Assessing Teachers’ Culturally Responsive Classroom Practice in PK–12 Schools: A Systematic Review of Teacher-, Student-, and Observer-Report Measures

30Citations
Citations of this article
119Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The importance of improving teachers’ use of culturally responsive practice (CRP) in the classroom setting has been widely recognized. Although quantitative data on teachers’ use of CRP has potential to be a helpful decision-making tool in advancing that goal, little is known about the psychometrics of classroom-based CRP measures, their utility in evaluating the impact of interventions designed to improve teacher CRP, or their use to inform teacher professional development in CRP. The current study reports findings from a systematic review of the research on the quantitative measurement of CRP using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses standards to document how CRP is operationalized and measured in prekindergarten–12th-grade classrooms in the United States (U.S.). Searching across six databases, 27 measures were identified for inclusion. The vast majority of measures were teacher self-report surveys, and relatively few were student-report or external observer assessments. We examined the availability of classroom-based observational and survey instruments and critically analyzed each measure through an argument-based approach to validation. We concluded that although some CRP measures hold promise, the validity of their interpretation and use is not adequately supported by evidence, with some exceptions. This lack of empirical evidence is exacerbated by the limitations of single-informant measurement of CRP. More multi-informant assessment approaches are needed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Franco, M. P., Bottiani, J. H., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2024). Assessing Teachers’ Culturally Responsive Classroom Practice in PK–12 Schools: A Systematic Review of Teacher-, Student-, and Observer-Report Measures. Review of Educational Research, 94(5), 743–798. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231208720

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free