# data[].attributes.body
Rawlin Rosario, a dedicated and experienced Senior Program Associate in Culturally Responsive Systems at WestEd, is a true product of his roots, born in the Dominican Republic and raised in the vibrant cultural tapestry of Harlem. These early experiences have profoundly shaped his educational lens and fueled his unwavering commitment to achieving educational equity.

Based in New Rochelle, NY, Rawlin actively champions the cause of educational equity, channeling his passion into a myriad of initiatives. He lends his expertise to technical assistance activities, meticulously crafts research-based tools and resources, and provides invaluable research and policy support to state, regional, and local education agencies. Rawlin's primary mission revolves around advancing the crucial work of cultivating and sustaining a school system that is culturally responsive and that affirms students’ racial, linguistic, cultural, and other forms of identity.

With extensive experience as an educational leader, Rawlin's impact is far-reaching. He served as a teacher, instructional Coach, school leader, in  numerous school systems, delivering professional development on instruction and culturally responsive practices restorative justice approaches, and ultimately supporting teachers through coaching and championing culturally responsive instruction.

Previously, Rawlin's passion for education policy and systems change led to a Public Policy Fellowship at the New York State Education Department, where he played a pivotal role in developing CRE principles, co-led professional communities, and helped implement socio-economic integration programs.

Throughout his career, Rawlin consistently delivers excellence, providing instructional support, data analysis, and coaching to improve teaching practices. He's a driving force for equitable and transformative education.

# data[].attributes.body
Implicit Bias - Page 33

# data[].attributes.body
Jackie Peng is a Program Associate II in the Culturally Responsive Systems team at WestEd. Peng supports states, school districts, regional education agencies, and higher education institutions to strengthen and diversify their educator workforce and to implement culturally responsive and sustaining systems. Her areas of expertise include K–12 education and teacher professional learning, teacher education and certification, educational equity, and culturally responsive practices. She is a skilled facilitator and has led DEI work with youth and adults to address bias, disproportionality, and systemic inequity in school settings. Peng received her BA in American Studies and MEd in Secondary Social Studies from The George Washington University. She was distinguished as The Washington Post Teacher of the Year for Montgomery County, MD, and was recognized by The National Education Policy Center for innovative school-based professional development on racial equity. Ms. Peng is a doctoral candidate at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) and a Minority Dissertation Fellow for the American Educational Research Association (AERA).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WEEAC Webinar 1 Part 2 Vignettes #2 - Google Jamboard

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser. Dismiss

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It involves holding a student, a student's family, or a student's culture accountable for academic or behavioral difficulties at school. For example, school staff may assume that a student is acting out because they're innately a "bad kid" or because the student's parents "didn't raise them right."

Unfortunately, research also indicates that educators are more likely to engage in deficit thinking when working with students of color, students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, students with disabilities, and EL (English learner) students.

This can lead to teachers unintentionally lowering their expectations for students based on factors outside of the student's control. It also paves the way for inequitable outcomes for students from historically marginalized backgrounds.

One example is disproportionate office referrals of historically marginalized students for suspension or expulsion compared to other students.

Deficit thinking is harmful to education for two reasons:

Educators assume that they can't support the student.

It can lead to educators lowering expectations for the student.

Research shows that when educators have high expectations for students, their students will rise to those expectations. In contrast, when educators hold low expectations for students, students are less likely to succeed.

If you were to ask teachers WHY they thought a student was misbehaving, what types of responses do you think you would receive?

I distributed a questionnaire to 300 teachers from six school districts to examine the relationship between deficit thinking and school discipline patterns.

The six districts each had unique school discipline patterns (some had a history of high suspension patterns, some had a history of low suspension patterns, some had large racial disparities, and others had no racial disparities).

The questionnaire started with a brief prompt asking teachers to think about a student they've worked with who has engaged in "disruptive and/or negative" behavior in class. One of the questionnaire items that followed asked teachers to record what they believed to be the "root cause" of that student's misbehavior.

Results revealed a troubling pattern: 86% of teachers reported a root cause that somehow blamed the student or their family.

Some examples:

family background

lack of structure at home

domestic issues at home

"The student is seeking attention because they are not getting attention at home."

no parental support

a learning disability

"The father is not present."

a lack of educational skills

a chaotic household

"The student is spoiled at home."

You may wonder why some of these root causes are problematic.

For example, if a student has a learning disability, isn't it somewhat fair to attribute the student's misbehavior to their disability?

If a student has a difficult home life, isn't it somewhat fair to assume that the student may engage in problematic behavior at school because of it?

To these questions, I respond, "Sure, it's possible."

But sometimes, the problem does not lie in the root cause we attribute; the problem lies in how we talk about and think about our students of these root causes.

They may well determine how we treat students and the expectations we hold for them. These deficit-thinking root causes lie in how we frame them. They lead teachers to believe that there is nothing they can do.

If the root cause is out of our control, what does that say about our expectations? And what do we know about the impact of our expectations?

So what about the other 14% of teachers?

I've termed this small minority of responses as "putative malleable root causes," defined as "root causes that examine the role that school factors play in contributing to and/or causing the problem behavior and can be changed through school-based intervention."

Some examples:

"We need more social-emotional training for teachers and admin."

"The student is bored."

"There are inconsistent expectations from the teacher."

"The student might not be engaged in the current activity."

"There's a negative relationship with the teacher."

"The student isn't being challenged enough."

"The student needs assistance completing work."

"Teacher/school involvement within teams is lacking."

Some fall directly within the line of school factors we can alter, while others can be minorly reframed when teachers perceive students. ( Note: while responses from the latter could be interpreted in a deficit light, these variables do not place inherent blame on the student.)

If a student is acting out because they're bored, what can be changed about the instruction, content, or delivery of material?

If the student is acting out because they need academic assistance, how can we ensure that the student receives the help they need to prevent misbehavior?

How can we alter our everyday practices to meet the needs of our students?

In other words, rather than associating a student's difficulties with a "learning disability" or "lack of educational skills," we need to shift our thinking to consider what supports we can provide for a student with a disability or for a student who struggles academically.

Instead of: "Her parents never taught her how to behave," try: "She may benefit from more intensive social/emotional, behavioral skill instruction at school."

Instead of: "He doesn't receive enough attention at home, so he seeks negative attention at school," try: "He needs more positive relationships and positive reinforcement at school."

Instead of: "The content is way over their head, so they act out because they don't understand," try: "I can modify my instructional techniques and/or the curriculum to better fit their academic needs."

Instead of: "He has a chaotic home life," try: "His current school environment is too unstructured for his needs, and he may benefit from more structure."

Imagine if we did our best to reframe all root causes that blame families or students into root causes that are within our control.

Perception is everything.

Framing is everything.

We may have good intentions when we think about difficulties that arise for students outside of school. But the real question is, when is it helpful to consider the impact of such factors, and when is it harmful?

How are we using the information we know about the student?

How can we reframe the behaviors we're observing at school to be strengths?

How can we use these strengths to better support our students instead of further marginalizing them?

My research got me thinking about the culture of our schools and how we, as a society, think about problematic behavior. The lack of a relationship between deficit thinking among teachers and school discipline data does not mean that deficit thinking isn't harmful to students.

I argue that it reflects an even more troubling finding: our schools are breeding grounds for deficit thinking.

And it's not because teachers are ill-intentioned. Our school staff members are not equipped with the tools or capacity to think about strengthening behavior in this way because our larger society does not value it.

This is why deficit thinking is a social justice issue. Our current method of addressing student behavior in schools is exclusionary because we believe that students who engage in misbehavior are "bad" and/or "unable to change" rather than considering how we can support them.
And just like most social justice issues, our historically marginalized students continue to bear the brunt of the impacts of deficit thinking.
So the next time you're working with a challenging student, rather than blaming the student, lowering your expectations for them, or deeming them a "lost cause," I challenge you to consider the malleable factors contributing to the student's difficulties.

If you think in a deficit light, how can you reframe that root cause into an addressable action? A simple modification of language can ultimately make a huge difference.

Which hypothesis leads you to unintentionally lower your expectations?

Which hypothesis empowers you to support the student?

Photo by Marcelo Jaboo from Pexels

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deficit Thinking in Schools: A Social Justice Issue

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These deficit-thinking root causes lie in how we frame them. They lead teachers to believe that there is nothing they can do. If the root cause is out of our control, what does that say about our expectations?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cover Art by Favianna Rodriguez
Django Paris and H. Samy Alim agreed to answer a few questions about their new book, Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies: Teaching and Learning for Justice in a Changing World.

Django Paris is Associate Professor of Language and Literacy and Core Faculty in the African American and African Studies Program at Michigan State University. In January 2018, he will join the faculty at the University of Washington, Seattle, as the Director of the Banks Center for Educational Justice.

H. Samy Alim is Professor of Anthropology and African American Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles.
LF: You make a distinction between culturally relevant pedagogy and culturally sustaining pedagogy. Can you say more about those differences? Django Paris and H. Samy Alim: This is an important question, one we have of course thought deeply about. In order to explore this question we'll need to first define culturally sustaining pedagogy: CSP seeks to perpetuate and foster-to sustain-linguistic, literate, and cultural pluralism as part of schooling for positive social transformation and revitalization. CSP positions dynamic cultural dexterity as a necessary good, and sees the outcome of learning as additive, rather than subtractive, as remaining whole rather than framed as broken, as critically enriching strengths rather than replacing deficits. Culturally sustaining pedagogy exists wherever education sustains the lifeways of communities who have been and continue to be damaged and erased through schooling. As such, CSP explicitly calls for schooling to be a site for sustaining-rather than eradicating-the cultural ways of being of communities of color. CSP builds on decades of crucial asset-based pedagogical research that has countered pervasive deficit approaches to prove that our practices and ways of being as students and communities of color are legitimate and should be included meaningfully in classroom learning. Whether explicitly stated or not, this tradition of asset-based pedagogical research has fought against persistent, ongoing beliefs in White superiority and the systemic racism they engender. In the past 25 years, this research has importantly included work on the funds of knowledge (Luis Moll, Norma Gonzalez and their collaborators), the third space (Kris Gutiérrez and her collaborators), cultural modeling (Carol Lee), and, to your question, Gloria Ladson-Billings' seminal conception of culturally relevant pedagogy. Indeed, Ladson-Billings (2014) wrote in her recent article in the "Harvard Educational Review" that "culturally sustaining pedagogy uses culturally relevant pedagogy as the place where the 'beat drops'"; it does "not imply that the original was deficient" but rather speaks "to the changing and evolving needs of dynamic systems " (p. 76). It is these changing and evolving demographic, cultural, and social needs coupled with the persistence and even increase of deficit-framed policies and practices that make a more explicit commitment to sustaining the valued practices and ways of being of students and communities of color so necessary in the current moment. For us, then, it is not so much about distinctions between CSP and CRP, but rather about the ways CSP can contribute to the ongoing work of educational justice that CRP and other asset pedagogies have forwarded. CRP continues to guide our work, even as we continue to develop needed pedagogical theory and practice. It's also worth noting that across our own careers as classroom teachers and now as university educators, we have both been deeply informed by CRP and the other asset pedagogies CSP builds from. And we are deeply grateful that the founders of these frameworks are members of our CSP collective and have chapters in the book! So while you can take our word for it, it's really important to read what Ladson-Billings, Gutiérrez, Lee, Gonzalez and others have to say about CSP. Within our new book Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies is the kind of intergenerational "building" that we hope can produce a strong educational justice movement going forward.

LF: What would you say to teachers who claim to "not see color" and teach all students the "same"? Django Paris and H. Samy Alim: No matter how well-intentioned, when a teacher (often a White teacher but as we mention in the book, teachers of color, too, can be invested in "Whiteness") claims that they "don't see color" they are engaging in "colorblind" rhetoric that is harmful to communities of color for at least three obvious reasons: (1) They are denying their own "Whiteness" (and/or their investment in "Whiteness") and all of the social privileges and power that they gain from that, and (2) They are denying other folks' "Blackness," "Brownness," or "Asianness" (as examples) and all of the social discrimination that flows from that, and most importantly, (3) They are constructing racism as individual and intentional, rather than institutional. Racism is structural; it is historical and enduring. The U.S.-unfortunately for People of Color-is structured from top-to-bottom by race (including infant mortality rates, quality of educational opportunities, housing and employment discrimination, and so on and so on; all social science research confirms this). As we write in the introduction to the book, our work on CSP has been informed by justice movements like the Standing Rock #NoDAPL movement for Indigenous sovereignty, land, and clean water for all people and by #BlackLivesMatter. We'll leave readers with this #BlackLivesMatter meme that went viral and, we believe, has direct relevance to this question: SAYING ALL LIVES MATTER IS LIKE SAYING "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY ENSLAVING OVER 4 MILLION HUMAN BEINGS. If the message still isn't clear, then consider this. Saying that you "don't see color" whenever People of Color are vocal about racism and discrimination is akin to saying you "don't see gender" (or more accurately, gender expression) whenever women (of any gender) raise their voices about sexism and harassment. It is dishonest. And frankly, we have no time for it. What we do have time for, though, is genuine, open, honest, courageous conversations about racism and how education can disrupt racism. This book brings all of us together in a collective effort to address racism and all other forms of discrimination in our educational policies, practices, and pedagogies. We hope you will join us in that effort.

LF: Your book shares lots of teaching strategies. This may be an unfair question, but could you share two or three of your favorites and explain why you like them? Django Paris and H. Samy Alim: This is an unfair question! You'll note that the book is called, "Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies" (CSPs)-plural! In the book we join a collective of educational justice workers (teachers, youth, families, researchers) to forward examples of CSPs across Indigenous, Black, Latinx, Asian, Pacific Islander, and immigrant communities in the U.S. and also in South Africa. Several of the chapters focus on classroom level examples, while others look at entire schools or communities enacting CSPs. Across these long-term, community-engaged studies the book, community accountability and local affordances and constraints mean CSP takes on necessarily different forms across different contexts (hence, the plural). This is to say that what we are seeking to sustain through our teaching, how we seek to sustain it, and why we do so all depend on who the students are, where the school is, who the teachers and school leaders are. Even within this necessary and expected variation, key features across culturally sustaining educational settings include: This means that educators don't see students' languages (e.g., Navajo, African-American Language, Spanish, "standard" English), literacies (e.g., Hip Hop, poetry, social media, street art) or ways of being (e.g., spiritual beliefs, ways of relating to adults and elders) as somehow marginal or to simply be added to the existing curriculum. Rather, these facets of students' selves and communities must be centered meaningfully in classroom learning, across units and projects. Even as this may be in tension with some of the expectations of many school settings, it is also true that such centering has proven to increase student outcomes on dominant measures of school achievement. Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 show how teachers center students' cultural communities in classrooms serving Black, Latinx, Native, and Pacific Islander students specifically. As educators, we know all too well about the many systems of accountability we are subjected to. Unfortunately, being accountable to the communities-the students and families-we serve is generally not something we are required to do. Culturally sustaining educators and schools are in conversation with young people and families about what they desire, what they want to sustain through schooling. Chapters 4, 6, 7, and 13 (among others) give examples of how teachers and administrators reach out to communities and remain accountable to their needs. Culturally sustaining educators connect present learning to the histories of racial, ethnic, and linguistic communities, to the histories of neighborhoods and cities, and the histories of the larger states and nation-states that they are part of. It is crucial when we are seeking to sustain valuable practices that we link those practices up with the past and present of communities. Pulitzer Prize winning author Junot Díaz recently told a group of students of color at one of our college campuses that the whole purpose of our educational system was to "make us misunderstand ourselves." He was speaking about the role of educational institutions in colonial and neocolonial contexts. This, of course, can have a deep impact on our communities. When an educational system and larger society continually tells us that we are a "problem," that we lack rich languages, beautiful cultures, and storied histories-that we are deficient in all of these ways-we can internalize false understandings of ourselves, our practices, our communities, and our futures. Across the chapters in the book, educators work to show the value of communities and their practices beyond the dominant narratives of White, middle class, "standard" English monolingual/monocultural superiority which schools largely uphold. These educators are working to refuse, reject, and in some cases, return what Toni Morrison calls the White gaze. Chapters 7 and 9 on the U.S. and South Africa are great examples of this. As teachers we create and adapt curriculum-the stuff of teaching and learning-and we plan how it is we will teach it. Culturally sustaining educators are no different; it's just what and who we value and include in the process that shifts. We work to curricularize-to make into curriculum-the previous four elements as we choose (together with students and community members) what we are seeking to sustain. What will we read, write, perform, research? In what classroom and community settings? Who are the sources of knowledge we must be in critical conversation with? Being and becoming a culturally sustaining educator is dynamic; it's about critically learning with community; it's about, together, sustaining who youth and communities are and want to be; and it's about doing all of that with respect and love.

LF: Is there anything I haven't asked you about that you'd like to share? Django Paris and H. Samy Alim: Thanks for this opportunity to share our work on CSP with the "Ed Week Teacher" audience. We hope the book can be of use to educators committed to equity and justice in a time of continuing inequity and injustice in our schools and in society. For us, it is always important to keep the goals of our teaching front and center. CSPs are about more than just resistance. This book, in fact, is about building the kind of world that we want to see for our children (that's the symbolism of Favianna Rodriguez's brilliant cover design). As we continue to think through the promises and challenges of culturally sustaining pedagogy, we are hopeful that this work can join young people, educators, communities, and scholars in producing a collective vision of an educational system-and a future world-that sustains us. LF: Thanks, Django and Samy!

Save

Save

Save

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Django Paris and H. Samy Alim agreed to answer a few questions about their new book, "Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies: Teaching and Learning for Justice in a Changing World."

# data[].attributes.headline
Culturally Responsive School	Leadership Framework - UMN

# data[].attributes.subject
Culturally Responsive School	Leadership Framework - UMN

# data[].attributes.headline
The Exceptional Negro: Fighting to be Seen in a Colorblind World | Traci Ellis | TEDxHarperCollege

# data[].attributes.subject
The Exceptional Negro: Fighting to be Seen in a Colorblind World | Traci Ellis | TEDxHarperCollege

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Exceptional Negro: Fighting to be Seen in a Colorblind World | Traci Ellis | TEDxHarperCollege

# data[].attributes.headline
Introduction to Culturally Relevant Pedagogy Video

# data[].attributes.subject
Introduction to Culturally Relevant Pedagogy Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Introduction to Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

# data[].attributes.headline
Our Culture Our Schools Culturally Responsive Education in New York City

# data[].attributes.subject
Our Culture Our Schools Culturally Responsive Education in New York City

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Our Culture Our Schools Culturally Responsive Education in New York City

# data[].attributes.headline
Bias Based Beliefs and Opportunity Gaps Impacts Summary

# data[].attributes.subject
Bias Based Beliefs and Opportunity Gaps Impacts Summary

# data[].attributes.headline
Video: What Culturally Responsive Teaching Looks Like: A Native Educator Explains

# data[].attributes.subject
Video: What Culturally Responsive Teaching Looks Like: A Native Educator Explains

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Culturally Responsive Teaching Looks Like: A Native Educator Explains

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explainer: What is Culturally Responsive Teaching?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: Family and Community Engagement. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
During the final session of our series, we'll examine how we can extend equity beyond the classroom by deepening our understanding of culturally responsive family and community engagement. Participants will gain strategies and practices for partnering with families and communities to achieve equity for marginalized students and communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: From Awareness to Action: Equity Detours & the Equity Literacy Framework. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn to identify common “detours” that can hinder achieving equity, strengthening educators’ equity literacy, and cultivating practitioners’ abilities to create an equitable environment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: Solving Disproportionality & Culturally Responsive Data Literacy. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Data informs nearly every aspect of school design, culture, and improvement. During this session, we'll explore the importance of centering culture and equity in data interpretation, particularly as it pertains to students with disabilities. We'll also share ways you can identify and use data sources beyond assessments to inform culturally responsive policies and practices while advancing educational equity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: Foundations of Culturally Responsive & Sustaining Education. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore how and where culture exists in our schools and shared spaces, and how becoming a culturally responsive educator is critical to addressing educational inequities and fostering student belonging.

# data[].attributes.headline
'But What Can I Do?'': Three Necessary Tensions in Teaching Teachers About Race

# data[].attributes.subject
'But What Can I Do?'': Three Necessary Tensions in Teaching Teachers About Race

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Welcome! You are invited to join a meeting: Part 2: Beyond Diversity: Achieving Equity by Addressing Systemic Beliefs. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email about joining the meeting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Continue the conversation from Part 1 of Session 1 in this series and develop the skills needed to shape conversations that foster understanding, empathy, and collaboration, while also addressing potentially uncomfortable topics with grace. Please note: Breakout rooms will be utilized throughout the webinar. Active participation is encouraged.