized the expertise gained from participation in the teacher leader academy to plan this professional learning. The TLs led eight different professional learning groups focused on different equity topics (2-5 TLs leading each group). The topics were generated from the TLs work with the Culturally Responsive Instruction Observation Tool (Powell et al. 2016) that helped to provide a vision of culturally responsive teaching along various dimensions (i.e. assessment, discourse, pedagogy and instructional practices, family collaboration, multiple perspectives, etc.). These groups were created as inquiry communities guided by a question developed by the TLs (See Table One).

In September, the TL groups created a 2-minute video “advertisement” that was shared with the entire school at a faculty meeting. The faculty members then self-selected the PD group they wanted to join. Group sizes ranged from 5 participants to 15 participants. The participants of the groups included classroom teachers, support personnel, and special area teachers. Throughout the year, TLs led their PD groups once a month for a total of eight sessions. Each session was approximately one hour in length. The TLs had autonomy in planning each of the professional learning sessions. However, many included readings and activities that they had participated in themselves during the previous year when TLs engaged in graduate coursework focused on equity. Each month, the TLs wrote a lesson plan to guide their professional learning session, as well as an exit ticket to gain participant feedback.

Methods

This study was guided by the question, What features of professional learning do a group of TLs prioritize and find essential when working to enact high quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers?

Participants

The participants in the study were a cadre of 23 TLs who participated in the Teacher Leader Academy at Hope Elementary (approximately ⅓ of the staff), ranging in age and experience from early to late stages of their career? They all had been teaching for at least 3 years, and most of the TLs had completed or were working toward advanced degrees or graduate certificates in education. All TLs were selected to participate in the Teacher Leader Academy by their principal because of their promise as emerging TLs. Teacher leaders were all informed of the study, and all consented to participate. The TLs were predominantly white and female, though there were two males.

Research Team

The research team consisted of four individuals - two research faculty and two doctoral students. In this study, the researchers were positioned as both insiders and outsiders in this context. All four individuals had worked with the school in which the study was situated for several years, primarily as part of the TLA work, but also in some other contexts (volunteering, school committees, supervision of interns, etc.). However, none of the researchers were instructional staff or involved full-time at the school. We acknowledge the way our positionality shaped this study’s design and our interpretation of our data. Working under the assumption that our positionalities necessarily influenced this research, we also collaborated with one another, with school leadership, and with all participants to ensure multiple perspectives were explored and represented throughout each stage of the research.

Data Collection

There were three main sources of data collected, (1) professional learning lesson plans, (2) TL reflections on professional learning sessions, and (3) field notes.

Professional Learning Lesson Plans

The first data source was the lesson plans for the teacher-led monthly professional learning sessions. Each professional learning group created a yearlong “unit” plan around a topic of equity (see Table 1). From August through May, TLs were required to write a lesson plan for their monthly professional learning session using a template that we provided. The lesson plan asked them to include: (1) the topic and overall goals for their group’s yearlong professional learning unit, (2) the goals and objectives for the upcoming session, (3) a step-by-step detailed plan including times and responsibilities that served as the facilitation plan for the session, (4) an explanation of how this session built on the last session to ensure continuity, (5) research-based professional learning strategies that they were using this session, and (6) connections to the previous year’s equity coursework (See Appendix). Lesson plans averaged four pages in length. Thus, there were a total of 80 lesson plans and 120 pages (8 groups x 10 months of plans x 4 pages per plan). The research team members each took responsibility for supporting several professional learning groups by providing written feedback on the lesson plans. We also reviewed the feedback as a reference when analyzing the lesson plan data.

Table 1.

Teacher-Led Professional Learning Topics.

Group Name & Topic	Inquiry Wondering
Multiple perspectives	In what ways can teachers create a culturally-centered environment for students that celebrates multiple perspectives and ideas?
Classroom caring	How do we establish a classroom of respect and rapport with one another?
Classroom climate	How can we create a positive learning environment where all individuals are valued and respected?
Family collaboration	How can we develop partnerships with our parents to support their children as learners?
Curriculum	How can I integrate culturally responsive learning experiences into the curriculum?
Pedagogy	How can we build on students’ cultural backgrounds/knowledge to develop instruction relevant to students’ lives?
Assessment	How do we include student voice in assessments?
Discourse	How do we use students’ home language and culture through a variety of discourse techniques to implement equitable teaching?

TL Reflections on Professional Learning Sessions

Following each session, TLs gave out an “exit ticket” to gain teacher feedback about their session. Exit tickets asked teachers to briefly reflect on and respond to a question(s) about their learning during the session. The TLs analyzed the exit ticket data, along with anecdotal notes taken from a member of the research team who had attended the session, to reflect on the session. The TLs were then asked to respond to the following reflection questions:

• Look at the data you gathered. Analyze that data. What evidence-based claim(s) can you make about your PD session (and give the evidence from the exit tickets) about your ability to meet your objective for that planning session? Did you meet the objectives you planned for? Why or why not? How do you know?

• What values, beliefs, or assumptions could you identify that teachers held as they were learning and participating in your PD session?

• What do you want to remember to include in your PD plans for the future based on what you learned today?

The post session reflections were between 1-2 pages in length, producing about another 100 pages of data.

Field Notes

The final data source was field notes (Emerson et al., 2011). When the TLs led their monthly sessions, a member of the research team would attend the session and script field notes. The research team members all had experience scripting and met prior to data collection to develop an organizational scheme, including timestamps and a process for delineating participants. The main content of the field notes included the back-and-forth conversation between TLs and participants as well as among participants. The field notes notes were given to the TLs who were facilitating the session. The TLs used those field notes as a data source when they wrote their post-session reflections to reflect on participant learning.

Data Analysis

To analyze our data, we engaged in a multi-step process of several rounds of coding and then graduating toward larger patterns and themes. We engaged in the six phases of Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis: (1) familiarizing with the data, (2) generating codes, (3) constructing themes, (4) reviewing potential themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) producing the report.

Familiarizing with the Data

Since there was a great volume of data, each researcher focused on two specific professional learning groups for initial analysis. To familiarize ourselves with the data, we created a spreadsheet for each PD group. In the spreadsheet, each row represented one of the PD sessions. The headings of the spreadsheet (relating to each PD session) included (1) date, (2) objective, (3) key words, (4) routines of practice, and (5) connection to equity. We cut and pasted data from the TLs’ PD lesson plans, reflections, and anecdotal notes to put under the appropriate heading. Organizing our data helped us to follow the progression of sessions as well as the key actions that took place. While this organization helped us to pull out the key data, the isolation did not capture the complexities or the story of what occurred during the sessions. Therefore, we used the spreadsheet data to write a narrative for each PD group’s progression of sessions. The narratives were quite detailed and included direct quotes from across the data sources that chronicled the journey of each professional learning group.

Generating Codes

Since the narratives were a detailed chronology of the professional learning sessions (including data from across data sources), we decided to code the narratives as our data set. We began with a deductive coding process influenced by two frameworks. One framework included the core features of high-quality professional development (Patton et al., 2015). The second framework included the elements of equity literacy or to “recognize, respond to, and redress” (Gorski, 2018) in relation to the actions and outcomes of the professional learning session. We then moved into a round of inductive coding. These codes tended to name the content of “what” the TLs were focusing on during the professional learning session. Secondary codes included: Bias, Privilege, Culture, Language, Race, SES Status, School culture, Policies, School Structures, Norms, Curriculum, and Pedagogical Practices.

Theme Creation

After engaging in several rounds of coding, we moved to seeking out themes, reviewing potential themes, and defining and naming the themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). To seek out themes, we created a table for each professional learning group where we connected equity literacy, core features, and secondary codes. From there, we wrote a brief statement/phrase (emerging theme) that described the connection between equity and PD codes with our research question in mind. Example phrases included, “Develop awareness of bias through active/hands-on experience” and “Engage in data collection to uncover bias/inequity.” We met to present the phrases (with supporting quotes) from our individual PD groups. We collapsed and combined phrases as well as uncovered phrases that seemed to be outliers and not shared by other groups to create nine potential themes. To review the themes, we each went back to our group data and coded specifically for those nine themes. This resulted in further collapsing to five themes. From there, we each moved the data for each specific theme into a shared google doc. This allowed us to begin looking at the data across the professional learning groups by theme. This coding resulted in defining the parameters of the theme. For example, an initial theme was the “importance of relationships”; however, through deeper analysis of the data, the theme became “Safe, trusting community grounded in relationships.”

Trustworthiness

We employ Guba and Lincoln’s trustworthiness criteria (Guba & Lincoln, 1985) in this research to establish credibility and transferability. Having multiple researchers during the data collection and data analysis process promoted trustworthiness. We triangulated our data by using multiple data sources to gain understanding of the features that TLs relied upon and found essential in their enactment of equity-centered professional learning. There were ongoing opportunities for both individual and team analysis of the data, whereby discussions and memo writing around the data from multiple perspectives were used to develop codes and eventually themes that came from across the data sources. Additionally, trustworthiness was promoted by the researchers’ prolonged engagement in the context and the volume of data collected during our full year in the field. Finally, our use of thick description as we establish the context for this research allows readers to determine the extent to which this study might apply to another context.

Findings

This was a case of equity-centered teacher professional learning led by TLs. The findings are presented as five key features (see Table 2) that this group of TLs relied upon and found essential when working to enact high-quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers. This framework can serve as a useful tool for professional learning practitioners.

Table 2.

Five Features of Equity-centered Professional Learning.

• Safe, trusting community grounded in relationships
• Dialogue to explore and critically reflect upon biases, beliefs and experiences
• Active learning opportunities that promote dissonance
• Authentic connections to equity within the local context through inquiry
• Responsiveness to participants’ varied experiences and understanding of equity

Feature One: Safe, Trusting Community Grounded in Relationships

The creation of a safe, trusting community grounded in relationships was a foundational feature used across TL groups in their facilitation of equity-centered professional learning. Across the data, we consistently saw the terms “safe”, “open”, “comfortable”, “non-threatening” and “trust” to describe the characteristics of the community context the TLs were aiming to develop. The TLs explained how this community was a necessary foundation for professional learning. Discussing equity issues was often uncomfortable so as one TL shared, “This is why we keep trying to make our participants feel comfortable and that their voices are heard” (Curriculum Group).

The formation of this community was not happenstance, but quite intentional. The TLs described a variety of practices they utilized to promote the development of safety and trust within the community. One of the most popular practices was the development and regular review of community norms. Across lesson plans, we saw norms such as: (1) Be transparent and honest, (2) Challenge ideas, not people, and (3) Active Participation. Interestingly, several of the groups specifically noted the inclusion of unique norms due to the equity-centered content. For example, the Curriculum Group shared:

We will be doing so to further enhance the ‘regular’ norms we have already created. They were the usual norms- no hogs, no logs, being on time, being prepared, staying positive, productive sidebars, etc. I then asked them [teachers] to look a little deeper and figure out if we can extend these norms to incorporate cultural diversity. After reading the article, “Willing to be Disturbed”, participants were able to add to the norms to relate better to the sensitive topics we will be discussing. (TL Reflection)

The Curriculum Group TLs shared that they intentionally had their group members read “Willing to Be Disturbed” (Wheatley, 2002), a chapter that describes how to frame and engage in conversations that promote critical reflection and transformation. Their hope was that this reading would give the teachers insight into the types of conversations they hoped the group would have together. It is also important to note that the norms were often co-constructed as a group rather than the facilitators creating the norms on their own.

In addition to utilizing norms, the TLs designed various community-building activities to help the participants learn more about each other. Purposeful practices to build community were needed as the professional learning groups included teachers from across grade levels, special areas (i.e. PE, music, etc.), and a variety of support teachers. Some of the teachers did not know each other very well. The TLs spoke about designing specific “getting to know you” opportunities to share information about personal lives and experiences. Specifically, the TLs discussed trying to connect some of those “getting to know you” opportunities to the equity content. For example, several groups had teacher participants bring an artifact connected to their culture as a follow up to a reading. Other groups did a community building activity about the origin and origin behind the teachers’ names. The Pedagogy Group explained that their hope was to not only centralize the teachers’ identities, but to model practices that could be used with elementary students. The TLs explained that the rationale behind these community building activities was “to find and make connections with our group members” (Lesson Plan). This essential feature served as a foundation in which the other essential features relied upon.

Feature Two: Dialogue to Explore and Critically Reflect upon Biases, Beliefs, and Experiences

The next feature that we found TLs used regularly was the inclusion of dialogue to explore and critically reflect upon biases, beliefs, and experiences. The TLs articulated that this critical dialogue could occur because the group built a trusting, safe foundation (Feature One). For example, the Discourse Group TLs spoke about the need for trust so teacher participants would be “open and ready to put themselves into discomfort” (Lesson Plan). While Feature One included sharing about experiences and identities to build community, Feature Two goes a step further to include critical reflection about those experiences and identities.

The TLs explained that dialogue and reflection were key aspects of equity-centered professional learning. For example, the Curriculum Group TLs shared, “Although this makes people feel vulnerable, we can only begin to change our mindsets and our practices if we draw awareness to our own beliefs” (TL Reflection). The TLs realized the importance of dialogue “for unearthing bias and discrimination,” (TL Reflection), so they often adjusted their plans to not cut a meaningful conversation short. For example, the Classroom Climate Group reflected, “We ran out of time because we wanted to value everyone’s time to share their ideas and since the sharing was so rich and deep, we brought up the possibility of continuing for next time and we decided that an extension of this topic would be needed” (TL Reflection).

The TLs spoke about the importance of prompting dialogue about experiences beyond surface level interests (i.e., “I like to travel.” or “I have a dog.”) to deeper conversations about the teacher participants’ personal experiences with bias and discrimination as well as uncovering biases they held (Caring Classroom Group Lesson Plan). For example, the Multiple Perspectives TLs posed questions such as, “What connections can you make between your own biases and the data?” (Lesson Plan) to draw out members’ biases.

At times, the TLs used readings to serve as a catalyst to promote reflection on biases, beliefs, and experiences. For example, the Family Collaboration TLs explained that after reading the article “The Red Shoe” (Webb, 2000) about a young girl who was humiliated by her teacher due to assumptions and bias, the teachers began to open up about how they too have made assumptions about their own elementary students. The Family Collaboration TLs shared, “Each participant opened up and shared personal views and experiences with the group. This sparked an in-depth conversation that helped us really uncover unknown biases we have as teachers'' (TL Reflection). By asking questions such as, “How did this article make you reflect on your personal experiences with students?” (Classroom Culture, Lesson Plan), the teachers were able to effectively use the readings as a catalyst for dialogue and reflection.

The TLs spoke about the importance of dialogue that did not promote fear of judgment. Many of the groups utilized protocols to structure dialogue within their groups. Protocols served to not only structure conversations, but promote equity of participation (Easton, 2009). The TLs also used many of the same Kagan conversation structures they utilized with their students. For example, the Curriculum Group facilitators reflected:

We will use the Kagan structure called Single Round Robin for participants to share out their biases. We are using this structure because after our last PD we reflected on wanting to aim to use more structures in order to ensure that all voices are heard. This structure is quick which is beneficial because it is just to serve as an opening activity to see if our participants were keeping track of any biases they may have noticed. It allows for every person to share once through without being able to respond to another participant. (Lesson Plan)

The TLs reflected that the topic of equity must include dialogue and reflection about one’s own experiences, biases, and beliefs.

Feature Three: Active Learning Opportunities that Promote Dissonance

In the data it was evident that the TLs did not conceptualize equity-centered professional learning as a passive process of telling teachers about equity, but included various opportunities for the active construction of knowledge. In the PD groups, the participants engaged in active learning to gain a deeper understanding of equity concepts (i.e., privilege, bias, culture, etc.). This active learning often promoted feelings of discomfort. The TLs spoke about how this dissonance was an important component to promote learning.

Several of the groups utilized a sorting activity to promote learning about bias and stereotypes. The teachers sorted a stack of photos in relation to questions such as, “Who is the smartest? Who is the richest? and “Who experiences the most discrimination?” Engaging in this sort made the participants uncomfortable, but that was the point (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). The Family Collaboration TLs reflected after the sort:

Some of the participants used their own personal experiences to sort the pictures for the bias activity. Others chose to sort by biases that are normally favored in everyday life. This opened a big discussion about how everyone has different views and opinions based on how we were raised. It was interesting to hear the WHY of how pictures were ranked for each of the categories. At the end of the activity, we discussed how our unconscious bias can build walls between us and others if we are not aware of them. (TL Reflection)

The purpose of the sort was to raise consciousness about the prevalence of stereotypes and biases through the active construction of knowledge.

Other groups had the teachers bring in a cultural artifact so they could learn about the concept of culture. The TLs spoke about how giving the teachers the assignment prompted dissonance as the teachers often responded by saying they “don’t have a culture” and questioned what to bring. However, after engaging in the cultural artifact sharing, the teachers had a broader view of culture. The TLs then connected the conversation to a focus on knowing the cultures of students. Another group had their participants engage in the Implicit Bias Gender quiz (Project Implicit, https://www.projectimplicit.net) that resulted in a score about individual preferences and bias in relation to aspects of gender identity. The TLs explained that teachers felt dissonance after receiving scores that unearthed their biases. These examples were not about the TLs telling their groups they held biases but instead engaging in experiences that uncovered and prompted reflection about the biases teachers held.

At times, TLs provided the group participants with an opportunity to experience inequities and dissonance through a simulation experience. For example, the Curriculum Group had their participants take a test in Spanish with only a Spanish to English dictionary as a guide. The group shared:

They will be told that they have 10 minutes to complete the test, but they have extended time. We are doing this to show participants what tests or activities may be like for our ELLs. We want them to feel challenged by not knowing what the test or work is asking them. We also want them to run out of time. We want to pressure them to add detail and use correct grammar. These are the challenges that our ELLs face daily. (Lesson Plan)

Engaging in this activity prompted teachers to begin to understand the perspective of students whose primary language was not English as well as experience dissonance and frustration.

Another active learning opportunity, used by several of the groups, was a privilege walk. A privilege walk is where participants step forward or backward as a series of statements are read aloud about privilege (as often defined by mainstream narratives). While privilege walks have been criticized, these privilege walks included a second walk focused on community cultural wealth (assets marginalized communities hold) (Yosso, 2005). The Multiple Perspectives TLs reflected, “This culture walk activity helped our participants not only reflect on their own life and their perspective of each other, the ‘disadvantages’ and ‘privileges,’ and how their lives have shaped who they are and how they see things” (TL Reflection).

The active learning opportunities promoted teacher engagement as opposed to just reading or listening to a lecture on equity issues. The dissonance teachers experienced was productive rather than paralyzing as a foundation of trust had been built within the community.

Feature Four: Authentic Connections to Equity within the Local Context through Inquiry

The TLs in this study demonstrated that equity-centered professional learning must be grounded in the local context. The TLs supported authentic connections to the local context by engaging teachers in cycles of inquiry (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999; Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2019). Engaging in cycles of posing questions, collecting, and analyzing data, and acting helped to move teachers from reflection (prominent in features two and three) to reflective action (Freire, 1970).

The TLs prompted cycles of inquiry by giving participants a question or task framed as an “assignment” between sessions. This task often included engaging in an activity or practice and collecting some type of data to bring to the next PD session. This “assignment” promoted accountability and served as an inquiry-oriented process to bring about explicit connections to inequities in the school context. For example, the Curriculum Group asked their participants to “assess a portion of the literature they have in their own classroom to see how many different ‘groups’ are represented” (Lesson Plan). The group members tallied the number of times they saw students from various races and ethnicities represented in a collection of books from their classroom library. The TLs explained how they anticipated the participants “observed that many groups are not adequately represented” (TL Reflection). From there they hoped to work with the teachers “to brainstorm how our students feel because of this and also to guide them to have a conversation with their own classes about their feelings on the books they are reading and the representations they see within them” (TL Reflection).

The Multiple Perspectives Group asked their participants to collect data about the behavior of 1–2 focus students who experienced challenges in their classrooms. The TLs hoped that by collecting behavioral data, “eventually they would take their student(s)’ culture into perspective when dealing with their behavior OR helping them to understand the underlying reasons/causes as to why the student displays such behaviors” (TL Reflection). While discussing the data, one of the participants described how his focus student was constantly misbehaving, even after redirection. The group engaged in discussion about what could be the origin of this behavior. A few teachers shared about the boy’s family structure and the cultural practices within his home that may influence his interactions with other boys in school. The group helped the teacher set goals for that student and came up with a plan to further track it. The TLs shared that after the session they heard how this teacher had “been talking about our PD and how it is helping him to understand the students more” (TL Reflection).

The Family Collaboration TLs asked their group members to collect data about parent communication and parent interactions. The teachers came back to the PD group to disaggregate the participation data, specifically the number of families returning the parent conference form as well as agreeing to attend a conference. Within these responses the group looked for patterns such as “girls versus boys, ELL versus non-ELL, on level and above level versus below level academic achievement” (TL Reflection). From there, the group brainstormed ways to get more families to come to conference night next year.

Engaging in cycles of inquiry involves asking questions, collecting data, and analyzing data, the teachers were able to make authentic connections to the context as well as make or suggest areas for change.

Feature Five: Responsiveness to Participants’ Varied Experiences and Understanding of Equity

The final feature of equity-centered professional learning that TLs prioritized in this study was responsiveness to teachers’ needs, various roles, and understanding of equity. The TLs utilized tools such as exit tickets, self-assessments, etc. to gauge teachers' knowledge, receptiveness, and experiences with equity. They used the data to plan future professional learning sessions based on the teachers’ needs and development. For example, the Discourse Group had participants complete a teacher profile to uncover their strengths in relation to equity (Lesson Plan). Similarly, the Family Collaboration Group led a “Block Party” protocol activity (School Reform Initiative, https://schoolreforminitiative.org/doc/block_party.pdf) where they asked participants to respond to quotes to gauge perceptions about families and communities (Lesson Plan). Other groups created a cultural self-assessment for teachers with questions such as “I am comfortable talking about my culture and ethnicity” and “I know the effect that my culture and ethnicity may have on the people in my work setting” (Lesson Plan). The TLs shared, “The self-assessment is for us and the participants to get to know more about one another. It will also allow the participants to know how their culture and biases could influence and impact their family collaboration interactions” (Lesson Plan).

The TLs were intentional in planning their sessions based on teachers’ current levels of comfort and understanding. For example, after analyzing exit ticket data and field notes, the Curriculum Group decided to begin with the Implicit Bias quiz (Project Implicit, https://www.projectimplicit.net) on gender as “this particular quiz seems as though it is a ‘safe’ segue into beginning the conversations about biases” (Lesson Plan). Similarly, the Multiple Perspective Group discussed how they decided to begin by “looking at privilege from an easily accessible topic of left-handedness” (Lesson Plan) (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). Additionally, the TLs reflected on what made sense in terms of a learning progression. For example, the Curriculum Group shared:

We feel as though we are at a point as a group that we are ready to move from understanding our own biases (again as per our conversations and the exit ticket data we have been collecting) and to get more into what we can do about it .... it is now the time to look at the curriculum and see how we can have an impact on it as we move forward. (TL Reflection)

While the TLs knew the importance of spending enough time on critical reflection about biases and beliefs, they knew their participants were antsy to engage in action in their classroom. Therefore, they were responsive and adjusted their plans to help the teachers “incorporate more culturally diverse activities into their classrooms and groups” and have “more resources and ideas to do so” (Pedagogy Group TL Reflection).

The TLs were very teacher-centered in the planning of equity-centered professional learning. Specifically, they thought about the teachers' needs and how they were responding to the equity content.

Discussion and Implications

High quality professional learning is described in the literature as job-embedded, active, research-based, connected to the local context, connected to student outcomes, and thoughtfully planned (Foster 2022; Guskey & Yoon, 2009; Hirsh, 2019). While these are all important and valued features, the purpose of this study was to identify what features of professional learning this group of TLs prioritized and found essential when working to enact high quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers. The findings pointed to five key features that this group of TLs relied upon and found essential when working to enact high-quality, equity-centered professional learning for teachers. These included a (1) Safe, trusting community grounded in relationships, (2) Dialogue to explore and critically reflect upon biases, beliefs and experiences, (3) Active learning opportunities that promote dissonance, (4) Authentic connections to equity within the local context through inquiry, and (5) Responsiveness to participants’ varied experiences and understanding of equity.

Unique Features for Equity-Centered Professional Learning

The five key features connected and aligned to the literature on high quality professional learning. For example, high quality professional learning occurs within learning communities (Hirsh, 2019; Patton et al., 2015) where teachers have opportunities to collaborate and network to generate knowledge. In addition, there should be trust and respect so that teachers feel they can take risks in their learning (Patton et al., 2015; Whitcomb et al., 2009). However, within the five features, that the TLs utilized, we uncovered specific nuances connected to professional learning emphasizing equity. For example, the need to build community is a feature we often see within the professional learning literature; however, in Feature One, we saw how this was an imperative foundation for a focus on equity (Kohli et al., 2015; Leonard & Woodland, 2022; Skerrett et al., 2018). The TLs spent a great deal of time attending to community building. They delayed discussions of content until they felt the community was strong. Additionally, the TLs described building community as not just learning surface level information about each other, but exploring identity and past experiences, as well as experiences with marginalization to solidify bonds (Bianchini et al., 2015; Novak et al., 2020). Additionally, in Feature Two there was not just a need for dialogue, but specifically for dialogue that prompted critical reflection on biases and beliefs (Battey & Franke, 2015; Bristol, 2015; Ezzani, 2019). Similarly, in Feature Three there was not just the idea of active learning but promoting dissonance as a part of that learning (Novak et al., 2020). Future research could study professional learning experiences using these features as a framework for analysis as well as uncover additional features.

Often school districts respond to challenges with student achievement and increased accountability pressures by tightening “the reigns” on teachers with less opportunities for autonomy in professional learning. However, the features uncovered in this study align with current research emphasizing that critical approaches to professional learning do not coincide with a technical, top-down or training approach to professional learning (Kohli et al., 2021). Additionally, Feature Five, responsiveness to participants’ varied experiences aligns with the idea that a “one-size-fits-all approach does not work in professional learning geared to developing awareness of underserved groups” (Novak et al., 2020, p.175). Differentiated professional learning is needed rather than a blanket “diversity” training which is aligned to “teachers in classrooms must individualize and differentiate instruction for each of their students” (McKenzie et al., 2006, p.162). Therefore, rather than responding with automatization or mandated professional learning, school districts need to respond by empowering teachers and promoting equity for teachers through professional learning that values their voice and expertise.

Emphasis on Critical Reflection in Essential Features

Within the Features, we could see many examples of the TLs prompting teachers to engage in critical reflection about themselves in relation to identity and past experiences. The majority of the eight sessions seemed to focus on becoming equity-minded or recognizing inequity (Jacobs & Burns, 2021). There was some movement toward responding and redressing or becoming equity-driven through the process of inquiry (Essential Feature Four) (Gorski, 2018; Jacobs & Burns, 2021). The cycle of inquiry facilitated the collection of data which moved the critical reflection into action within the teachers’ classrooms (Bianchini et al., 2015; Poekert et al., 2020). For example, after collecting data about parent involvement in conferences, the teachers began to see inequity in participation and named possible ways they could respond. In these instances, the TLs came up with ideas for future action, while immediate action was not as apparent (Battey & Franke, 2015). Once again, inquiry is an approach to professional learning that values teacher voice and is differentiated. Engaging in inquiry not only promotes teacher professional growth but provides teachers with the tools to engage in educational change and reform (Dana & Yendol-Hoppey 2019). Therefore, this finding reinforces that professional learning focused on equity should be approached in a way that frames professional learning as equitable.

The Features utilized by the TLs centered more on becoming equity-minded or recognizing inequity rather than becoming equity-driven or responding and redressing inequities (Gorski, 2018). Perhaps this is since eight sessions were simply not enough time to move toward prolific responding and redressing. With such complexity, extended or sustained time is needed to become equity-minded and equity-driven (Novak et al., 2020; Skerrett et al., 2018). Future research could focus on uncovering additional essential features for how professional learning can intentionally move teachers toward greater praxis (Freire, 1970). Additionally, future research could include following these teachers to see how they were able to put some of their ideas for action into place. A limitation of this study was that we did not get to observe the teachers within their classrooms, so it was difficult to capture their ability to respond as well as redress inequities within their practice. Adding this component to future research would be valuable.

Routines of Practice to Enact Essential Features

When we look closely at these five Features, we can identify smaller, more concrete actions that the TLs took to enact each feature. These pedagogical routines of practice or “concrete and intentionally designed activities” can be used to actualize the essential features of equity-centered professional learning (Burns et al., 2020, p. 224). We saw how similar pedagogical routines emerged across the different PD groups throughout the data. Table 3 lays out some of the routines of practice embedded within the essential features.

Table 3.

Routines of Practice to Enact Five Features.

The 5 Features of Professional Learning	Routines of Practice
Safe, trusting community grounded in relationships	• Create and revise norms that reinforce a context that supports uncomfortable conversations • Design and enact community-building activities for participants to share personal information about experiences and identity • Approach learning sessions as a facilitator rather than a trainer or knowledge-holder • Acknowledge and affirm teachers’ knowledge, skills, and experiences
Dialogue to explore and critically reflect upon biases, beliefs, and experiences	• Ask questions prompting deeper topics and reflection • Share readings to spark dialogue about critical topics • Provide time for dialogue • Design and utilize protocols to structure dialogue • Invite and encourage multiple perspectives and contributions from all participants
Active learning opportunities that promote dissonance	• Design simulations • Engage in hands-on activities (i.e. sorting, quizzes, etc.) • Provide opportunities to share experiences • Participate in active learning alongside participants
Making authentic connections to equity within the local context through inquiry	• Ask questions to link content and context • Collect data in classrooms • Analyze data collected with an equity lens • Use data to create actions steps and/or changes in classroom
Responsiveness to participants’ varied experiences and understanding of equity	• Administer exit tickets • Utilize equity self-assessments • Plan sessions grounded in data • Adjust plans based on teacher need and understanding • Adjust practices to include all participants based on roles

These pedagogical routines of practice are not exhaustive but do unearth the complexities and the actions that undergird designing and enacting professional learning related to equity.

The pedagogical routines of practice point to the knowledge base needed to enact equity-centered professional learning. This work is complex as well as intentional in terms of the practices enacted to promote learning in relation to equity. Future research could uncover additional routines of practice. Furthermore, studies could investigate the discourse around these routines of practice, study the moves of the TLs facilitating professional learning, and study the experiences of participants engaged in this equity-focused learning using these routines. Finally, the complexity of enacting the features of equity-centered professional learning points to the preparation of those leaders, who may be within a variety of roles (i.e. principal, instructional coach, teacher leader, university faculty member, etc.) to engage in this work (Kose, 2007). As was the case with this unique context, the TLs facilitating the professional had engaged in their own learning and development with equity, both equity consciousness and equity-practices (McKenzie et al., 2008) not just knowing how to facilitate professional development before beginning their work.

The major challenges facing education today have equity at the center. Therefore, we argue that all professional learning experiences should center equity. A generic lens or design plan for professional learning will not bring the nuanced, specialized features needed specifically to learn about equity which are so needed in PK-12 education. Instead of conceptualizing a focus on equity as an add-on to professional learning or the focus for a particular year, equity can become a lens to view all professional learning. Uncovering these five features helped to create a framework that can serve as a tool for those facilitating professional learning as well as reframing professional learning to center equity. Each of the features includes an element that is unique to the focus on equity, thus implying the need to bring an equity lens to the design and planning of all professional learning.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Jennifer Jacobs

Rebecca W. Burns

Appendix

Author Biographies

Dr. Jennifer Jacobs is currently an Associate Professor in the Elementary Education program at the University of South Florida. Her research is situated within the context of teacher education and focuses on teacher learning centered on equity. Central to her work is developing high-quality teacher education programs within partnerships between schools and universities. She has published in Action in Teacher Education, Journal of School Leadership, The Teacher Educator, etc. She recently co-authored the book (Re)Designing Programs: A Vision for Equity-Centered with Rebecca West Burns.

Dr. Rebecca West Burns is the Bill Herrold Endowed Professor and Director of Clinical Practice & Educational Partnerships for the College of Education and Human Services at the University of North Florida. Her community-engaged scholarship is situated within clinically based teacher education where she studies supervision, school-university partnerships, and teacher leadership. She has received national recognition for her exemplary school-university collaboration and her impact on urban education. Her recent co-authored books include (Re)Designing Programs: A Vision for Equity-Centered, Clinically Based Teacher Preparation with Jennifer Jacobs, and the second edition of Carl Glickman’s best-selling ASCD book, Leadership for Learning: How to Bring Out the BEST in Every Teacher.

Dr. Samantha Haraf is an instructor at the University of South Florida and an instructional coach at a local elementary school, where she works to support the professional learning of K-5 teachers. Prior to this, she worked as an elementary teacher in urban, rural, and suburban schools in the Chicago area. Samantha received her Ph.D. in Teacher Education from the University of South Florida, and her M.Ed. in Curriculum Studies from DePaul University. Her research interests include teacher learning in relation to issues of equity, teacher leadership, student voice, and social justice issues in schools.

Jennifer McCorvey is a doctoral student at the University of South Florida. Jennifer has over 17 years of experience in the public and charter school settings as a classroom teacher, Literacy Specialist, Instructional Coach, and Administrator. Her research interests include school-university partnerships, teacher retention, social justice, and educational leadership.

References

Acquah

E. O.

Tandon

Lempinen

(2016). Teacher diversity awareness in the context of changing demographics. European Educational Research Journal, 15 (2), 218–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904115611676

Battey

Franke

(2015). Integrating professional development on mathematics and equity: Countering deficit views of students of color. Education and Urban Society, 47(4), 433–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124513497788

Bianchini

J. A.

Dwyer

H. A.

Brenner

M. E.

Wearly

A. J.

(2015). Facilitating science and mathematics teachers’ talk about equity: What are the strengths and limitations of four strategies for professional learning? Science Education, 99(3), 577–610. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21160

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bristol

, 2015. Leading-for-inclusion: Transforming action through teacher talk. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19 (8), 802–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.971078

Brown

J. C.

Crippen

K. J.

(2017). The knowledge and practices of high school science teachers in pursuit of cultural responsiveness. Science Education, 101(1), 99–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21250

Burns

R.W.

Jacobs

Yendol-Hoppey

(2020). A framework for naming the scope and nature of teacher candidate supervision in clinically-based teacher preparation: Tasks, high-leverage practices, and pedagogical routines of practice. The Teacher Educator, 2(55), 214–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2019.1682091

Burns

Shadoian-Gersing

(2010). The importance of effective teacher education for diversity. In Educating teachers for diversity: Meeting the challenge (pp. 19–40). OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264079731-en

Carter Andrews

D. J.

Richmond

(2019). Professional development for equity: What constitutes powerful professional learning? Journal of Teacher Education, 70(5), 408–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248711987509

10.

Cochran-Smith

Lytle

(1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X024001249

11.

Cochran-Smith

Shakman

Jong

Terrell

D. G.

Barnatt

McQuillan

(2009). Good and just teaching: The case for social justice in teacher education. American Journal of Education, 115(3), 347–377. https://doi.org/10.1086/597493

12.

Creasey

Mayes

Lee

R. E.

D’Santiago

(2016). A survey to assess barriers to urban teaching careers. Urban Education, 51(7), 748–769. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914549359

13.

Crockett

M. D.

Buckley

L. A.

(2009). The role of coflection in equity-centered mathematics professional development practices. Equity & Excellence in Education, 42(2), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680902724545

14.

Dana

N. F.

Yendol-Hoppey

(2019). The reflective educator's guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry. Corwin.

15.

Darder

Torres

R. D.

Baltodano

(Eds.). (2009). The critical pedagogy reader. Routledge.

16.

Darling-Hammond

Hyler

M. E.

Gardner

(2017). Effective teacher professional development. : Learning Policy Institute.

17.

Darling-Hammond

McLaughlin

M. W.

(2011). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200622

18.

Desimone

L. M.

(2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140

19.

DiAngelo

(2018). White fragility: Why it's so hard for white people to talk about racism. Beacon Press.

20.

Easton

L. B.

(2009). Protocols for professional learning. ASCD.

21.

Emerson

R. M.

Fretz

R. I.

Shaw

L. L.

(2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. The University of Chicago Press.

22.

European Commission Joint Research Centre Shuali Trachtenberg

Bekerman

Bar Cendón

(2020). Addressing educational needs of teachers in the EU for inclusive education in a context of diversity. Volume 1, teachers’ intercultural competence: Working definition and implications for teacher education, Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/533558

23.

European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport, and Culture , (2017). Preparing teachers for diversity: The role of initial teacher education final report, Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/637002

24.

Ezzani

M. D.

, 2019. Principal and teacher instructional leadership: A cultural shift. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2019-0071

25.

Forghani-Arani

Cerna

Bannon

(2019). The life of teachers in diverse classrooms. OECD education working papers No. 198. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/19939019, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/the-lives-of-teachers-in-diverse-classrooms_8c26fee5-en?fbclid=IwAR1D5GmxobCgSOk–QoAlcpNQoJwv8KNjw0prSCeFpfb7i6pa8mt3sheSio

26.

Foster

(2022). Standards for professional learning: The research. Learning Forward.

27.

Freire

(1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

28.

Galloway

M. K.

Ishimaru

A. M.

(2019). Leading equity teams: The role of formal leaders in building organizational capacity for equity. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 25(2), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2019.1699413

29.

Gay

(2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.

30.

Glickman

C. D.

Gordon

S. P.

Ross-Gordon

J. M.

(2018). Supervision and instructional leadership: A developmental approach. Pearson.

31.

Goldenberg

B. M.

(2014). White teachers in urban classrooms: Embracing non-white students’ cultural capital for better teaching and learning. Urban Education, 49(1), 111-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912472510

32.

Gorski

P. C.

(2018). Reaching and teaching students in poverty: Strategies for erasing the opportunity gap. Teachers College Press.

33.

Grant

C. A.

Agosto

(2008). Teacher capacity and social justice in teacher education. Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts. Routledge.

34.

Guba

E. G.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

35.

Guenther

A. R.

Wexler

L. J.

(2021). I’ve never really thought about social justice in the classroom. Teacher Education Quarterly, 48(3), 53–79. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27094742

36.

Guskey

T. R.

Yoon

K. S.

(2009, March). What works in professional development? The Kappan. 495–502.

37.

Irvine

J. J.

(2003). Educating teachers for diversity: Seeing with a cultural eye (Vol. 15). Teachers College Press.

38.

Hirsh

(2019). 4 cornerstones of professional learning: Fundamental principles pave the way for educators’ actions. Learning Forward.

39.

Jacobs

Beck

Crowell

(2014). Teacher leaders as equity-centered change agents: Exploring the conditions that influence navigating change to promote educational equity. Professional Development in Education, 40(4), 576–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.896272

40.

Jacobs

Burns

R. W.

(2021). (Re) Designing Programs:: A Vision for Equity-Centered, Clinically Based Teacher Preparation . IAP.

41.

Jacobs

Burns

Haraf

Perrone-Britt

Bellas

Holt

(2020). Equity-based teacher leaders facilitating change within an urban professional development school. School-University Partnerships, 13(3), 102–123.

42.

Kohli

Picower

Martinez

A. N.

Ortiz

(2015). Critical professional development: Centering the social justice needs of teachers. The International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 6(2), 7–24.

43.

Kohli

Pizarro

Garcia

L. G.

Kelly

Espinoza

Cordova

(2021). Critical professional development and the racial justice leadership possibilities of teachers of colour in K-12 schools. Professional Development in Education, 47(1), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1814387

44.

Kose

B. W.

(2007). Principal leadership for social justice: Uncovering the content of teacher professional development. Journal of School Leadership, 17(3), 276–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460701700302

45.

Leeman

van Koeven

(2018). New immigrants. An incentive for intercultural education? Education Inquiry, 10(3), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1541675

46.

Leonard

A. M.

Woodland

R. H.

(2022). Anti-racism is not an initiative: How professional learning communities may advance equity and social-emotional learning in schools.Theory Into Practice, 61(2), 212–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2036058

47.

McDonald

(2007). The joint enterprise of social justice teacher education. Teachers College Record, 109(8), 2047–2081. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810710900806

48.

McKenzie

K. B.

Christman

D. E.

Hernandez

Fierro

Capper

C. A.

Dantley

González

M. L.

Cambron-McCabe

Scheurich

J. J.

(2008). From the field: A proposal for educating leaders for social justice. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(1), 111–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X07309470.

49.

Mckenzie

K. B.

Skrla

Scheurich

J. J.

(2006). Preparing instructional leaders for social justice. Journal of School Leadership, 16(2), 158–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460601600204

50.

Milner

H. R.

(2010). Start where you are, but don’t stay there. Harvard Education Press.

51.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) . https://nces.ed.gov/

52.

Nicholson

J. M.

Kroll

(2015). Developing leadership for early childhood professionals through oral inquiry: Strengthening equity through making particulars visible in dilemmas of practice. Early Child Development and Care, 185(1), 17–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2014.903939

53.

Novak

A. M.

Lewis

K. D.

Weber

C. L.

(2020). Guiding principles in developing equity- driven professional learning for educators of gifted children. Gifted Child Today, 43(3), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520915743

54.

OECD . (2018). The OECD teaching and learning international survey (TALIS) - 2018 results. OECD Publication. https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/

55.

Patton

Parker

Tannehill

(2015). Helping teachers help themselves: Professional development that makes a difference. NASSP Bulletin, 99(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636515576040

56.

Picower

(2011). Resisting compliance: Learning to teach for social justice in a neoliberal context. Teachers College Record, 113(5), 1105–1134. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111300503

57.

Poekert

P. E.

Swaffield

Demir

E. K.

Wright

(2020). Leadership for professional learning towards educational equity: A systematic literature review. Professional Development in Education, 46(4), 541–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1787209

58.

Powell

Cantrell

S. C.

Malo-Juvera

Correll

(2016). Operationalizing culturally responsive instruction: Preliminary findings of CRIOP research. Teachers College Record, 118(1), 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681161180010

59.

Prenger

Poortman

C. L.

Handelzalts

(2017). Factors influencing teachers' professional development in networked professional learning communities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 68, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.08.014

60.

Riordan

Klein

E. J.

Gaynor

(2019). Teaching for equity and deeper learning: How does professional learning transfer to teachers’ practice and influence students’ experiences? Equity & Excellence in Education, 52(2–3), 327–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2019.1647808

61.

Sensoy

DiAngelo

(2017). Is everyone really equal? An introduction to key concepts in social justice education. Teachers College Press.

62.

Skerrett

Warrington

Williamson

(2018). Generative principles for professional learning for equity-oriented urban English teachers.English Education, 50(2), 116–146.

63.

Stake

R. E.

(1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

64.

Wager

A. A.

Foote

M. Q.

(2013). Locating praxis for equity in mathematics: Lessons from and for professional development.Journal of Teacher Education, 64(1), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112442549

65.

Webb

(2000). The red Shoe. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 74–76.

66.

Wheatley

M. J.

(2002). Turning to one another: Simple conversations to restore hope to the future.

Berrett-Koshler Publishers, Inc.

67.

Whitcomb

Borko

Liston

(2009). Growing talent: Promising professional development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3), 207–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109337280

68.

Yendol-Hoppey

Dana

(2010). Powerful professional development: Building expertise within the four walls of your school. Corwin.

69.

Yosso

T. J.

(2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006