共查询到2条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
Research points to particular problems in the experiences of White teachers teaching students of color (Cochran-Smith et al.,
2004). Despite good intentions, teaching students of diverse backgrounds and experiences can be challenging for teachers who are
unfamiliar with their students’ backgrounds and communities. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of notions
about “good urban teaching” for three women in a preservice teacher preparation program. Reporting on two years of data, we
show how the three women negotiated their beliefs and identities in light of program demands and classroom realities. The
lack of synchronicity within the women’s experiences highlights that the traditional (white, female, middle class) students
in preservice teacher education programs are not homogeneous. The significance of this difference is highlighted through the
concept of heterogeneity. We define heterogeneity as the differences that exist among traditional students in preservice teacher
preparation programs. Our research suggests that heterogeneity is complicit in the progress or lack of progress of preservice
teachers developing professional identities.
This paper was originally presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association April 7–11, 2006 San Francisco, CA
An erratum to this article can be found at 相似文献
2.
Brett G. Stoudt 《The Urban Review》2009,41(1):7-28
Rooted in feminist philosophy, critical race theory, and participatory action research (PAR), I partnered with four faculty
and four students at an elite, private, college preparatory day school for boys in order to examine bullying. In this article
I closely examine the role of language and discourse when conducting counter hegemonic research with people who are predominantly privileged and within institutions designed to reproduce those privileges. I briefly describe the co-construction of our theory and instrument
to illustrate that our close attention to language in regards to bullying both helped us understand our work and changed how
we went about conducting the study. I describe how our strategic use of language to broadly define bullying helped us capture
interesting data and interrupt power. And finally, I discuss our political use of language to others and suggest that while
it paved a safer space for us to conduct our work it also may have restricted our work from having the power to resist co-optation
and promote sustainable, systemic change. 相似文献