discussion 11.6

A_Real_Man_._._._Deconstruc.pdf

Home >Education homework help >discussion 11.6

“A REAL MAN. . .”: DECONSTRUCTING MACHISMO HETERONORMATIVE STANDARDS WITH K–12 LATINO MALE EDUCATORS THROUGH DIALOGIC SPACES

Mario Echeverria

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

December 2023

Dissertation Committee

Sarina Chugani Molina, Ed.D., Chair Veronica Garza, Ed.D., Member

Pedro Nava, Ph.D., Member

University of San Diego

School of Leadership and Education Sciences

CANDIDATE’S NAME: Mario Echeverria TITLE OF DISSERTATION: “A REAL MAN . . . : DECONSTRUCTING MACHISMO

HETERNORMATIVE STANDARDS WITH K–12 LATINO MALE EDUCATORS

THROUGH DIALOGIC SPACES

APPROVAL:

_____________________________________, Chair Sarina Chugani Molina, Ed.D. _____________________________________, Member Veronica Garza, Ed.D. _____________________________________, Member Pedro Nava, Ph.D.

DATE: December 2023

ABSTRACT

In a K–12 educational landscape where 75% of educators are white women, recruitment

of Latino male educators is crucial for diversification, yet these educators represent just 2% of

the teaching workforce in the United States (NCES, 2020). These educators grapple with a

layered sense of identity as they navigate expectations of hegemonic masculinity and machismo

norms that dictate their roles as disciplinarians and saviors, especially for young boys of color

(Brockenbrough, 2018; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Martino & Kehler, 2006; Mills et al., 2004;

Singh, 2021). Unfortunately, Latino male educators leave the profession at twice the rate of their

Latina counterparts (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Partee, 2014). This critical qualitative case study

employed critical sociocultural theory, racial identity development theory, masculinity studies,

and LatCrit theory to explore how Latino male educators comprehend and negotiate their gender

identities in K–12 educational spaces. Using circulos enfocados, findings revealed participants

often navigated tension between their authentic selves and external and internal expectations of

their machismo. Participants with a heightened critical consciousness demonstrated how they

rejected heteronormative standards, engaged in critical pedagogical practices, and worked to

dismantle patriarchal systems. Participants accumulated knowledge and skills vital to navigating

their personal and professional lives. This study revealed how circulos enfocados can enhance

critical machismo consciousness and support the complex journey of Latino male educators as

they redefine their roles and challenge heteronormative gender standards in pursuit of inclusive

and equitable education. Recommendations include how educational institutions can support

programmatic efforts to retain these educators.

Keywords: retention, circulo, Latino male educators, diversity, qualitative, case study,

masculinity, machismo, identity, focus groups, teacher, education, critical consciousness

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to Ellie Echeverria. I disrupted systems that were never

meant for me, for you. May you always disrupt by sneaking more of us in so we may dismantle

oppressive systems to build a liberated society that focuses on empathy, compassion, and

belonging to the complexity of humanity. I love you with all my heart and soul. You make me a

better human, a better parent, and have healed me more than you will ever imagine. Know that I

am always proud of everything you do, and you will always be ENOUGH!

This dissertation is also dedicated to my parents, Mario and Ana Echeverria, for creating

generational disruption and change in your lifetime to support opportunities for Rick and me to

dream of something different. Know that I understand the complexity of what you have had to

navigate, endure, and persevere in a society that never fully accepted your humanity. I love you

and hope that this doctorate provides deeper roots for future generations of our family. Thank

you for everything!

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge the Latino male educators who

participated with me on this study, without you, there is nothing: J.O., Espy, Sandro, Jaime,

Kevin, Christian, Bobby, Jose Jesus, Michael David, Justino, Miguel, Leon, Alonzo, Javier,

Dani, Antonio, and Taco. I would also like to acknowledge my dissertation chair, Dr. Sarina

Molina, for your endless support, feedback, and compassion throughout this journey. I felt I

could be my most authentic self with you throughout my time at USD. I also acknowledge my

dissertation committee members, Dr. Veronica G. Garza and Dr. Pedro Nava, who provided so

much feedback that enhanced my perspective from multiple facets. Your brilliance in theory and

practice are seen throughout this dissertation.

Jennifer Miyamoto Echeverria, my best friend, my partner-in-crime, my biggest

supporter, you always make me feel like I am worth more than I ever give myself credit. Thank

you for being my balance in all things and for cheering for me throughout this program. Without

you, I do not know how high I could have reached in my career. Love you, siempre.

O, thank you for being my mentor, my coach, and friend. You push me to be a better

human and father through all our coaching sessions, co-facilitating spaces, and our constant

conversations of all things life. Love you, brotha.

Christen and Harry, thank you for being support structures throughout this journey for

me. Know that your friendships mean the world to me and our constant messaging threads across

multiple social media platforms have been a supplemental healing structure for my mental

wellness throughout this journey. I appreciate and love you both.

Supergroup, you are all amazing humans, and now doctors, that will create necessary

disruption and impact in every space you take up. Thank you for the connection, the laughter,

vii

and the inspiration you all bring in every interaction I have with you all. I love you so much.

Doctoral life was easier because you all were in it.

Cionnie, Angel, Alondra, Kimberly, Darla, and Xenia, I want you to know I always think

of your brilliance when life gets difficult, when I want to gain inspiration and motivation to

persevere, and how much I learned from you all that has made me a better human overall. Thank

you.

I would like to acknowledge the work provided by Dr. Michael Singh, who, without your

work on masculinity, I would not have a dissertation. I appreciate you taking a call from a PhD

candidate from another institution. You are a wonderful researcher and professor. Thank you!

I would like to acknowledge the amazing professors who supported my criticality through

this doctoral program: Dr. Rebekka Jez, Dr. Jose Lalas, Dr. Sarina Molina, Dr. Veronica G.

Garza, Dr. Suzanne Stolz, Dr. Jorge Ramirez Delgado, Dr. Joi Spencer, Dr. Ricardo Medina, Dr.

Reyes Quezada, Dr. Monique Major, Dr. Maya Kalyanpur, and Dr. James Fabionar. Thank you

for the intentionality in founding a doctoral program with so much criticality that it supported my

growth in liberatory consciousness in everything that I do. I appreciate you all for your hard

work, dedication, and lifelong work to drive equity in the spaces you all have navigated.

Last, I acknowledge my family, friends, colleagues, mentors, femtors, mentees, current

and former students, and community families who have had direct impact on me in obtaining this

doctoral degree. I hold all of our connections and interactions in my heart. I hope to continue

making you all proud. I appreciate your words of encouragement and endless love that you have

shown me throughout my life, career, and now, doctoral journey. Love you all.

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi

LIST OF TABLES xiv

LIST OF FIGURES xv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1

Background 1

Educator Diversity 1

Racial Demographics 2

Gender Gap 5

My Story 6

Changing the Narrative 9

Purpose of the Study 11

Theoretical Framework 15

Critical Machismo Consciousness 16

Critical Sociocultural Theory 17

Racial Identity Development Theory 19

Masculinity Studies 21

LatCrit Theory 22

Research Questions 23

Limitations and Delimitations 24

Researcher’s Perspective 25

Organization of the Study 28

Definitions 29

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 32

Identity 34

Critical Sociocultural Theory 35

Racial Identity Development Theory 37

Brain Science 39

Initial Interactions 40

Gender Norms 41

K–12 Experience 42

Stereotyped From the Beginning 42

Gender Disparities 43

Masculinity 44

Masculinity Studies 45

Masculinity Norms 47

Machismo 49

Emotional Erasure 51

Latino Male Educators 52

Disciplinarians 52

Mentorship 53

Future Focus 54

Outcomes 55

Vanishing Latino 56

Lack of Representation 57

Identity Crisis 59

Latino Studies 60

LatCrit Theory 60

Supporting Latino Boys and Men 62

Reciprocal Love and Ethos of Care 64

Círculo y La Cultura Cura 65

Latino Men in Therapy 66

Critical Machismo Consciousness 66

Circulos Enfocados 68

Summary 69

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 71

My Ongoing Journey 74

Research Methods 75

Research Questions 77

Critical Qualitative Case Study 78

Participant Selection Procedures 81

Participant Demographics 82

Data Collection 84

Data Collection Procedures 84

Research Setting 86

Data Collection Tools 88

Circulos Enfocados 89

Memo Writing 92

Data Organization 92

Data Analysis 93

Open Coding 95

Axial Coding 97

Selective Coding 99

Trustworthiness and Credibility 100

Researcher Bias 103

Limitations of the Research Methodology 104

Summary 105

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 106

Exploring Latino Male Educator Identity 108

Social Construction of Identity 109

Fatherhood Machismo Impact 110

External Gender Norm Impact 113

Creation of Masks 117

Internal Conflict 118

Caution 121

Othered 123

Exploring Counter-Machismo 126

Deconstructing and Disrupting 131

Deconstruction Through Critical Consciousness 132

Disrupting With Youth 136

Disrupting Through Critical Pedagogy 143

Surviving and Thriving in the Profession 149

xii

Development From Mentors/Femtors 151

Surviving and Thriving 156

Chapter Summary 162

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION 165

Moving Away From Damage-Centered Research 165

Summary of Key Findings and Policy Recommendations 167

Key Finding 1 167

Key Finding 2 168

Key Finding 3 170

Recommendations 170

Creating Gender Affinity Spaces With Other Latino Male Educators 172

Creating Intentional and Consistent Coaching Cycles on Instruction and Pedagogy 173

Gaining Qualitative and Quantitative Survey Data on Latino Male Educator

Experience 174

Intentional Identity Development: Critical Machismo Consciousness 174

Providing Mental Wellness Support Structures for Identity Development for

Latino Men 175

Implications 177

Identity Negotiations 178

Implications for Fathers and Youth 179

Implications for Policy 180

Critical Machismo Consciousness 181

Implications for Practice 183

xiii

Implications for Research 185

Intentional Development 185

Implications for Practice 188

Limitations 189

Conclusion 191

REFERENCES 194

APPENDIX A. Diversifying the Teacher Workforce 224

APPENDIX B. CITI Certificate and IRB Approval 225

APPENDIX C. Research Recruitment Email Script 2

APPENDIX D. Latino Male Demographic Survey 3

APPENDIX E. Consent Form 5

APPENDIX F. Circulo Enfocado Protocol 8

APPENDIX G. The Mask You Live In Transcript 13

APPENDIX H. Member Checking Form 15

APPENDIX I. Codebook 22

xiv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Latino Male Educator Participants 82

Table 2. Data Collection Tools 88

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Critical Machismo Consciousness 17

Figure 2. Nonlinear Process to Qualitative Research 94

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

The first act of violence that patriarchy demands of males is not violence towards

women. Instead, patriarchy demands of all males that they engage in acts of

psychic self-mutilation, that they kill off the emotional parts of themselves.

–bell hooks, The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love

Men have been socially conditioned through masculinity gendered norms to think,

behave, and replicate an oppressive structure that violently destroys their empathy, inclusivity of

all genders, and mental wellness (Berggren, 2014; Connell, 2005; Salisbury & Jackson, 1996;

Singh, 2021; Waling, 2019). As schools begin to move toward inclusivity, an emphasis on

gender equity would support educators’ use of a critical and culturally sustaining pedagogy that

affirms, values, and welcomes all forms of gender identity while dismantling patriarchal norms

(Freire, 1970; Paris & Alim, 2017). Intentional emphasis on deconstructing masculinity for male

educators and letting go of “a real man does . . .” narratives have the potential of leading to more

intentional and supportive healing efforts for all male educators (Singh, 2021). If diversifying the

teacher workforce is the goal, then encouraging progressive gender consciousness may support

inclusive pedagogy for Latino male educators who use gender expansion to serve their diverse

school communities.

Background

Educator Diversity

The lack of diversity in the U.S. teacher workforce is a key issue when discussing

inclusive and affirming schools. Research has shown student belonging is enhanced when the

teacher workforce mirrors a multiracial, multicultural, multigendered, and multilingual

population (Paris & Alim, 2017). This culturally sustaining environment would “foster—to

sustain—linguistic, literate, and cultural pluralism as part of schooling for positive social

transformation” (Paris & Alim, 2017, p. 1). Moving away from colonial frameworks of

schooling to liberatory spaces that support the growth of critical consciousness for all community

members can help to reimagine a world in which all can thrive (Freire, 1970; Love, 2019; Paris

& Alim, 2017). When students are able to engage with teachers who look like them, there are

benefits to student attendance and academic identity, which lead to increased achievement and

higher expectations for all students being served (Dee, 2005; Romero et al., 2009; Singh, 2021).

Diversity is a word often overused in performative equity statements in U.S. society and

organizations (Ahmed, 2012). Institutions use diversity statements as proof they have checked

off a task on the list rather than truly diving in to issues of equity, thus maintaining existing

hierarchal structures and leadership (Ahmed, 2012). As a result, when an individual raises

concerns about inequity in an organization, they are marginalized and become a problem to

maintaining the current hegemony. In public education serving kindergarten through 12th grade

(K–12 schools), teacher diversity does not match the current student diversity in regard to

demographics (de Brey et al., 2019). At the time of this study, 54% of U.S. K–12 public school

students identified as nonwhite; however, 79% of the teacher workforce identified as white (de

Brey et al., 2019). By 2029, predictions have indicated students of color will represent over 60%

of the student population (Gottfried et al., 2022). With student racial demographics shifting,

teacher demographics must shift to support these students.

Racial Demographics

Diversifying the teacher workforce has been on the agenda for many U.S. schools,

districts (see Appendix A), and state educational departments serving predominantly Black and

Brown students. However, these efforts have fallen short given 21% of the teacher workforce

have been teachers of color and served a population of 54% students of color (de Brey et al.,

2019). Teachers, in general, have struggled to stay in the profession because of poorly

conditioned classrooms, inadequate teacher preparation, and the inability to sustain a work–life

balance in a profession that requires working after school hours with grading, student concerns,

and lesson planning (Barkhorn, 2013; Blanchard, 2013; Machado, 2013; Riggs, 2013). In

addition, research has shown white educators do not deal with the same issues as teachers of

color (Kohli, 2019). Teachers of color often have had to navigate daily microaggressions,

confront white educators’ lowered expectations of students of color, and lead whole school

events to process trauma from continued police violence in Black and Brown communities

(Kohli, 2019; Matias & Mackey, 2016). It is difficult for teachers of color to find solidarity in

spaces when they are one of few represented in the population and one of the few resisting the

status quo.

Teachers of color have worked under continued pressure to support every student they

serve because their purpose is deeply rooted to the community in which they grew up. They do

this work and simultaneously deal with cultural insensitivity in school systems that do not take

into account how policies affect their community (Machado, 2013). Internally, teachers of color

have struggled to be enough for the community of which they have always been a part,

continuing to give their time and effort past work hours, and donating part of their salaries to

students who remind them of themselves. Unfortunately, teacher salaries do not build

generational wealth for first- and second-generation teachers of color (Machado, 2013). Teachers

of color have had an added pressure to persevere for their communities regardless of how

oppressive their school system is because they know the importance of their role in schools,

particularly for students of color (Cormier et al., 2021).

Given the evidence presented, it is clear the current system of schooling has not

supported an inclusive, affirming, and supportive environment for teachers of color. School and

district hiring programs have not advertised true experiences of teachers of color in their

recruitment efforts; thus, patterns of low retention numbers have continued. However,

diversifying on the basis of race is not the only gap to address in creating a more inclusive

teaching force.

Too often, racial demographics are highlighted in diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts

in hiring practices, yet the structural foundation of organizations still functions through

whiteness normativity (Ward, 2008). White normativity defaults the thinking, speaking, and

doing most prevalent to white culture, which automatically segregates people who do not fit

these norms (Ladner, 1998; Ward, 2008). People of color may make up a large percentage of the

work demographic data; but, they struggle to gain access to power in hierarchical positions

because the structure in charge is predominantly white (E. Scott, 2005; Ward, 2008). Ultimately,

diversity demographics data are used as a performative indicator in attempt to optically diversify

organizations without real cultural changes to the work environment (Ward, 2008).

Hiring to bridge racial gaps, especially in K–12 schools, without structural change will

not bring forth equity in a more diverse workforce. More importantly, people of color

accumulate assets such as aspirational, linguistic, social, navigational, and resistance capital

through white dominant centered spaces that mimic societal ideology (Yosso, 2005). This

highlights the fatigue people of color experience in continuing to navigate spaces never meant

for them in the first place. Identity intersectionality is an important component of humanity, and

race is only one factor that impacts an experience for educators. To build on inclusivity of

diversity, gender needs to be a major component of K–12 educator intersectionality and

experience to help recruit, hire, and retain newer teachers from marginalized identities.

Gender Gap

Gender discrimination has always been a major issue impacting the diversity of the K–12

teacher workforce. In 2018, women made up 76% of the teaching workforce in K–12 schools,

whereas men made up 24% (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2020). When

breaking down the data by grade levels, 89% of women taught in elementary schools, 72%

taught in middle schools, and 60% taught in high schools (NCES, 2020). Data for educators who

identified as men indicated they made up 24% of the teacher population, and, when

disaggregating by race, just 2% of the entire teaching workforce identified as Latino male

educators (NCES, 2020).

This gender gap is not new to the field by any means. Once the Common School was

introduced to the mainstream public educational system in the 1830s, feminization of the career

began (Mondale, 2001). Women were recruited to teach because they were regarded as more

nurturing to young children and men in charge could pay them one third of the salary a qualified

male educator would be paid (Mondale, 2001). As women began taking up more teaching

opportunities, the school year increased in length and time, which pushed men away from having

a second occupation (Strober & Lanford, 1986). An increase in the certification needed to work

coupled with a salary never made to support a family, led to a decrease in men staying or

entering the profession of teaching (Strober & Lanford, 1986). However, the economic

ramifications of feminizing the profession are only one small portion of the story. Critical

scholars have contended patriarchy has significantly influenced the teaching profession, resulting

in a situation where women are subjected to control based on their performance and men

predominantly assume administrative roles that dictate working conditions for women (Apple,

2013; Danylewycz & Prentice, 1984; Saavedra, 2006). Moreover, this phenomenon in teaching is

closely linked to the societal norm of domesticity and the associated labeling of socialization

norms. As a result, the profession of teacher has been “deskilled” in comparison to how difficult

the work truly is, and feminization of the profession has continued, which is why there remains a

major gender gap in the field (Apple, 2013; Saavedra, 2006).

My Story

It is important to me to tell my story in relation to the information being provided. In my

experience teaching for 10 years in parochial and public schools, it was a rarity to work

alongside another Latino male educator. My identity as a man was always front and center as I

navigated my day-to-day life. Women leaders often elevated unwritten codes I had not realized

before coming to this profession. I was yelled at and reprimanded for having a female student

alone in my classroom when I was eating lunch. However, administrators did not know the

student had forgotten her juice and needed to get it from her backpack during lunch. I always left

my classroom door open because of these types of situations. In this situation, the white female

administrator created assumptions about the intentions I had for children and asked the student if

I had asked her to come to my class. Being a man in this space was difficult to navigate when

assumptions about what I was doing and questions about my motives were frequent challenges.

In another instance, a white female administrator told me I would never succeed as an

English language arts (ELA) teacher because I was an English language learner and a man. The

coded messaging about my intelligence was a constant occurrence with interactions around

content with other educators and administrators. In addition, school personnel would, frequently

and without reservation, send me students, primarily boys of color, who were labeled

troublemakers so I could discipline them for not following rules. The underlying coded

messaging I internalized was I had to become a disciplinarian who could instill fear in young

boys of color. Administrators admitted they could not believe students loved me because I was

so serious and looked angry all the time. Every day I had to think about how I was showing up

for others and never truly felt like myself. This constant feedback of how to act, think, feel was a

major factor in my everyday life as an educator. I had to learn to survive; learn to put on another

mask; and be careful how I portrayed myself to women, children, and parents because I never

wanted anyone to think I would intentionally harm the young people I taught.

As I embarked on this dissertation journey, previous research affirmed many of my

experiences and enhanced my critical consciousness of the power dynamics constantly at play in

education. In describing the experiences of men of color, this study focused only on Latino male

educators. When speaking in terms of men of color, most research has examined the Black and

Latino male experience. Identity plays a major role in the constant stereotyping and assimilation

of certain societal and behavioral norms used to set specific standards. For men of color, this

means they have already been stereotyped as the type of educator they needed to be when they

walked in the door (Brockenbrough, 2018; Singh, 2021).

Specifically, men of color have been targeted to teach in schools using the narrative of

saviors needed to come rescue young boys of color (Brockenbrough, 2018; Singh, 2021). This is

problematic for young boys of color because they begin to create a stereotype threat (i.e.,

internalizing the negative stereotypes defined for one’s group) of being a problem that needs

fixing (Baldridge, 2017; P. Johnson & Philoxene, 2018; Noguera, 2009; Pabon, 2016; Steele,

2010). Men of color enter educational settings through an established hegemonic,

heteropatriarchal, masculine archetype: the stereotypical disciplinarian who (a) models

assimilated capitalist norms of being complicit to white male hegemonic success metrics, (b) is

accepted as a model of a “successful” man, and (c) should be replicated by young boys of color

(Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh, 2021). Ultimately, this archetype glorifies assimilation to white

male patriarchal ways of being as a means to be successful and accepted in society.

In this standardization of manhood and masculinity, Latino male educators also have to

consider machismo definitions in their cultural home life, work environment, and the community

in which they serve (Pérez & Okello, 2017). Due to this constant awareness of gender and

sexuality expectations, Latino male educators have reported they are in a constant identity crisis

and are twice as likely to leave the profession compared to Latina women (Lara & Fránquiz,

2015; Partee, 2014; Singh, 2021). The environment into which men enter the teaching profession

has been created to emasculate the teaching profession and bring hegemonic masculinity into the

spotlight to solve the “boy problem” (Martino & Kehler, 2006, p. 113). Centering hegemonic

masculinity norms means every decision Latino male educators make is directly tied to how they

live up to social constructions of their gender identity. With the feminization of the profession,

teaching in elementary grades has been considered to be more of a nurturing role, which is why

more men have tended to teach in middle and high school grades (Mills et al., 2004).

Male educators have gained awareness of how they are perceived in the educational

environments in which they work. Male educators have reported difficulty in navigating the

constant scrutiny of being viewed as less than a man by their social circles, families, and

communities (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). As a result of this scrutiny, men have tended to shy away

from showing affection to students and around women. Lara and Fránquiz (2015) explained

“homophobia and pedophilia are the societal discourses that act as a form of social control to

reinforce hegemonic views of masculinity while simultaneously conflating gay or effeminate

men with pedophilia” (p. 211).

Men must survive the daily struggle of negotiating suspicions of being labeled as

pedophiles, regardless of marital status, and performing heteronormative stereotypes to combat

homophobic and transphobic community norms (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). For Latino men, a

hegemonic masculine archetype is constantly perpetuated by (a) female educators sending

troubled male students to Latino male educators for discipline, (b) parents pressuring Latino

male educators to make sure male students are being brought up like “men,” and (c) continuing a

cycle of survival they grew accustomed to as students in the K–12 environment (I. Jackson et al.,

2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). Latino male educators are in constant fight or flight mode

because of continued suppression of their vulnerabilities, using coping strategies to navigate

society, and consciously or unconsciously perpetuating harmful stereotypes of successful

hegemonic men. In a minoritized structure where there are very few Latino men, Latino male

educators have struggled to navigate the constant external and internal messaging about what to

do in every situation.

Changing the Narrative

Gaining consciousness and awareness is an important aspect for teachers who are

working to critically think and act toward social justice and equitable outcomes for students

(Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008). Latino male educators can achieve awareness by

understanding the criticality of their unique identities, power relations within those identities, the

privileges they use, and how culture has developed their ways of being (Bartolomé, 2010).

Ideological reflexivity allows for educators to critically evaluate their teaching pedagogy, the

way they interact with all community members, and the hidden elements that keep society

functioning through inequity (Bartolomé, 2010; Darder et al., 2003). Latino educators can use a

critical pedagogy to gain knowledge on dominant ideologies and begin to interact with counter

hegemonic discourses. Such critical pedagogy can add purposeful intentionality to resistance

efforts in every educational setting.

With the constant interrogation of identity Latino male educators face in their everyday

lives, they need support for mental health and wellness for healing (Ginwright, 2015, 2018).

Studies regarding retention efforts to support Latino male educators have indicated more

research is needed on how institutions support educators’ belonging, mental wellness, and how

to develop affinity among Latino male educators (Falicov, 2010; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013).

Developing critical consciousness (Freire, 1994) is beneficial for survival; yet, it can be

traumatizing if individuals are not well-equipped to unpack traumas related to racism, sexism,

and classism in a healthy manner. The process toward critical consciousness involves

understanding the inequitable social conditions created by society and developing an awakening

to combat these structures (Freire, 1994). As Latino male educators begin to grow their critical

consciousness on machismo, sexism, and feminism, schools have the ability to provide

structured support in their professional development programming. This reminds me of what I

had to obtain during my journey for me to gain my critical consciousness.

I constantly reflect on where I would be if I had not grown my consciousness. This

process was not and could not be done alone. My consciousness was raised through proximity to

feminist mentors, coaches, and colleagues who pushed my thinking on masculinity, on how the

world perceived me, and on how I could be more emotionally intelligent. My response when I

was harmed had always been to fight back with verbal threats of physicality or to remove myself

from the situation without confrontation. By suppressing my emotions from my traumas and

daily interactions, I created a version of myself I did not enjoy. I walked through the world with

constant aggression, anxiety, and a lack of closure. Throughout my teaching experience, I

received coaching on my identity from educational leaders and from a therapist. As I began to

gain a healthy perspective on from where my behaviors, thinking, and actions stemmed, I began

to heal and have been constantly growing into a newer version of myself I had never considered.

This journey is just one example and is ongoing. My K–12 experience was both a harmful and a

liberating experience because I chose to dive into the discomfort of unpacking my identities and

began to directly deal with problems I had.

Diversity and inclusivity cannot be attained through the sole lens of antiracism when men

of color have been conditioned to also perpetuate oppression through hegemonic masculinity and

suppress their humanity (Ginwright, 2015; Singh, 2021). In my experience, I also needed to be

an advocate for justice for people of color, women, and the LGBTQIA+ community, which

reflects the nuance of true inclusivity in society. To retain Latino male educators in education,

more work needs to be done to understand, validate, and support their full humanity and true

understanding of all their identities.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this critical qualitative case study was to explore the phenomenon of how

Latino male educators understand and navigate their gender identities in their K–12 spaces. This

study aimed to discover how Latino cisgendered heterosexual men process, reflect on, and act by

centering their understanding of masculinity and machismo. From a young age, all men are

conditioned to create an archetype of masculinity that informs how they behave, feel, and think

(Connell, 2005). In gaining a critical machismo consciousness, men have the potential to gain a

deeper understanding of how they perpetuate harmful stereotypes and learn to expand

masculinity through reimagination, renegotiations of identity, and tapping into new skills they

should have learned earlier in their lives. Due to different societal norms Latino male educators

have to navigate, expectations from their Latino nationalities mixed with U.S. gender norms

create different versions of masculinity and machismo each Latino male educator must navigate

(Falicov, 2010; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Pérez & Okello, 2017).

This study used focus groups, or circulos enfocados, to gather insight into how Latino

male educators understand their roles through the lens of gender, how they combat or assimilate

these norms, and what they have learned to be successful in their settings. Furthermore, I asked

what more they need to stay in the profession. Focus groups were used to provide a safe and

brave space to give a voice to participants, co-construct themes and interpretations, and gain

multiple perspectives around similar topics (Kamberelis & Dimitriadis, 2005; Morgan, 1996;

Rakow, 2011). It was important to me to give a voice to some of the most marginalized

educators so educational institutions can learn from their stories, lived experiences, and unique

realities. There was a need to center the voices of Latino male educators to understand

contemporary versions of masculinities and gain insight about systems they must navigate in

each of their respective spaces. Thus, four separate focus groups, circulos enfocados, were

conducted with 17 participants who were Latino male educators. By using circulos enfocados,

data collection and analysis centered Latino male educator voices on understanding how gender

impacts their educational environments through the use of intentional dialogic spaces where they

could push, challenge, and support each other on sensitive topics.

As a researcher and outsider, my goal was to raise Latino male educator voices to express

their needs through purposeful and intentional spaces. By creating a group in which cisgendered

heterosexual Latino men can share stories, be vulnerable, and dialogue, the opportunities to bring

forth collective knowledge and healing has the potential to increase support structures Latino

men may need (Carrillo & Tello, 2008; Falicov, 2010; National Compadres Network, 2021;

Winn, 2018). In their generic form, focus groups constitute a group interview, which is

important, yet they lack a humanizing element. As a result, I created circulos enfocados, or

focused community circles using restorative justice practices. Circulos enfocados encompasses

different components of focus groups, culturally responsive focus groups (CRFGs), restorative

practices, and community circles (Carrillo & Tello, 2008; Falicov, 2010; National Compadres

Network, 2021; K. Rodriguez et al., 2011; Winn, 2018). My circulos enfocados focused on

community building, invoking trust, and providing a space of healing by sharing vulnerabilities

as humans.

Using circulos enfocados was helpful in creating a space focused on stories as asset-

based opportunities from which the entire circulo could learn and uplift each other. Each group

had the same questions to unpack, and the conversations, topics, and challenges were led in

different directions based on the lived experiences of Latino male educators. My perspective as a

Latino male researcher was to listen, to become an insider by sharing my experience with other

Latino men, and to help facilitate a space where participants could be themselves without feeling

judged. Balancing individual experiences with communal experience was difficult because the

goal of the study was not to generalize these stories to all Latino male educators. The complexity

in humanity was on display because intersectionality of many identities played a role in shaping

current versions of participants’ identities. My role in these circulos was to highlight these

experiences, to affirm their identities, to foster dialogue, and to challenge heteronormative

patriarchal characteristics Latino men have internalized. By understanding where Latino men are

in their journeys with masculinity and machismo, this study has the potential to inform retention

efforts on how to support the growth of critical machismo consciousness of Latino men. In

addition, this study recognizes the complexity of engaging in sensitive topics like masculinity

and machismo to assist retention programming efforts for Latino men. Critical pedagogical

educators would need to develop intentional and purposeful programming that supports, guides,

and challenges gender dynamics to expand masculinities for Latino men.

This critical qualitative case study documented a humanized portrait—a portrayal of the

power in words by centering Latino male educators and their words—to support the importance

of critical machismo consciousness for Latino male educators in their work experience. Research

has continued to provide deficit-based stereotypes of Latino male educators instead of enhancing

methodologies to place their voices at the center of studies (Singh, 2018). Problematic narratives

of saviorism, masculinity, manhood, mentorship, and father figures without critical analysis of

their origins and definitions have continued an oppressive cycle (Singh, 2021). Creation of male-

only affinity spaces that perpetuate hegemonic toxic masculinity norms are also not helpful to the

inclusivity of multiple masculinities including queer, transgender, and nongender conforming

community members.

As a trained facilitator of safety in circulo processing spaces, I sought to support, guide,

and challenge Latino men to be co-conspirators in gender equity and give direct feedback on

building awareness when hegemonic masculinity and machismo were brought into the space. I

have had the honor and privilege to be trained in restorative practices to help facilitate, lead, and

co-construct circulos throughout my professional experience. Ultimately, critical consciousness

has helped me in how I model, how I pose questions, and how I challenge perspectives that lead

to productive dialogue versus blaming, judging, or dehumanizing individuals for sharing their

truths. My intention was to provide a space and opportunity for participants to gain awareness,

unpack why they think or behave in a particular way, and begin to heal by renegotiating their

gender identities through consciousness work. Supporting Latino male educators through this

deconstruction of masculinity and machismo actively disrupts heteronormative patriarchal

structures and can influence critical sociocultural theories.

Theoretical Framework

This study used a critical review of literature focused on the understanding of identity

development, the navigation of intersectional identities, and the responses of being a Latino male

educator. The ways in which young Latino boys are conditioned by society, family, and schools

may indicate how Latino male educators navigate their identities as adults. This study relied on

literature and research with the potential to disrupt heteronormative patriarchy, enhance critical

consciousness of gender, and support healing centered engagement through circulos enfocados.

Four main theoretical frameworks guided the purpose of the study: critical sociocultural theory,

racial identity development theory, masculinity studies, and Latino critical (LatCrit) theory.

These frameworks established the foundation on which literature, research, and studies were

analyzed and illuminated how to move forward in supporting Latino men in K–12 spaces.

In addition to the frameworks, the context of how transnational people navigate different

ways of being based on their cultural lens in the home and mainstream societal norms in the

United States was important to this study. This context helped to provide support to the current

theoretical research and retention programming for Latino male educators in K–12 schools.

Overall, this study focused on centering critical machismo consciousness for Latino male

educators as a way to address retention efforts through direct disruption of heteronormative

patriarchy while enhancing the agency and emotionality of men (Singh, 2018, 2021; Waling,

2019). The following theoretical frameworks focused on using literature and research to support

the critical machismo consciousness of Latino male educators.

Critical Machismo Consciousness

A tenet of critical pedagogy is critical consciousness, in which educators develop an

awakening about inequities for marginalized people in society (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell,

2008; Freire, 1994). Individuals who develop a deep sense of critical consciousness take critical

action to actively disrupt and dismantle oppressive structures. Critical consciousness allows

educators to question what they are teaching, how they are teaching it, and whether they are

supporting students to also become critically conscious (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2008; Gay

& Kirkland, 2003). This study aimed to examine all aspects of criticality and consciousness,

which, for Latino cisgendered heterosexual men, is to examine, question, and disrupt

heteronormative patriarchy.

Built on critical race theory (CRT) and critical pedagogy, this study used circulos

enfocados (i.e., focus groups) to create a supportive space in which to dialogue about critical

machismo consciousness alongside Latino male educators (see Figure 1). Researchers have

argued further development of critical consciousness should include the examination of core

beliefs and practices that are misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic, and patriarchal because

masculinity and machismo socialize men to maintain these structures (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015;

Singh, 2021). By engaging in deconstruction of masculinity and machismo with a focus on

gender expansion, it is important to integrate coping strategies and support mechanisms for

Latino male educators to handle this new knowledge in a productive manner. By using circulos

enfocados, this research may suggest Latino male educators could benefit from the formalization

of affinity groups in which they can dialogue, express their emotions, and collectively heal.

Centering Latino male educator experience while nurturing the development of critical

machismo consciousness can support the implementation of initiatives to maintain and sustain

their humanity. In essence, Latino male educators would gain the capacity to preserve their skills

as educators dedicated to promoting inclusivity, actively challenge heteronormative patriarchy,

and foster a secure environment conducive to further exploration of their gender identities.

Figure 1

Critical Machismo Consciousness

Critical Sociocultural Theory

In the formation of identity, cultural norms are passed down through different inputs for

all humans. Sociocultural theory argues the mind is mediated through intentional artifacts passed

down generationally (Lantolf, 2000). Individuals take these symbolic tools of understanding the

world in which they live as a guide for how they psychologically live up to those expectations (S.

Scott & Palincsar, 2013). The translation of those artifacts can change over time based on the

different lived experiences of individuals. Ultimately, individuals gain consciousness through

natural, individual, and social interactions and make meaning of the world through the collection

of language (Vygotsky, 1978/1997).

For the purposes of this study, I used critical sociocultural theory because it brings in the

critical tenets of power, identity, and agency as dimensions to navigate consciousness for Latino

male educators. Learning is a participatory act between individuals involved in which learners

bring their knowledge into a space and create new learning from others (Moje & Lewis, 2020).

This process of learning and unlearning brings forth consciousness in discourse communities

“that share ways of knowing, thinking, believing, acting, and communicating” (Moje & Lewis,

2020, p. 41). These discourse communities—or dialogical learning spaces—support trust

building, create shared power, and bridge multiple lived realities in the production of knowledge

(Molina, 2015). Learning is the internalization of ideas used to reformulate an individual’s

identity, values, and understanding of the world. This growth leads to an unlearning through

active resistance to what has been known, reevaluation of meaning, and co-construction of new

discourses (Moje & Lewis, 2020). The participants in this study were active learners alongside

the researcher as both parties produced new knowledge for a larger audience.

In terms of power, this particular study understood masculinity and machismo in relation

to the system of patriarchy and how gender norms have been accumulated, assimilated, and

accommodated in the lives of men (Moje & Lewis, 2020). The learning of these gender norms

has been appropriated through patriarchal standards in society, and an active renegotiation

through an expansion of masculinities can support efforts toward new formations of meaning.

Through this learning and unlearning process, a new consciousness is formed by remaking

identities based on new knowledge, and individuals are able to create different versions of

themselves in different discourse communities (Moje & Lewis, 2020). Ultimately, this process

has the potential to lead to agency and a deeper understanding of purpose and meaning in regard

to collective identities and active dismantling of power dynamics.

For Latino male educators, a structured gender socialization process begins in infancy

and conditions them on how to think, behave, and feel or not feel. By diving into this discourse

community, I hoped to promote more individual learning and unlearning to deepen the critical

machismo consciousness of my participants. However, humanity is complex, and individuals

may experience a multitude of intersectionalities, hence why this study used the framework of

racial identity development theory.

Racial Identity Development Theory

For this study, it was important to explore how Latino male educators formulate,

navigate, and understand racial identity. Racial identity development theory directly connects to

critical sociocultural theory because race is a major component of identity in U.S. society. Helms

(1990) described racial identity development theory as established beliefs, perceptions, and

affinity an individual has to a racialized group that evolves when they compare themselves to

other racialized groups. Tatum (2004) noted “given the dominant/subordinate relationship of

Whites and people of color in this society, however, it is not surprising that this developmental

process will unfold in different ways” (p. 93). Further, Ferdman and Gallegos (2001) established

Latino development occurs through an understanding of similarities in a cultural group and how

one person is directly influenced by socialization experiences of home life, school, peer

interactions, and the racialized U.S. caste system. However, Latinidad is not monolithic, and

every person has a different relationship to how they racially identify given the othering that

occurs in dominant, white caste U.S. society. For this study, Latinidad is a term used to describe

a sense of cultural identity and belonging to the broader Latin American or Hispanic cultural and

ethnic heritage (Chávez-Moreno, 2021a; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Gómez, 2020). Latinidad

encompasses the shared cultural, historical, linguistic, and social experiences of people with

roots in Latin America or with Latin American heritage. The term emphasizes a collective

identity, including individuals or communities who identify with the diverse range of Latin

American countries, languages, traditions, and customs. Latinidad is a complex and multifaceted

concept and can encompass various aspects of identity, including language, ethnicity, race,

nationality, and cultural heritage. Ferdman and Gallegos (2001) created the following lenses to

describe individuals’ identification of Latinidad: (a) Latino integrated (i.e., having a full

understanding of racial construction), (b) Latino identified (i.e., an acceptance of Latinidad and

white racial labeling constructs), (c) subgroup identified (i.e., acceptance of multiple Latinidad

races and having proximity to a particular region or subgroup), (d) Latino as other (i.e., generic

labeling to a Latinidad affinity through ancestral heritage), I undifferentiated (i.e., assimilation to

U.S. imperial individualism through colorblind narrative), (f) and white identified (i.e., rejecting

Latinidad as a racial construct and full acceptance of whiteness in racial construct).

Understanding the power dynamics of racial identities is important for deepening critical

consciousness because they give insight to the lived experiences and attachments Latino male

educators have regarding the intersectionality of their identities. Racial identity development

theory and critical sociocultural theory help to bring another dimension of identity to this study

that can lead to rich discussions, reflexivity, and, hopefully, healing. In addition to understanding

identities, disruption of gender norms emphasize deconstructing masculinity and machismo

norms Latino men have individually and collectively internalized.

Masculinity Studies

From early stages of development, young babies understand the coded gendered

messages they see from clothing, colors, toys, books, media, and sexist cultural norms (Rippon,

2019). Advertisements are focused on “what a real man” uses versus a woman’s version of the

same product, which are deemed as inferior (Rippon, 2019). This coding becomes more

problematic for young Latino boys as they enter their first school experiences. Latino boys walk

into schools with a carried stereotype and definition of manhood they must achieve.

The social construction of gender derives from societal norms of masculinity and how

specific ways of existing have been defined for men. Masculinity studies have evolved over time

to include multiple typologies that explain a continuum men can navigate in their world. For

example, Connell (2005) suggested the typologies of hegemonic, complicit, subordinate, and

marginalized masculinity. The archetypal form of masculinity is hegemonic in exerting

dominance through strength, aggression, race, and ableism (Connell, 2005; Lara & Fránquiz,

2015). Complicit masculinity archetypes are the “front line troops” that uphold hegemonic norms

by wanting to be included in that fraternity. In subordinate masculinity, gay and nongendered

men are targeted through exclusionary practices and by psychological and physical violence. In

marginalized masculinity, men of different races support the white male hegemonic archetype

yet are not fully accepted into mainstream masculinity culture (Connell, 2005; Lara & Fránquiz,

2015). This coded form of masculinity begins at a very young age, and young boys are

conditioned not to show emotions, which can lead to problematic habits as they become adults.

Feminist scholars have noted the slow progress of masculinity studies in dismantling the

power dynamics continued by men (Waling, 2019). In building consciousness through agency

and emotionality to actively dismantle patriarchy, men must be held accountable for decisions

they make to intentionally uphold toxic masculinity behaviors (Berggren, 2014; Waling, 2019).

Sticky masculinity supports the use of feminist theoretical frameworks to gain consciousness of

the continued positionality men must navigate as they develop awareness of being oppressors

(Berggren, 2014). Waling (2019) further suggested masculinity studies include feminist

theoretical frameworks of agency and emotionality to enhance fluidity in identity navigation.

This study looked at Latino male educator experiences and how they navigate U.S. culture and

Latinidad cultural norms through gender, race, and class. For this study, it was also important for

me to use LatCrit theory as this study aimed to add to the scholarship on individuals of Latinidad

identity.

LatCrit Theory

CRT is focused on issues of race, power, and class to disrupt all spaces in a white

hegemonic formalized system (A. Martinez, 2014). As Latino male educators enter the field and

notice they are marginalized in the K–12 environment, it is important to focus on racial

disparities in their experiences (Carey, 2020). Latino male educators have been heavily recruited

to diversify the teaching workforce because a large population of public school students identify

as Latino boys. Dismantling sexism for Latino male educators must live simultaneously with

racism and classism to gain awareness of their daily impact on the profession. In addition,

advocacy for young Latino boys in K–12 spaces needs further development to enhance students’

success in schools (Crosnoe et al., 2008).

As CRT has expanded over the years into education, LatCrit theory has emerged as a

developing framework (Arriola, 1998). With the focus on Latino and Latinx perspectives, the

focus of using LatCrit is to further expand on the damage caused by white hegemonic structures

in society and how they impact multiple identities. LatCrit enhances the perspectives of Latinos

and Latinx people by theorizing where intersectionalities of race and racism meet with other

forms of oppression such as classism and sexism (Solórzano & Yosso, 2001). Furthermore, a

LatCrit framework in education hyper analyzes how schooling environments oppress and silence

versus affirm and empower Latino and Latinx students, teachers, and community members

(Solórzano & Yosso, 2001). A tenet of CRT is using counternarratives in the form of storytelling

from an oppositional view or perspective (Delgado, 1989). Counterstories from people of color

must be recognized and acknowledged as a critical understanding of racism (Solórzano &

Delgado Bernal, 2001).

For this particular study, I explored how Latino men deal with multiple positionalities

and identities by navigating gender disparities, racial disparities, and academic identities to gain

insight into what they navigate and how they survive (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Martino, 2008;

Sargent, 2001). A. Martinez (2014) noted a methodology of CRT includes storytelling, family

history, biographies, cuentos, testimonios, and counterstories from people of color. Thus, this

study purposefully used Latino male educator voices and their words from circulos enfocados as

counternarratives to support the creation of intentional programming to retain their talents and to

contribute to systemic changes in oppressive, racist, and sexist K–12 environments.

Research Questions

The following research questions were intentionally designed to capture the voices and

perspectives of Latino male educators and provide a deeper understanding of how they navigate

their identities in K–12 schools:

1. In what ways do Latino male educators understand their masculinity and how it

impacts their day-to-day lives in their educational settings?

2. In what ways do Latino male educators disrupt heteronormative patriarchal standards

of masculinity and machismo in their own beliefs and actions?

3. In what ways do Latino male educators acquire knowledge and skills in their teaching

practices to help them remain and thrive in the teaching profession?

Limitations and Delimitations

This research study focused on documenting and elevating the voices of Latino male

educators in navigating their identities in K–12 spaces. The study was delimited exclusively to

individuals who were educators in K–12 schools and identified as male, Latino/Hispanic,

cisgendered, and heterosexual. In addition, this study recruited educators who varied in years of

teaching experience to support research on retaining Latino male educators in their careers.

Obtaining perspectives from experienced Latino male educators could add a different layer of

internalized masculinity and machismo and provide further insight into how educators survive or

thrive in their educational spaces.

Another aspect of this research study was to see how heterosexual Latino men defined

masculinity in their own cultural home life, schools, and the greater society. Results from this

study are not generalizable to the experiences of all Latino male educators but can provide

guidance for retention programming. In addition, this study intentionally used the voices of

Latino male educators to deconstruct definitions of masculinity and determine ways of being that

were not oppressive, toxic, and hegemonic (Connell, 2005; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). A limitation

to this study is masculinity can be defined differently by race, region, religion, and other layers

of culture. Masculinity and machismo can be similar and different yet coexist in the identity

development of Latino men.

An intentional element to this research study was to have circulo (i.e., community circle)

protocols to assist in building community, affinity, and trust in circulos enfocados. As health and

safety continued to be a priority due to the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic, this study was

limited to a remote setting. This setting allowed Latino men to participate from multiple zip

codes rather than being confined to one school, district, or area. Set dates and times were

selected and participants chose their circulo enfocado based on their availability.

This study aimed to add to the research on how to support Latino male educators. Given

this aim, time constraints for participants, resources, and funding were limited in terms of the

impact of the study. The time commitment from participants included one remote-based circulo

enfocado that lasted 90–120 minutes based on the conversations and dialoguing. As a researcher,

data collection and analysis time were driven by the four session recordings. Due to the amount

of data, the information was extensive, and the scope of analysis was limited based on the time

constraints of the entire process.

Researcher’s Perspective

As a researcher and learner in this study, I wanted to provide context regarding my

relationship to the study topic. I identify as a Latino male educator who has had great success

despite traumatic experiences as a K–12 student and in my career as an educator. I hold a unique

bias of what allowed me to be successful that I developed through my own reflexivity, therapy,

and decisions that helped me get to a space of healing and an administrative career level. My

experiences are unique to me, and I am not suggesting educators should take this path to feel

successful as teachers or administrators. I immersed myself in this study with the intention to

build trust and show Latino male educators I wanted to be in this work alongside them.

I also understood each Latino male educator brought their own unique history, identities,

and experiences that may not have always aligned with mine, and these differences could create

other pathways that strayed away from the goal of retention in education. As a critical researcher,

my critical consciousness is based on my learning and lived experiences, which is important to

my healing journey. Every Latino male educator in this study had their own journey of

consciousness that had to be honored in this inclusive space. My hope is for all Latino male

educators to stay in the teaching profession, but I cannot control what happens outside of the

time I had with them. My unique experience gives me agency in providing a humanizing

representation of Latino male educator voices, and I hope to add to the scholarship in critically

examining and critiquing retention efforts for Latino men.

Significance of the Study

This critical qualitative case study focused on elevating the perspectives of Latino male

educators. This research study builds on work supporting the use of critical consciousness to

bring about systemic change through direct action. In addition, critical machismo consciousness

was used as a tool to support retention efforts as Latino male educators learn to disrupt internal

and external factors of hegemonic masculinity. With a critical machismo consciousness, Latino

male educators can focus on implementation of inclusive practices that affirm all identities they

serve. This research study also extends the notion of multiple masculinities through intentional

deconstruction of manhood, mentor, father figure, and “real men” (Singh, 2021). Deconstructing

masculinities embedded into programming for retention of Latino male educators can present a

collaborative opportunity to extend the services to young Latino boys in K–12 spaces through

critical machismo consciousness of Latino male educators and teacher development on gender

bias in pedagogy.

Circulos enfocados provided the methodological framework in which Latino male

educator perspectives were centered as asset-based narratives to inform retention practices in

critical machismo consciousness. The unique lenses and navigation of intersectionality of

multiple identities support Latino male educators’ journeys to build purpose for their work in

disrupting oppressive systems. This case study attempted to understand Latino male educator

identity development, deconstruction of identity, and reconstruction toward liberatory critical

machismo consciousness and how that process contributes to culturally sustaining inclusive

pedagogy.

This study focused on understanding the phenomenon of how Latino male educators

understand and navigate their masculinity and machismo in their K–12 settings. Current research

has shown educator retention efforts use a hegemonic masculinity lens to continue stereotypes of

manhood and mentorship, therefore diminishing progress toward inclusivity (Singh, 2021). In

enhancing the critical machismo consciousness of Latino male educators, support for inclusivity

of multiple masculinities, including feminist, queer, transgender, and nongender conforming, can

be embedded in spaces where men can be their authentic selves.

With the national trend of antiracist and antibias curriculum development in all learning

spaces, there is no room for performative outcomes of inclusivity when further marginalization

of multiple identities has continued and individuals are excluded, intentionally oppressed, and

(re)traumatized in school settings. Research has documented ways Latino male educators

navigate their deconstruction, reconstruction, and development of masculinity in support of

inclusivity (Singh, 2019). Most importantly, this study hopes to answer whether this level of

critical consciousness in their educational careers has enabled Latino male educators to continue

working in education, especially given the magnitude of disruption in ways of being.

Organization of the Study

This research study explored how Latino male educators navigate their lives through

gender norms established for them and what they choose to exhibit in their K–12 settings.

Through circulos enfocados (i.e., focus groups), the heart of this study showed a humanized

portrayal of Latino men to help enhance retention efforts in K–12 schools.

Chapter 2 provides context for how Latino male educators experience the world as

reported by existing research literature. The chapter also explores the potential of increasing

critical masculinity consciousness as a way to support Latino men. The chapter is broken down

into the following domains: (a) identity, (b) masculinity, (c) outcomes, (d) Latino studies, and (e)

intersectionality.

Chapter 3 describes the critical case study methodological process and intentionality in

using specific data collection tools and how data were analyzed. The data collection process

began in June 2023 and all data were gathered by July 2023. The data collection tools included

circulos enfocados (i.e., focus groups) about critical masculinity consciousness and memos

created by the researcher. From the data collection stage, an analysis of circulo recordings were

coded for saturation in understanding the phenomenon. The goal was to center the voices of the

participants through intentional reflexive opportunities to learn from their experiences.

Chapter 4 presents the expertise, lived experiences, and complex voices from the Latino

male educators in this study. The data represent only a small glimpse of what was collected from

the circulos enfocados. The findings include themes, quotes from participants, and analysis that

connects to the literature reviewed for this study. The chapter ends with a summary of the

findings pertaining to the three research questions that guided this study.

Chapter 5 provides a discussion of the key findings in this study and their connection to

the literature. The chapter dives deeper into the implications of the findings and future

recommendations for institutions. The chapter ends with a reflection on my learning as a

researcher throughout this dissertation process.

Definitions

The following definitions of terms are supportive for full engagement in the research

study.

Archetype

An archetype is the popular model generated for everyone to accept. Archetypes include

imagery, figures, character types, settings, and story patterns typically found in literary works

(Jung, 1969). Ultimately, these archetypes become so normalized, society obtains an

unconscious rationale to any dominant archetype created.

Familismo

Among Latinos, familismo is a concept focused on the importance of family over all

other decisions or opportunities. Instilled in young children, family support for large family

networks is bestowed upon the oldest siblings in the family dynamics. Basically, an individual’s

reality is predetermined by their family’s reality (Calzada et al., 2013).

Critical Consciousness

Critical consciousness refers to not just being in the world but also engaging in it by

gaining an awakening of the social inequities and creating action to transform it (Freire, 1994).

Hegemonic

Hegemonic refers to the maintenance of power dynamics created by elites for program

citizens in society to accept norms, beliefs, values, practices, and policies (Lea, 2014). As a

philosophy, it makes individuals believe the current state is normal or natural in the world.

Heteronormative

Heteronormative refers to “an institutionalized group of pressures that transcend mere

attraction to conform to a specific gender relationship based upon anatomy, psycho-social traits,

and class” (Capaccio, 2011, p. 2). Coined in the early 1990s, heteronormative is the explanation

that sex and gender identity play a role in the establishment of dominant social order (Warner,

1993). Sexuality, in this case, is defended through the determination of being human only if

individuals participate in the nuclear version of male–female relationships.

Latinidad

According to J. Martinez (2019), “As a movement in the U.S., Latinidad suggests that

despite varying nationalities, racial and gender identities, generations, languages, immigrant

status and mobility, among other factors, Latinxs are united under the term and identity” (para.

6). This study did not seek to silence the activism continued by Afro-Latinx, Indigenous, and

LGBTQIA+ communities in the fight to be seen, heard, and valued in Latinx society.

Machismo

Machismo is the term accepted in Latinidad for how men, predominantly Mexican men,

understand the characteristics created for them on how to behave, think, and act. Machismo has

transferred into all Latinx cultures and has connections to sexism, chauvinism, and violence

(Arciniega et al., 2008).

Marginalization

Marginalization is a form of oppression in which one group is directly silenced,

forgotten, and intentionally left out of participation in a particular setting (Young, 2011). For the

purpose of this study, Latino men, who have very few representations as educators in K–12,

often are not included in discussions about supporting their success.

Masculinity

Masculinity, as a term, creates expectation for how men behave, think, and act in gender

superiority over women and feminized men. Descriptions of masculinity including aggression,

social respect, strength, and sexual drive are used to create a dominant model in U.S. society

(Salter, 2019). Ultimately, these expectations are unattainable, which is why many “real men”

are fictional characters.

Patriarchy

Patriarchy ultimately refers to the intentional domination of men over women. According

to Pateman (1988), “the patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and

femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection” (p. 6).

Pedagogy

Pedagogy is the art and science of teaching students in education, in which a

knowledgeable educator passes down cultural knowledge and skills to novice learners and

enhances their understanding of the world (Hardman, 2008).

Stereotype Threat

A stereotype threat refers to an individual’s ability to accept and confirm negative

stereotypes about their group (Steele & Aronson, 1995).

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

All men support and perpetuate sexism in one form or another . . . men have been

socialized to passively accept sexist ideology. While they need not blame

themselves for accepting sexism, they MUST assume responsibility for

eliminating it.

–bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center

This chapter is intentionally organized using numerous works of literature and research to

build context for the masculinity and machismo identities Latino male educators navigate on a

daily basis. To understand how to best support Latino male educators with coded identities such

as manhood, mentor, masculinity, and machismo, a foundational baseline must be presented for

programs that support them. Latino men must navigate identity formation through a dominant

U.S. cultural society and their Latinidad. There are many differences in how Latino men

internalize identities. This study focused on highlighting Latino voices in the description of these

identities to further support organizational efforts to retain these men. This chapter is organized

through the following theoretical frameworks: (a) critical sociocultural theory and racial identity

development theory combined, (b) masculinity studies, and (c) Latino critical (LatCrit) theory.

These frameworks intentionally use theory to frame the literature that connects to the purpose of

this study. Afterward, the intersectionality of all frameworks is analyzed to create a theoretical

framework that supports critical masculinity consciousness of Latino male educators as a way to

engage further studies and programming efforts pertaining to this marginalized population.

The goal of this study was to provide insight and much needed support to the retention of

Latino male educators in schools, districts, teacher preparation programs, and any setting directly

supporting Latino men. However, the implications from this study do not need to translate only

into educational and schooling spaces. There is potential for the results to support multiple fields,

professions, and initiatives. Diversifying efforts in organizations requires more than just hiring

people to fill gaps, and research on effective retention initiatives can help support sustainability

for marginalized groups. Another important element to highlight is existing research and

initiatives have shown a plethora of programming tailored to Black male educators, which is

extremely important, and there is much knowledge to gain from these efforts in support of Latino

male educators. In conducting this research, men of color were too broad of a descriptive identity

marker to fully understand the scope of the problem in retaining Latino men.

Latinidad is not a monolith, and researchers have begun to understand how masculinity

and machismo intersect. Yet, these findings cannot be transferred into all ethnicities,

nationalities, and races in Latinidad. This inability to generalize has left a major gap in

understanding Latino male educator experience because Latinos identify in so many different

ways. Terms such as Hispanic, Latino, Chicano, Latinx, Latine, and all the Latin American

identifying nationalities play a huge role in how people begin to internalize who they are

(Gómez, 2020). This nuance in identity, mixed with U.S.-dominant culture, has created and

evolved versions of being that need to be highlighted to understand contemporary and historical

contexts for Latino men. This study used Latino as the connecting identity label with an

understanding of nuanced intersectionality all individuals have in their identities. Furthermore,

this study focused on cisgendered and heterosexual men given the extent of violence

heteronormative patriarchy has inflicted on women, children, and LGBTQIA+ members

(Chávez-Moreno, 2021a; Connell, 1987, 2005). As mentioned, there have been numerous efforts

to recruit, accept, and hire Latinos in programming and employment; however, there have been

very few efforts to deconstruct masculinity and machismo as part of their goals, which is what

this chapter and study highlight. This study presents a significant contribution to the research

literature by using Latino male educator voices as experts of their unique understanding of the

world as they begin to illuminate their levels of consciousness. The domains presented in this

chapter are as follows: (a) identity, (b) masculinity, (c) outcomes, (d) Latino studies, and (e)

critical masculinity consciousness.

Identity

Identity development is an evolution throughout the lives of human beings. People

become versions of themselves based on awareness they obtain from their own environment,

relationships they experience, questioning of unique perspectives and core beliefs, and healing

through learning and unlearning (Erikson, 1968). These lived experiences can affirm one’s

identity, or they can cause an individual to internally question who they are. This transformation

people go through is a constant change involving internal reprogramming and creation of a new

version of the individual (Chandler et al., 2003; Jennings et al., 2014). Identity development is a

complex process for all people, especially when society has created archetypes for gender, race,

socioeconomic status, and many other intersectional identities.

Because of these complexities, people create commitments to who they want to be.

Meeus et al. (2010) described this process in cycles. The first cycle is considered the identity

formation cycle in which young people make commitments to who they want to become through

constant internal and external negotiations. The second cycle, identity maintenance, allows for

deeper inner work to determine if choices affirm the initial commitments (Meeus, 2011). This

chapter first explores critical sociocultural theory, racial identity development theory, how

people are socialized to make certain choices and commitments to their identities, and whether

they are helpful or harmful to their identities. Before ever becoming educators, Latino men

experience constant stereotypes based on their identities and committing to these stereotypes can

be difficult.

Critical Sociocultural Theory

From an early age, people are programmed for how they are supposed to behave in their

environments. The current study focused on critical sociocultural theory as a lens to understand

how people interact, change, and remake themselves in their environments. Vygotsky

(1978/1997) theorized people are conditioned through social and mental interactions that have

been constructed from culture over time. These specific interactions, or artifacts, that are passed

down can evolve over time based on how they are influenced by the contemporary society in

which they currently exist (Lantolf, 2013). According to Lantolf (2013), “as with physical tools,

humans use symbolic artifacts to establish an indirect, or mediated, relationship between

ourselves and the world” (p. 1). Ultimately, Vygotsky argued a person’s mind develops through

natural, individual, and social interactions that lead a person to develop consciousness. Thus, a

key element of developing consciousness in young people is how they make meaning of the

world through social interactions.

People constantly interact with their world through word meaning and verbal thinking

because words are central to how thought is created, thus formulating consciousness (Lantolf,

2013; Mahn, 1999). This interaction is vital to understanding how language can influence the

ways people internalize how they are supposed to engage in the world. Young people are

meaning makers who are heavily influenced by culture and nature around them (Mahn, 1999).

Sociocultural theory describes semiotic mediation as the navigation of language and other

symbolic systems through which people begin to internalize culture (Vygotsky, 1978/1997).

From the birth, children are intentionally or unintentionally programmed to live up to versions of

identities dictated by home life, society, and schools.

From sociocultural theory, Moje and Lewis (2020) created critical sociocultural theory by

adding critical tenets of learning, power, identity, and agency to expand people’s consciousness.

Learning is a participatory act between individuals that allows learners to bring their knowledge

to the space and create new learning from others (Moje & Lewis, 2020). This act of learning and

unlearning occurs through discourse communities “that share ways of knowing, thinking,

believing, acting, and communicating” (Moje & Lewis, 2020, p. 41). These discourse

communities—or dialogical learning spaces—support trust building, creation of shared power,

and bridging multiple lived realities in the production of knowledge (Molina, 2015). According

to Moje and Lewis (2020), “learning thus involves both awareness of differences and

distinctions, and, ultimately, an act of subject formation, that is, identification with particular

communities” (p. 45). Learning is the internalization of ideas used to reformulate who an

individual was prior to the learning. This growth leads to an unlearning through active resistance

to what has been known, reevaluation of meaning, and co-construction of new discourses (Moje

& Lewis, 2020).

Through this learning and unlearning process, a new consciousness is formed by

remaking identities based on new knowledge, and people are able to create different versions of

themselves in different discourse communities (Moje & Lewis, 2020). Ultimately, this process

leads to new agency and a deeper understanding of purpose and meaning in regard to identities

and dismantling hierarchical power dynamics in society. The constant messaging young people

obtain plays a crucial role in how they will respond to the world they have been given. Critical

sociocultural theory gives a glimpse into how deconstruction and consciousness begin for people

and questions the impact it can have through the negotiation and renegotiation of identity. As

individuals learn about their identities, identity markers, like the U.S. construct of race, play an

important role in understanding which identities are formed internally or externally.

Racial Identity Development Theory

This study explored the intersectionality of identity, specifically how racial identity is

formulated, navigated, and understood through Latinidad. Racial identity directly connects to

critical sociocultural theory in that race is a major component of identity in U.S. society. Helms

(1990) described racial identity development theory as established beliefs, perceptions, and

affinity an individual has to a racialized group that evolves when they compare themselves to

other racialized groups. Tatum (2004) explained “given the dominant/subordinate relationship of

Whites and people of color in this society, however, it is not surprising that this developmental

process will unfold in different ways” (p. 2). Because Latinidad is not a monolith, every person

has a different relationship to how they racially identify given the othering that occurs in

dominant, white caste U.S. society.

A bigger dilemma is how an individual identifies with their background and proximity to

Latinidad. Census data from 2020 showed the second largest demographic group identified as

“some other race,” and more than 90% of people reported an identity of Latinidad (N. Jones et

al., 2021). These data indicate a persistent exploration of belonging and othering for a group that

has never fully aligned to a single race. As educators who identify as Latinidad enter the field to

serve a diverse population of students from different Latin American origins and multilingual,

multiracial, and multicultural backgrounds, educators need to fully grasp their own

intersectionality of identity.

Individuals who live in the United States have experienced ongoing tension around

identity and belongingness because of the colonization of race, racism, and imperialism. The

constant othering individuals experience depends on their proximity to whiteness, which brings

nuance to lived realities in the United States. Individuals with an identity in Latinidad constantly

live in a state of being a foreigner, in which they never fully belong in any spaces they enter

(Gómez, 2020; Huynh et al., 2011). As members of the Latinidad diaspora figure out where they

belong, they must understand they are conditioned through double colonization or multiple

colonialisms (Chávez-Moreno, 2021b; Gómez, 2018), namely the dual colonization of

Europeans in Latin America and the contemporary imperialist state in which they reside, the

United States (Chávez-Moreno, 2021a, 2021b; González, 2011). Race is a social construct

created in the establishment of hierarchy in the United States. Race can also be fluid as

acceptance of specific types of people, in proximity to whiteness, has gained approval by the

hierarchy and resulted in earned privileges.

Ferdman and Gallegos (2001) established Latino development occurs through an

understanding of similarities in a cultural group and how an individual is directly influenced by

socialization experiences of home life, school, peers, and the U.S. racialized caste system. In

addition, Ferdman and Gallegos presented the following lenses to describe how people identify

in relation to Latinidad: (a) Latino integrated (i.e., having a full understanding of racial

construction), (b) Latino identified (i.e., acceptance of Latinidad and white racial labeling

constructs), (c) subgroup identified (i.e., acceptance of multiple Latinidad races and having

proximity to a particular region or subgroup), (d) Latino as other (i.e., generic labeling to a

Latinidad affinity through ancestral heritage), (e) undifferentiated (i.e., assimilation to U.S.

imperial individualism through colorblind narrative), and (f) white identified (i.e., rejecting

Latinidad as a racial construct and full acceptance of whiteness in racial construct).

Understanding the power dynamics of racial identities is important for deepening critical

consciousness because they give more insight to the lived experiences and attachments Latino

male educators have regarding the intersectionality of their identities. Racial development theory

and critical sociocultural theory helped in providing understanding of the identities in this study,

leading to rich discussions, reflexivity, and, hopefully, healing.

Brain Science

Another area of identity formed early in life is gender. Conversations about gender

differences, such as physical, emotional, and intellectual differences, are common starting when

a pregnancy is announced. Studies have shown brains of male babies tend to have a larger

overall brain volume and larger specific brain regions, yet brain size alone is not an indicator of

intelligence, cognitive ability, or any specific skills or trait (Rippon, 2019). However, boys’

brains tend to culminate in development at 14.5 years of age whereas girls’ brains culminate

around 10.5 years of age. Researchers have stated this finding is not an advantage or

disadvantage in any way (Lenroot & Giedd, 2006; Rippon, 2019). In fact, brain scientists have

recommended 14-year-old boys should be learning what 10-year-old girls are learning in school

(Halpern et al., 2011). In a school environment, this rate of development could place boys at a

disadvantage because state learning standards dictate what they should be learning in their

specific grades. Unfortunately, schools have not adapted state standards and curriculum

according to gender or brain development because they have focused on equal access for all.

Standardization of schools does not benefit the different needs children have regarding their

cognitive abilities. Schools have perpetuated inequitable outcomes because of ableist,

compliance-based outcomes in terms of intelligence. Even though brain development and

capacity have shown no significant gender differences, society and the media have continued to

suggest notable differences based on gender. The nurturing element of child development must

be discussed as well.

Initial Interactions

The nature versus nurture debate in the explanation of child development has never been

settled. It is essential to note research findings on both sides of the argument to paint a full

picture of what parents and society need to support the development of children. As babies are

born and enter the world, differences in how they are treated can have an impact on

development. One study found mothers tend to talk to their girls from the time they are pregnant

until 11 months of age (K. Johnson et al., 2014) and communicate with boys through more

mobile and physical forms, which significantly reduces language communication and learning

opportunities with their parents (Fausto-Sterling et al., 2015). These findings supported a

discrepancy in the nurturing of boys versus girls. Because people use different language with

girls and boys, facial recognition can also be a factor in childhood development.

Another study found girls and adult women were better at recognizing and remembering

faces compared to men and boys (Herlitz & Lovén, 2013). This skill could be attributed to girls

receiving more eye-gazing opportunities than boys from the onset of life (Rippon, 2019).

Furthermore, other studies have shown how mothers tend to be more expressive with their

daughters, which may provide evidence showing girls are prepared to be more emotionally

attuned to their environments (McClure, 2000). From early on, adults are socialized to respond to

boys differently than girls, which may call into question whether boys are emotionally attuned.

By 4 years old, even with all the experiences named for girls, both boys and girls are

primed for social input (Wellman et al., 2001). Children have awareness of others’ emotions and

when people have a different perspective than their own. At 4 years old, boys and girls can be

both viewed as “tiny social workers” who want to be empathetic to everyone around them

(Rippon, 2019, p. 191). However, something happens at this stage. As boys get older, studies

have shown a huge decrease in empathy scores whereas girls’ scores keep rising. As children

enter middle school, boys and girls begin to fit social expectations of who they must be when it

comes to gender social norms (Michalska et al., 2013). Gender stereotypes perpetuated by

societal norms are expectations present every day.

Gender Norms

Children begin to understand gender messaging they obtain daily from the home and

outside world (Rippon, 2019). There are coded gender messages in books, toys, education,

media, jobs, and clothing, to name a few. Stereotypes, which are ways of being individuals are

conditioned to anticipate and predict, guide how individuals behave with a particular group of

people (Rippon, 2019). These stereotypes are embedded into children’s lives at the start of their

development. Toys are some of the first items people observe as being for boys or for girls. One

study discovered girls tend to believe Lego blocks are for boys and showed how much slower

girls were at construction-based problem solving (Shenouda & Danovitch, 2014). By

establishing which gender roles can do specific tasks, society gatekeeps opportunities for jobs in

science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), which are dominated by men

(Rippon, 2019).

In addition to toys, technology use among toddlers has increased. Data from 2013

showed 80% of 2- to 4-year-olds used digital phone media, which is filled with gender-based

advertisement algorithms for children (Rideout, 2017). With the constant messaging young

children receive daily, 4- and 5-year-olds have established which genders perform specific roles

in society based on how they play with their toys. Martin and Ruble (2004) found both boys and

girls know men can be police officers, firemen, lawn mowers, and barbecue grillers and can use

a tool like a hammer. In contrast, women are nurses and domestic housekeepers who wash the

dishes or do the laundry while wearing lipstick. Obviously, this strict adherence to gender-

assigned roles is a problem if society wants to diversify working fields and establish there are no

differences in capability based on gender.

Another problematic issue is the pink versus blue color divide. Up until the age of 2,

children do not have a preference for either color, and as they get older, boys start to reject pink

because of the gender labeling behind it (Zosuls et al., 2009). The pink evolution and marketing

scheme for girls has shown an increase in focus on STEM-based fields with standardized beauty

standards combined with an explosion of pink tools (Sherman & Zurbriggen, 2014). Girls are

encouraged to break gender stereotypes by playing more with cars, Legos, and toy trucks, yet 5-

year-old boys know if they played with toys considered to be feminine, their fathers would not

approve of those decisions (Freeman, 2003). A double standard of power has been established

from the onset.

K–12 Experience

As boys begin to navigate the world, society has already established how they should

behave. For the purpose of this study, the K–12 experience for Latino boys was reviewed to

understand how Latinos start to internalize messaging from their educational environments. For

Latino boys, society has already created a version of who they are.

Stereotyped From the Beginning

Latino boys and men have struggled in educational settings due to a lack of academic

identity obtained from their schooling experiences (I. Jackson et al., 2014; Milner, 2010; Romero

et al., 2009). Before Latino boys ever walk into their schooling spaces, terms such as at-risk,

disadvantaged, poor, underprivileged, dysfunctional, inadequate, and intellectually impaired

have been embedded for them through coded messages to educators (Campos, 2012). These

messages have stemmed from a historical eugenics movement that painted Latinos as genetically

deficient beings who should be segregated from white counterparts because they were only

meant for labor occupations (Terman, 1916; Yosso & García, 2021). Following this movement,

negative stereotypes of Latinidad focused on having large dysfunctional households, a lack of

access to the English language, and Latino families who do not assimilate to U.S. culture (Yosso

& García, 2021). It could be argued Latino boys have been set up for failure from the start given

the system has established lower expectations of their abilities. A stereotype threat involves

living up to negative associations pertaining to one’s identity (Bell et al., 2003). Seo and Lee

(2021) found Latino and Black boys experienced the most stereotype threat in a math classroom

pertaining to academic achievement. As discussed earlier, boys are taught to be better

mathematicians based on the toys they play with, yet when considering the stereotype threat

present in math classrooms, this math ability may only pertain to white boys and coded

messaging on racial superiority. Despite this deficit mindset for Latino boys, they still manage to

meet learning outcomes.

Gender Disparities

At the time of this research, Latina girls have outperformed Latino boys in almost every

academic category assessed in elementary and secondary schooling (Gándara & The White

House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics, 2015), even though both groups still

have some of the lowest high school and college graduation rates in the United States (Vasquez-

Salgado & Chavira, 2014). Latino boys (86.9%) and Latina girls (91.6%) increased their high

school graduation completion rates since 1980, yet Latino boys were twice as likely to drop out

and unenroll at school compared to white boys (Ryu et al., 2021). The experiences of both

groups have been vastly different with Latino boys more likely to receive harsher discipline

under zero tolerance policies including suspensions, expulsions, and juvenile detention referrals

than their white counterparts (Castillo, 2014). Latino boys are included in the school to prison

pipeline narrative given their experience of being pushed out of their classrooms. This harmful

stereotype produces trauma for Latino boys in a place that is supposed to provide safety for all

students (I. Jackson et al., 2014). Another aspect of their academic identity is how Latino boys

have been overrepresented in special education compared to Latina girls (Artiles & Trent, 1994;

Losen & Orfield, 2002; D. E. Thomas & Stevenson, 2009), which has directly impacted Latino

boys’ access to opportunities in terms of educational attainment. Conversely, Latino boys have

been underrepresented in advanced placement courses, gifted programs, and honors courses

throughout their schooling experiences (Noguera, 2008). In addition to dealing with the added

layer of stereotype threat, there is direct evidence Latino boys do not belong in K–12 schools

because society has already deemed their worth.

Given the existing gender disparities in K–12 schools, educators need to understand how

they are creating gendered biases and address them without taking away the progress Latina girls

have obtained in the setting (Crosnoe et al., 2008). Ultimately, there is a gender gap in academic

attainment in the United States, and educators need to focus on what they are doing to address

these disparities (Saenz & Ponjuan, 2009).

Masculinity

The socialization of gender is an identity marker that dictates how one is to behave or

resist in their environment. Masculinity studies have evolved over time, and there is a need for

collaboration with feminist and queer theories to actively dismantle heteronormative patriarchal

violence that has consistently held power over women and gender expansive folks (Singh, 2021;

Waling, 2019). Most masculinity studies focus on creating typologies to explain how men

behave without providing a full analysis of how they actively choose to engage in violent and

harmful norms (Waling, 2019). As Latino male educators enter a highly feminized profession,

their expectations of masculinity are at the forefront of how they are judged (Lara & Fránquiz,

2015). These educators have to navigate how they should or should not act regardless of whether

they cause harm. Men need more than just awareness about masculinity and its impact; they need

to engage in combating internalized oppressive behaviors that continue to have damaging effects

on society. This study focused on masculinity studies to add a counternarrative to past studies

and continue creating change in an archaic system that emboldens hegemonic masculinity as the

aspirational man.

Masculinity Studies

Masculinity studies have focused on exploring how men navigate the social conditions

from which they have benefitted. According to Waling (2019), masculinity focuses on

understanding the ways in which men behave in the confines of society and applying specific

typologies to affirm, sustain, or resist certain categorizations. Connell (1987) established

hegemonic masculinity to explain the power dynamics men perpetuate against women and

marginalized masculinities of men as a means to gain dominance over them. Typologies of

complicit, marginalized, and subordinate categorizations evolved to enhance the description of

where men could classify their masculinity, with most men trying to fit into hegemonic

masculinity (Connell, 2005). Posthegemonic masculinity has continued this trend of naming

categories of masculinity such as mosaic (Coles, 2008), inclusive (Anderson, 2010), and hybrid

(Bridges & Pascoe, 2014) to give reference to where men stand in these multiple masculinities

through their behaviors and lived experiences (Waling, 2019).

Most masculinity studies do not collaborate nor do they uplift the work of feminist

scholars. Berggren’s (2014) categorization of posthegemonic masculinity involves sticky

masculinity, which brings in poststructuralist and phenomenology feminist theoretical

contributions. Berggren (2014) noted, “Bodies are shaped by what they come into contact with,

by encounters that make ‘impressions’” (p. 244), which supported Ahmed’s (2004, 2006)

understanding of how people actively engage and resist the discourses around them.

Furthermore, bodies begin to orient themselves with sticky impressions that reveal what they are

actively carrying with them (Ahmed, 2004). The bodies mentioned are those of men and the

cultural norms they are actively negotiating with to portray or resist. For men to transform and

actively resist notions of manhood, they must directly combat their own decisions through

vulnerability and emotionality, which begins to change their understanding of the world. This

transformation can create tensions for men in how they show up and begin to deconstruct

masculinity because they are constantly moving between two worlds: manhood and selfhood

(Stoltenberg, 2000). Manhood symbolizes the world of power, strength, aggression, and

sexualization of women, whereas selfhood symbolizes a world of vulnerability, emotionality, and

social justice (Berggren, 2014; Stoltenberg, 2000). Sticky masculinity can be further defined as

an:

account of power, conflicting positioning as well as of lived experience. . . . While there

is flexibility and contradiction, this does not leave subjects unattached; the circulation of

norms stick to bodies, and the more masculinity is performed, the stickier it becomes.

(Berggren, 2014, pp. 246–247)

Ultimately, boys and men are already positioned in society as oppressors when they engage in

cultural norms of masculinity (Berggren, 2014). Men are socially constructed by masculinity,

which informs how they navigate in the world, yet masculinity is not the only discourse that

positions them or creates tension between the different versions of who they are (Berggren,

2014; Salisbury & Jackson, 1996).

Latino men must navigate westernized U.S. masculinity norms, machismo norms brought

from their specific nationalities, and Latinidad. The following section describes the different

definitions already created for Latino men, which show up in their experiences as young boys

and educators in K–12 spaces. Ultimately, to combat patriarchy, there needs to be active

resistance to cultural norms of masculinity while engaging in feminist practices geared toward

revealing authentic and vulnerable beings.

Masculinity Norms

Young boys come into the world with curiosity, empathy, and countless opportunities to

be the people they want to be. Masculinity is one of the first encounters with identity they

experience, and it has a long-lasting effect on how boys see themselves. Masculinity was

established to go against femininity; namely, male control and dominance over women provided

complete control of employment, wealth, and opportunities (Connell, 2005). Masculinity studies

began defining and describing men as strong, assertive, aggressive, intelligent, tough,

competitive, individualistic, thrill seeker, power hungry, stoic, risk takers, and anything

antifeminist (Carrigan et al., 1985; Connell, 2005; Goldberg, 1976; Levant, 1996; Levant &

Pollack, 1995; O’Neil, 1982). Because gender is a social construct, the fact masculinity holds

power through a fixed notion of what a “real man” should be is troublesome.

For masculinity to continue to hold power, it must protect its place using violence against

women or feminized men who do not meet this inherent definition (Connell, 1987). The levels of

masculinity used to describe how young boys and men should behave include the terms of

hegemonic, complicit, marginalized, and subordinate masculinities (Connell, 2005). The

archetypal form of masculinity is hegemonic in exerting dominance through strength, aggression,

race, and ableism (Connell, 2005; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). There are very few hegemonic

archetypes in society that are usually depicted by Hollywood action films, sports athletes, or

fictional characters. Many military, corporate chief executive officers, and business leaders

would fit a hegemonic archetype by the power they hold and how they lead through intimidation.

Men with complicit masculinity can be seen as the frontline troops because they uphold

hegemonic masculinity by cheering on men who are the athletes while also complying to the

nuclear family prerequisites of being married to a woman, being a father, and being the

breadwinner (Connell, 2005).

Men of subordinate masculinity are excluded from accepted forms of masculinity through

exclusionary practices that target gay and nonbinary men through religious rationale, legal policy

violence, physical street violence, and discrimination through economic opportunities. Lastly,

marginalized masculinities include men from different races who support the hegemonic

masculinity white male archetype. This can be seen in how Black athletes are glorified as

extremely masculine while, at the same time, Black men can be seen as rapists if they have

sexual relations with a white woman (Connell, 2005). Another example of the exclusion of

marginalized men is the constant policing of Black and Brown bodies in U.S. society and

continued colonization efforts of using slave labor among those incarcerated in the legal system,

increasing poverty in urban areas and maintaining a strong labor force of capitalist corporations

(Connell, 2005; Menakem, 2021). Men of color do not just have to deal with U.S. versions of

masculinity, they also have to navigate the meaning of their national and ethnic identity versions.

Machismo

This study focused on the experiences of Latino male educators. As noted in the context

presented, this study specifically focused on Latino men who live in the United States. Latino

boys have to deal with an overwhelming messaging of gender dynamics from a U.S. lens and

from a Latino lens. As they get older, Latino boys must navigate the U.S. version of masculinity

and machismo. There are some similarities to the described hegemonic masculinity mentioned

earlier; however, there are some evolutionary differences not mentioned in mainstream U.S.

society. Originally, machismo, which is a Mexican and Spanish gender construct, was

formulated on the basis of dominance over women (Paz & Kemp, 1961). Ultimately, a macho

hombre does not show any sign of weakness or emotions because doing so would constitute a

lesser version of manhood (Paz & Kemp, 1961; Torres et al., 2002). In addition, machismo has a

much more negative connotation of masculinity in the United States compared to hegemonic

masculinity created narratives. Quintero and Estrada (1998) found U.S.-created narratives

described machismo as dominating, authoritative, promiscuous, alcoholic, holding off all forms

of emotions, and employing oppressive actions toward women and children. Those coded

messages have led to an identity crisis for Latino men in the United States because they trap men

into showing up based on these definitions versus gender expansion (Pleck, 1981). Also, if

Latino men try to fit the hegemonic archetype norms of masculinity in the United States, they are

not generally accepted because they are meant for white men (Pollack & Levant, 1998). Other

descriptions of machismo include descriptors such as hardworking, bravery, pride, and protectors

of their home and families (Falicov, 1998). Further evolution of machismo has shown

characteristics such as emotional intelligence, agency, advocacy, self-confidence, and being

affectionate and caring toward themselves and others (Abaci et al., 1974; De La Cancela, 1991;

Falicov, 1998; Torres et al., 2002). Latino men must navigate through dominant U.S. masculinity

norms and the evolutionary elements of machismo that are driven through social, political, and

cultural elements of male identity (Torres et al., 2002).

Studying the multiple versions of machismo is just as important as understanding the

multiple masculinities described by Connell (1987). There is potential to develop an

understanding of what best supports Latino men in contemporary versions of gender roles.

Torres et al. (2002) studied Latino men’s definitions of what machismo means to them and how

they navigate the world. Five categories resulted from the study: (a) contemporary masculinity,

(b) machismo, (c) traditional machismo, (d) conflicted/compassionate machismo, and (e)

contemporary machismo. Men who described contemporary masculinity held a more egalitarian

familial perspective of gender roles and have an enhanced emotional intelligence that promotes a

harmonious living environment. In spending more time in the United States, men who affirmed

machismo held a less traditional view of gender roles; however, there are still elements of

competitiveness and familial obedience to traditional male hierarchy. Traditional machismo is a

traditional authoritarian definition of manhood that demands full familial obedience, traditional

gender dynamics, and very minimal emotional intelligence. Conflicted/compassionate machismo

holds authoritarian, traditional gender dynamics; is extremely competitive; shows more

compassion; and is often in conflict with life roles. Contemporary machismo maintains less

traditional demands of familial obedience, respect, and gender dynamics while also being more

emotionally expressive, balancing life roles, and varying levels of competition. Given these

versions of machismo, it is important to see whether different lived experiences of Latino men

show the evolution of social constructs for gender roles.

Because Latino men do not fit the hegemonic masculinity definition in the U.S. context

and are automatically ostracized from accessing the benefits of U.S. patriarchy due to racism,

machismo has evolved. This context provides a foundation for understanding what Latino boys

have to navigate early in life, which leads to varying definitions of what it means to be a man in

their present day lives. Schooling and education play a major role in academic identity for Latino

boys and men, which can transfer to their identities as educators.

Emotional Erasure

Another aspect of masculinity is the thought process behind emotionality. Due to

common expressions of masculinity and how strength and aggression are celebrated, men have

been conditioned to suppress their emotions (Gross & John, 2003). By suppressing their feelings,

men tend to exude more outward aggressive reactions (Brody, 1993). As this study focused on

Latino men, their relationships with emotions are quite different from the western archetype of

masculinity (Falicov, 2018). From an early age, Latino boys are publicly and privately shamed,

ridiculed, and humiliated as a form of behavior management, which results in negative

internalizations of emotional expression. Conversely, for Latino male adults, they have engaged

in affectionate behaviors to express their feelings toward their families, such as publicly kissing

other men, including their sons. Crying is still frowned upon in private and public spaces as an

expression of emotion, which is connected to western masculinity (Falicov, 2018). Thus, Latinos

have to navigate the masculinity of U.S. culture and the machismo from their country,

nationality, or specific region. On a positive note, although white men are seen as resistant to

therapeutic interventions, Latino men have displayed emotions, positive and negative, without

much hesitation in therapy sessions (Falicov, 2018; Garfield, 2010). This provides evidence that

therapeutic interventions can support Latino men in ongoing reflexive practices for their mental

wellness. Knowing this background about Latino men is helpful in understanding their

experiences as educators in K–12 spaces.

Latino Male Educators

Diversity recruitment efforts have focused on hiring Latino male educators to increase the

number of men who can support Latino boys and students of color. Because Latinidad does not

constitute one nationality, when diversifying a teaching staff in a particular community, schools

must know the cultural, national, and linguistic representation of the full community (Carey,

2020). As mentioned previously, Latino men have already been stereotyped, just as Latino boys

have been before they walk in the school building. Recruitment efforts place exaggerated

pressure on men of color to come and save young boys of color in the community, make them

fall in line with heteronormative beliefs they need tough love and harsh discipline, and support

students’ assimilation in compliance-based environments (Carey, 2020). However, as saviors,

these men still comply with heteronormative patriarchal expectations of manhood that continue

to communicate to young Latino boys what it means to be a “man” rather than deconstructing

masculinity (Singh, 2020). With these added layers, Latino men must navigate more obstacles as

educators, which questions whether they are set up to fail.

Disciplinarians

Once men of color become educators, they navigate a number of problems in their

teaching experience. Men of color are often labeled as disciplinarians for troubled boys or are

used as authoritative figures in the school environment (Brockenbrough, 2012; Cooper & Jordan,

2003; Singh, 2019). Latino men are already regarded as having obtained the skills needed to

support the lack of “Latino maleness” exhibited by Latino boys (Singh, 2018, p. 289). They are

the first line of defense when it comes to teaching troubled young boys because these boys are

sent to their classrooms prior to any administrative intervention (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). Due to

gendered societal norms that call Latino men to be aggressive and tough, these educators

experience a pressure to be performative rather than authentic (Singh, 2019).

With so much emphasis on discipline and culture, men of color are unable to obtain

professional development for their pedagogical and instructional skills, thus perpetuating the

same lack of academic identities they obtain as young boys (Griffin, 2018; Griffin & Tackie,

2017; Singh, 2019). Having more “successful” Latino male educators in classrooms would

support schools that struggle with controlling a population of students labeled as “trouble”

(Harper, 2015). In examining the Black male teacher experience, Brockenbrough (2015) found

Black men are exhausted in being used to push a hegemonic masculinity of being tough on Black

boys. Researchers can learn from studies about Black male educators because these same

stereotypes exist for Latino male educators and other men of color.

Mentorship

As advertisements for teaching jobs have focused on Latino men to come and “save”

Latino boys, programs must examine what they are asking men to replicate. According to

Merriam-Webster (n.d.), mentorship is defined as a relationship in which an individual passes

down skills, knowledge, and lived experiences to a mentee. This relationship can be problematic

if it passes on hegemonic masculinity and perpetuates cycles of antifeminist violence.

Latino men have to navigate the hegemonic masculinity notions of U.S. culture and the

machismo gendered notions of their own cultures (Connell, 2005; Torres et al., 2002).

Unfortunately, men of color are called to be mentors to fix problematic young boys (Dumas,

2016; Singh, 2019) when they have not been given the opportunity to understand the

problematic, oppressive ideology they have been engrained to follow in masculinity (Lara &

Fránquiz, 2015). Media have created a “societal curriculum” for Latinos depicting a legacy of

racism and inferiority of intelligence (Yosso & García, 2021, p. 311). Movies in educational

settings have portrayed Latino boys as aggressive, unintelligent students who need a violent male

protagonist to control them or a caring and nurturing female protagonist to save them (Yosso &

García, 2021). Ultimately, Latino boys have been portrayed similarly to Black boys as needing

saviors or needing to be “fixed” (Campos, 2012; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2021). Looking deeper

into the creation of male centered spaces, programs such as My Brother’s Keeper, which focuses

on recruiting men of color to be saviors, can be spaces of oppressive hegemonic masculinity

because there is no deconstruction of manhood in any of the program training (Crenshaw, 2014;

Singh, 2019, 2021). Furthermore, when advertising for the control of disciplining problematic

boys, hegemonic masculinity is allowed to thrive because that form of masculinity is accepted as

ideal manhood (Carrington & Skelton, 2003). As there are few male representatives in a school

community, it is difficult for Latino men to find success, and, without support, the diversity gap

will not improve.

Future Focus

This study has potential to add to the literature because masculinity and machismo have

continued to have categorical definitions of how men should identify. Critical machismo

consciousness is more expansive, and evolutionary reimaginations of masculinities can support

Latino male educators through the use of feminist and queer theory. One such evolution is for

Latino men to begin developing a Latino feminist masculinity (Hurtado & Sinha, 2008, 2016).

Latino feminist masculinity reconsiders the definitions of manhood through intersectional social

factors like race, ethnicity, social class, and, to a lesser extent, sexuality. These definitions

integrate cultural background, racial identity, social class, and, sometimes, the questioning of

heterosexual male privilege. Hurtado and Sinha (2008) expanded traditional masculine identity

and emphasized emotional connections, openness to change and help, collaboration, and comfort

with multiple social identities. Essentially, being able to redefine masculinity has enabled men to

embrace a broader range of human experiences, unbound by traditional gender roles, and

allowed them to be more than conventionally defined men (Hurtado & Sinha, 2008; Pleck,

1981). For Latino men, gaining empathy about women’s oppression can support the resulting

tension with masculinity/machismo values that dehumanize other genders (Hurtado & Sinha,

2016; Tajfel, 1981). This path could support Latino men in moving away and rejecting

masculinity/machismo norms and starting to fight for social justice on issues where they have

power to create change. If Latino feminist masculinity can be a newer version of masculinity,

then this study supports the creation of spaces that are catalyst moments for Latino men to

deconstruct their gender identity

Outcomes

Latino male students have struggled in their K–12 experiences because their identities

have been targeted through negative stereotypes. Latino men must navigate through multiple

worlds of being based on defined social constructs of race and gender. As they learn to navigate

those worlds, survival within the confines of school involves actively resisting negative

stereotypes created for them. The need for this resistance—to be seen, heard, and affirmed—

suggests society has already created the outcomes it expects from Latino boys and men.

Vanishing Latino

The concept of the “vanishing Latino” (Saenz & Ponjuan, 2009, p. 4) was first brought up

in the 2000’s because Latino boys and young men were not enrolling in college. Since then,

Latino boys and men have increased their rates of graduation from high school, enrollment in

college, and graduation with college degrees (Ryu et al., 2021). However, due to the COVID-19

global pandemic and economic recessive consequences, Latino men have been impacted in

educational attainment more harshly because of the added layers of responsibility in their lives

(Ryu et al., 2021). Latino male college applications and college attendance has been behind their

Latina counterparts. There has been a gender gap between Latino boys (59.4%) and Latina girls

(67.9%) enrolling in college at the age of 18 and 19 years old, the traditional transition phase

(Snyder et al., 2019). As both people from genders get older, it is more likely for Latina girls to

attend college later when they are adults compared to Latino boys (Ryu et al., 2021; Saenz &

Ponjuan, 2009). There are many factors why Latinos do not seek educational attainment given

how they are pushed out of schools early because of the negative internalization of their

academic potential (Romero et al., 2009; Saenz & Ponjuan, 2009).

Statistically, Latino boys and men who drop out of school are more likely to enter the

low-skill job workforce, are incarcerated as the second largest demographic in prisons, or obtain

combat positions in all branches of the military (NCES, 2020; Noguera, 2012; Saenz & Ponjuan,

2009). Latino men are less likely to be seen in science and business sectors of employment and

are more inclined to be a part of construction, natural resources, and maintenance occupations,

leading to less lifetime earnings as a result of fewer educational opportunities (Ryu et al., 2021).

Thus, it seems Latino men are primed to enter a labor force that maintains the current state of

society. As Latinos enter the workforce early in their lives, they also may need to provide for

their families, both financially and emotionally (Marin & Marin, 1991), which is intensified

during times of economic financial hardships (Ryu et al., 2021).

Educators would benefit from understanding the pressure Latino boys receive from their

families if they are the first in their family to attend and graduate from high school and college in

the United States. This aspect, known as familismo, is a cultural norm instilled in Latino boys,

both foreign born and native born, to be providers for their families because of a strong familial

bond that ties them to the perseverance of the entire family, rather than the individual (De Leon,

2005; Fry, 2005; Saenz & Ponjuan, 2009). This purpose has been bestowed upon them from an

early age regardless of input from the child themselves. Latino men still do their best to

persevere to obtain a college degree, yet Latino men have a lower percentage of obtaining a

bachelor’s degree because the lack of preparation they receive in their K–12 experiences lead

them to enroll in community colleges rather than 4-year colleges (Ryu et al., 2021; Saenz &

Ponjuan, 2009). Latino men in higher education settings lack necessary skills to navigate the

system; therefore, they revert to dropping out because these institutions replicate experiences

they had as young boys in K–12 classrooms. It is difficult for Latino boys and young men to

navigate institutions when they do not see representations of success for individuals who look

like them.

Lack of Representation

In their educational experiences, young Latino boys have lacked Latino men as teachers

(Saenz & Ponjua, 2009). In the United States in 2018, 8% of the teacher workforce identified as

Latino/a, with Latino men representing 2% of the entire teacher workforce (NCES, 2020). Latino

boys, Latina girls, and nonbinary students have not had cultural representation among

minoritized educators who would be more able to connect with the disparities their families face

in the community compared to teachers from different backgrounds (Saenz & Ponjua, 2009). An

opportunity for Latino male educators to mentor Latino boys has been missing from schooling

experiences, which would support the navigation of the educational system (Lahelma, 2000).

Boys of color tend to distance themselves from their educational institutions because there is a

void of male representation in their experiences (Carey, 2020). Despite this lack of

representation, the public school student population has been “browning” (Santa Ana, 2002, p.

67), as predictors of demographics have suggested the enrollment of Latino and Latina students

is on a continued rising trend. By 2029, 56% of all students in public schools will identify as

students of color (NCES, 2020). Thus, it is imperative diverse representation becomes a part of

recruitment and retention efforts.

Districts, schools, and teacher education programs are all supportive of diversifying the

teaching workforce by having more male teachers in the pipeline. Studies have shown academic

success for boys of color. Gershenson et al. (2018) found Black boys performed better

academically and had a reduced probability of dropping out of school when matched with a

Black male educator early in their elementary school experience. Another study focused on

same-gender programming of Black boys taught by Black male educators in the Manhood

Development Program at Oakland Unified Schools (Watson, 2014). Watson (2014) found

pedagogical advantages when Black men taught Black history, supported academic success, and

had high expectations for Black students in the classroom. Black male students had higher grade

point averages and were reading higher than male students not in this program (Watson, 2014).

Having male representation in the classroom has an effect on more than just academic

achievement. Men of color support boys of color when oppressive school policies are harmful to

their identities by mediating purposeful interventions instead of punitive disciplinary action

(Allen, 2015; Carey, 2020; Pabon, 2016). Some men of color display more playful and

restorative behaviors than disciplinary enforcement archetypes, which results in more supportive

and caring role modeling (Allen, 2015; Brown, 2009; Carey, 2020). Carey (2020) amplified the

voices of boys of color and found boys wanted more male representation in their school because

it garnered connection, bonding through informal conversations, representation, and shared

experiences related to their own lives. Men of color add value to schools and to the student

experience if they themselves are valued, affirmed, and supported.

Identity Crisis

The socialization of masculinity comes with layers of questioning identity that men of

color had not considered before entering the teaching profession. When Latino men enter a

highly feminized profession, their manhood is questioned constantly. Allan (1994) called this an

anomaly. Regardless of marital status, there is an element of suspicion as to why Latino men

teach (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015). Even when they fit the heteronormative masculinity archetype,

Latino men are still not fully trusted to teach young children because of the negative stigma of

homophobia in the field (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Sumsion, 2000). Because the teaching

profession is a highly feminized environment, hegemonic masculinity does not fit into the

educator identity structure (Allan, 1994). When Latino men opt to teach particular grade levels,

particularly in elementary education, societal biases may stereotype and label them as gay or

feminized versions of masculinity (Skelton, 2003). Unfortunately, the labeling they receive about

perceived masculinities can escalate to accusations and violence, specifically associated with

pedophilia (Skelton, 2003). Conversely, men are heavily recruited for secondary educational

environments versus elementary environments because they are assumed to be less nurturing to

younger youth (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Mills et al., 2004). This added layer of identity is

worrisome and creates tensions in the daily experiences for Latino male educators.

When presented with questioning their manhood, Latino male educators emphasize

hegemonic masculinity actions to navigate any accusatory remarks about their identities, which

has potential to shape youth perceptions that all men should conform to these behaviors (Lara &

Fránquiz, 2015). With the constant negotiation of identity in every interaction, Latino men have

reported experiencing an identity crisis and leave the profession twice as fast as Latina educators

(Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Partee, 2014). Latino boys and Latino male educators are struggling in

K–12 settings, which provides evidence in support of creating programming to address the

myriad of problems presented thus far.

Latino Studies

The final theoretical framework used to enhance the review of literature and research on

educational studies for Latinos is LatCrit theory (Arriola, 1998). This study focused on the

experiences of Latino male educators in K–12 spaces and how they navigate their identities

through race, gender, and class. Centering their voices and perspectives as educators can support

future programming efforts in their respective spaces.

LatCrit Theory

Critical race theory (CRT) is focused on issues of race, power, and class to disrupt all

spaces in a white hegemonic formalized system (A. Martinez, 2014). As Latino male educators

enter the education field and notice they are marginalized in the K–12 environment, it is

important to focus on racial disparities in their experiences (Carey, 2020). The U.S. system has

methodically shifted over time to a more sophisticated form of racism that uses the weaponry of

language, laws, structures, and perspectives (M. Jackson, 2009). More importantly, if race issues

are dismissed, institutional racism is guaranteed to continue and thrive (Olson & Fazio, 2003).

Five central tenets of a framework using CRT include (a) the centrality and intersectionality of

race and racism and multiple subordinating examples, (b) challenging dominant ideologies, (c)

commitment to social justice, (d) highlighting experiential knowledge and its importance, and (e)

using transdisciplinary perspectives (Solórzano & Yosso, 2001).

To understand U.S. culture, Latino male educators must understand racism is central or a

“normal” part of society, and it is so ingrained that it looks ordinary to anyone (Solórzano &

Delgado Bernal, 2001). More importantly, Latino male educators need to think critically about

racial discrepancies in the lack of success young Latino boys have in K–12 settings and whether

they are perpetrators in that lack of success (Crosnoe et al., 2008). Illuminating voices of Latino

male educators serves as active resistance to the dominant narrative in U.S. society.

Counter-hegemonic storytelling or counternarratives began as part of CRT as a form of

storytelling from an oppositional view or perspective (Delgado, 1989). Solórzano and Delgado

Bernal (2001) mentioned counterstories from people of color must be recognized and

acknowledged as a critical understanding of racism. If counterstories are not a part of obtaining

knowledge, then “majoritarian” stories continue to perpetuate the white dominant legacy of

racial privilege and hegemony for white people, white men, heterosexuals, and the upper class

(Yosso et al., 2004). Furthermore, stories from people of color, women, and marginalized groups

would continue to be defined as bad, whereas white, upper-class stories would be defined as

good (Yosso et al., 2004). A. Martinez (2014) noted a methodology of CRT includes storytelling,

family history, biographies, cuentos, testimonios, and counterstories from people of color.

Overall, counterstories are used to dismantle “majoritarian” stories or “master narratives” to

empower marginalized racial groups (A. Martinez, 2014). This form of resistance in

understanding racist U.S. society and history can live in any structure as there are always

marginalized voices in a given setting. With Latino male voices constituting 2% of the teacher

workforce, their voices resist the dominant narrative of teacher experience in K–12 schools.

As CRT has expanded into education, LatCrit theory has emerged as a developing

framework (Arriola, 1998). With a focus on Latino and Latinx perspectives, the purpose of using

LatCrit is to expand on the damage caused by white hegemonic structures in society and how

they impact multiple identities (Iglesias, 1997). LatCrit enhances the perspectives of Latino men

by theorizing where the intersectionalities of race and racism meet with other forms of

oppression such as classism and sexism (Solórzano & Yosso, 2001). Furthermore, a LatCrit

framework in education hyper analyzes how schooling environments oppress and silence versus

affirm and empower Latino and Latinx students, teachers, and community members (Solórzano

& Yosso, 2001).

Supporting Latino Boys and Men

As a researcher, it has been difficult to identify Latino programming efforts that retain

educators. Therefore, this review presents literature on Black male initiatives that have been

created to help retain men of color in the teaching profession. R. Jones et al. (2019) examined a

program that actively recruited Black boys in high schools, helped them apply to a teacher

preparation program, and supported these young men in college and postgraduate studies.

Clemson University’s Call Me MiSTER (CMM) cohort teacher training program recruits and

supports Black male students using living-learning communities, leadership development and

mentoring opportunities, summer internships, workforce development, and community

engagement (R. Jones et al., 2019). MiSTER stands for mentors instructing students toward

effective role models (R. Jones et al., 2019). Since 2004, 85% of CMM’s 250 graduates, or

MiSTERs, have remained teachers and administrators in K–12 settings, increasing South

Carolina’s Black male educator presence by 90% (R. Jones et al., 2019). Intentionality of

retention efforts has been key for CMM and has led other institutions to replicate the program,

which has expanded to 25 higher educational institutions in South Carolina and other universities

across state lines (R. Jones et al., 2019). Programs like CMM are important to learn from given

their success in the retention of Black male educators both in university programming and after

obtaining teaching jobs.

L. Rodríguez et al. (2013) recommended a similar program be created for Latino men.

The four Latino men who graduated from the same graduate degree program at Harvard

University argued the importance of providing structures in programming and creating a cultural

mind shift in beliefs of the people being served. Latino men need (a) institutions to dialogue with

them about their experiences, (b) quality relationships with their teachers, (c) a mentorship

program with other Latinos who have been successful in the system, (d) internships in the

professions they want to pursue, and (e) programs to enhance their academic skills (L. Rodríguez

et al., 2013). Currently, no program has been created for Latino male educators with all the

elements listed in the CMM programming. However, initiatives across the country exist in

individual districts and schools that focus on supporting retention efforts for men of color.

Mentorship is an important element in retention programs for men of color. Project

Mentoring to Achieve Latino Educational Success (MALES), out of the University of Texas at

Austin (UT-Austin), has focused on gathering contemporary and relevant research to support

Latino men in education, providing a student mentoring program to retain Latinos in college and

insight to state and local officials on best practices to support their success (Sáenz et al., 2015).

The Project MALES student mentoring program has impacted Latino middle, high school, and

college students directly by matching them with a trained Latino mentor from UT-Austin who

can support their retention in all levels of education (Sáenz et al., 2015).

Another program for supporting Latino students—Encuentros Leadership College

Preparatory Academy—was created by Latino community leaders. The Encuentros program

focused on the success of Latino boys through a culturally relevant and healing centered

curriculum that has improved self-esteem, worthiness, agency, and confidence (Quintanilla,

2017). Since the inception of the program, 100% of the participating Latino men have graduated

high school, 97% have enrolled in college after graduation, and 75% have advanced into a

master’s degree (Quintanilla, 2017). Encuentros leadership has also expanded to provide father–

son workshops and high school ethnic studies courses while enhancing the overall grade point

average and school attendance for Latino boys in San Diego County.

The programs described have been successful because of collective efforts to support

Latino male students in a community. Thus, the current study relied on the understanding of

recommendations for intentional mentorship and creating a sense of belonging in educational

spaces. The current study further sought to expand these notions by critically examining gender

consciousness in regard to the hegemonic masculinity norms enacted by society and schools and

learning from Latino male educators’ voices regarding what would support their retention in K–

12 schools.

Reciprocal Love and Ethos of Care

Programming efforts must consider co-created spaces designed for men to be human, to

be vulnerable, and to experience the power of love. As there are few Latino male educators in

education, it is important to create a space focused on the social, emotional, and pedagogical

(i.e., academic) success of every man in the cohort. Reciprocal love is a deep connection to one’s

love for self and how that is linked to another human being (I. Jackson et al., 2014). More

importantly, this kind of love is instilled in a community and nurtured to grow and flourish by

understanding a deeper purpose to replicate it for future generations (I. Jackson et al., 2014). An

ethos of care is the personal responsibility an individual has for others in their community,

meaning others’ success is also success for the entire community (I. Jackson et al., 2014). As

men are socialized to create a hegemonic masculinity, heteronormative role in society, it is

important to dismantle patriarchal archetypes through intentional fostering of deep relationships

in which men can be vulnerable, build trust, and heal.

Circulo y La Cultura Cura

Circulo, or community circle, is an indigenous practice used in restorative justice

practices to increase community, healing, and belonging (Winn, 2018). Circulo mixed with La

Cultura Cura emphasizes how men must connect with their cultural and ancestral roots to heal

(National Compadres Network, 2021). La Cultura Cura suggests all beings are sacred and have a

sacred purpose to use their culture to bring balance, belonging, and connection (Carrillo & Tello,

2008; Tello, 1998). This healing-centered approach moves away from trauma-informed work.

Because deficit-based stereotypes of young Latino boys and Latino male educators have been

prevalent, using indigenous ancestral practices can support healing by uplifting the sacredness of

every person in the space. Healing-centered engagement focuses on Latino male educators

making meaning of the world, gaining awareness, and establishing their purpose for engaging in

the work as social justice educators (Ginwright, 2018). Healing is a continuous journey with no

set culmination point. Because masculinity has created a culture in which showing emotion is

discouraged, mental health support has continued to have a negative stigma for men. As a result,

more research needs to show the benefits of healing for men to make it a mainstream habit.

Latino Men in Therapy

Dealing with a constant identity crisis by navigating the separate worlds Latino men

encounter can be a difficult experience. Contemporary Latino men understand the nuance in

social constructions of masculinity and machismo and have become reflexive about what they

have experienced and what actions they perpetuate (Falicov, 2018). With this sense of well-

being, both internal and external, Falicov (2018) created a therapeutic social constructivist plan

to support Latino men in unpacking their relationship with masculinity and machismo. Falicov

used the following evaluative treatment tools: (a) the multidimensional ecological comparative

approach, (b) concepts of shame and humiliation in the cultural gaze of others, (c) deconstruction

of internalized dominant gender discourses, (d) discovery of positive cultural and personal

constructs of masculinity, and (e) use of movies in therapy with Latino clients. Using these

methods, Latino men can begin to challenge the intersectionality of their identities through

therapy in support of deconstructing masculinities that:

entrap them and discover alternative cultural narratives . . . space for dialogue,

reflection, and choice among various conceptions of masculinity as portrayed in

the client’s own life, his family and friends, and in the larger culture, such as film

characters. (Falicov, 2018, p. 326)

Latino men can use therapy to begin transforming, deconstructing, and healing from the

experiences they have had throughout their lives. The goal is to destigmatize therapy and

advertise it as a form of wellness, coaching, and self-discovery.

Critical Machismo Consciousness

As discussed in this literature review, this study used the components of critical

sociocultural theory combined with racial identity development theory, masculinity studies, and

LatCrit theory to construct critical masculinity consciousness and deepen critical consciousness

of gender for Latino men. Critical consciousness, or conscientizacão, is defined as not just being

in the world, but also engaging in it by developing an awakening to what is happening in the

environment (Freire, 1994). Danielewicz (2014) focused on how the act of becoming self-

conscious can lead a person to deeply understand who they are in relation to their social

environments, which creates an awareness of how they are socially influenced and how they

behave in that society. As Latino male educators have identified having experiences with identity

crises through internal and external notions of gender, this study explored the possibility of

obtaining critical masculinity consciousness as a support structure in retention efforts. Figure 1

displays the theoretical framework for this study.

Latino men have been socially constructed through masculinity and machismo, which has

led them to engage in or resist oppressive hegemonic structures of gender. As a result, Latino

boys and men have been constantly stereotyped in their experiences as students and K–12

educators (Singh, 2018). Hiring initiatives have focused on recruiting more Latino male

educators, yet there has been no mention of the problematic notions of masculinity these men

have been asked to replicate for themselves and for the young Latino boys in schools. Because

Latino men represent a small number of educators in any community, few affinity spaces exist in

which they can process what has occurred. Retention efforts, programming, and initiatives to

support Latino male educators can use therapeutic programming elements to deconstruct

masculinity and machismo and enhance their critical masculinity consciousness (Falicov, 2010;

Singh, 2021).

Therapy is a vital component for Latino men to process, reflect, and heal when learning

and unlearning about their lived experiences and stickiness with masculinity and machismo. The

support of feminist theory, accountability, emotionality, and healing can lead to transformations

in how Latino men successfully navigate the world they have inherited (Waling, 2019). Latino

men have a responsibility to dismantle oppressive structures of masculinity and machismo and

demonstrate agency to support a more inclusive environment in every space (Berggren, 2014).

This study aimed to use Latino men’s voices to inform future research studies and retention

efforts and not replicate deficit-based stereotypes of Latino men in their environments.

Circulos Enfocados

As a researcher, it was important to me to have Latino male educator voices at the center

of this study. These men were experts in how they have internalized and navigated their unique

intersection of identities. Focus groups, or group interviews, provide a space in which individuals

come together to dialogue and interact (Kitzinger, 1995). Instead of a general interview protocol

in which each participant is asked to answer particular questions, a focus group encourages

participants to respond to each other in the moment, ask questions, exchange anecdotes, and

build on other participants’ points of view (Kitzinger, 1995). This method can be useful in

reflexive exploration of how people behave, how they think, and why they think in a particular

manner. For this study, circulos, or community circles, were an added component to this

structure wherein norms are set regarding how participants interact, engage, challenge, and

support each other’s perspectives. Participants support the co-construction of these norms and

support the facilitator in holding the group accountable. To promote trust, belonging, and

affirmation, community circle questions bring in participants’ identities, their unique stories, and

their roots. The resulting vulnerability, trust, and transparency are necessary as topics become

more intense based on the themes discussed. The intention is not to (re)traumatize participants

but to provide a space in which their authenticity is celebrated, their stories are heard, and they

are able to dialogue about topics they generally do not have an opportunity to discuss (Dilshad &

Latif, 2013). This methodology is further explained in the next chapter of this dissertation.

Summary

This chapter presented relevant literature and research to provide an understanding of

Latino men’s lived experiences in K–12 schooling environments. This understanding supports

the development of theory to improve retention of Latino men by supporting their critical

masculinity consciousness. This research study addresses a critical need to move beyond the

typologies of masculinity and machismo to describe where men situate themselves and

collaborate with feminist theoretical studies to enhance male agency and emotionality as they

purposefully engage with structured gender norms.

By establishing a critical masculinity consciousness, Latino men have the potential to

navigate their identities through authenticity, vulnerability, and agency, which can lead to more

inclusive advocacy for themselves and for the young people they teach. There is a need for more

research on how deconstruction of masculinity and machismo impacts Latino men in the spaces

they navigate. Latinidad is not a monolith; however, even with the evolutionary pathway of

identities and how they all intersect, Latino men intentionally choose ways of being and

interacting with the world that are harmful, violent, and oppressive toward women, LGBTQIA+

folks, and children. A reframing of positive and healthy formations of consciousness through

mental wellness research, literature, and studies can support the creation of programming that

directly supports inclusive gender spaces for all. Societal messaging has negatively stereotyped

Latino men as a problem for far too long, and further research needs to use their voices as asset-

based co-constructors for new programming to help other Latino men.

The research detailed in this chapter provides important context to the issues facing

diversity hiring in K–12 schools for Latino men. By gaining a full understanding of what these

men are dealing with on a daily basis, retention efforts can provide supportive measures to

increase proximity to and interaction with marginalized demographics. The constant othering in

U.S. society takes a toll on all individuals, and communal supportive measures can support

processing, awareness, and healing so Latino men feel they belong. This study focused on

centering Latino male educator voices as experts and historians of their lived experiences as

teachers by humanizing the constant shifting in their identities due to a multitude of social

constructs. By learning from them, this study aimed to make significant contributions to the

limited research on Latino male educators that centers their voices through consciousness.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

They are heretofore untold stories of courage, resilience, pain, and struggle. They

are their stories. They are my story. . . . They provide a way to gain understanding

and to aim for transformation and change toward a pedagogy of liberation.

–Margarita Machado-Casas, Narrating Education of New Indigenous/Latino

Transnational Communities in the South

This research study focused on the lived experiences of Latino male educators. This

dissertation is their words, their lived experiences, their reflections, and, more importantly, their

vulnerability regarding the struggle of engaging in internal and external consciousness work.

Freire (1998) referred to the work of understanding one’s self and the surrounding world as

conscientizacão, which involves not just being in the world but engaging in it by developing an

awakening to what is happening around an individual. As a researcher, it was important for me to

model vulnerability by telling my story and experience from my perspective before I asked any

questions of participants. My intention was to build connection, to bring up past experiences, and

to name my experience as just one example. Ultimately, I wanted to showcase how I would have

benefited from a group like this, one in which I could be vulnerable about my insecurities, my

traumas, and the constant negotiation of my identities. A goal of this study was for Latino male

educators to reflect on their identity development through an intentional dialogic space rooted in

their lives, experiences, and truths to (a) foster affinity with other Latino male educators who

have similar experiences, (b) learn from one another through dialogue, and (c) notice how these

dialogic spaces can foster development.

As such, this research focused on understanding the construction and deconstruction of

identity through the lens of masculinity and machismo and through the negotiation of how Latino

male educators think and behave in their K–12 spaces based on gender norms. Identities for

Latino men are often influenced by heteronormative gender norms that perpetuate stereotypes of

“being a real man” through U.S. and Latinidad intersectionalities (Singh, 2020, 2021). Latino

male educators are often stereotyped once they walk into a school building as being

authoritative, a disciplinarian, a role model, a mentor, and a savior of Black and Brown boys

(Allan, 1994; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Mills et al., 2004; Partee, 2014; Singh, 2021; Sumsion,

2000). However, this study centered the voices of Latino male educators using circulos

enfocados to gain insight on their lived experiences in their respective K–12 spaces. These

spaces created opportunities to foster discussions among heterosexual cisgendered men by

providing space to explore deep consciousness topics. The specific focus of this study was on

gender because of its role in the construction of identity or identity development of heterosexual,

cisgendered men. My work built on Waling’s (2019) call for men to interrogate masculinity

beyond acting a certain way and how it intentionally has focused on internal and external harm.

More importantly, Waling (2019) called researchers to consider two things: “the positives or the

pleasures in engaging with particular forms of masculinity when framed as a negative and

therefore oppressive structure, and how men negotiate such engagement through a consideration

of their agency and emotional reflexivity” (p. 103).

Circulos enfocados were used as an opportunity to show Latino male educators a

different way to interact. Delicacy and nuance in interactions with Latino male educators in the

circulos enfocados was necessary to reframe, deconstruct, and enhance healthy forms of

masculinity through agency and emotional reflexivity. It was not my intention to make Latino

male educators feel their gender identities are negative. Instead, the intention was for these

Latino male educators to find a safe and brave space in which to explore their lived experiences

with gender and how gender has affected and influenced the understanding of their present

identity.

Masculinity in this study was framed by the duality of negotiating intersectionalities

between U.S. masculinity norms and machismo Latinidad norms for Latino male educators. Key

to this study was understanding that social construction of multiple identities are at play because

of a constant state of othering in the United States. For Latinidad, there are layers that contribute

to the social construction of identities. Among these layers is the duality of double colonization:

colonized within European Latin American imperialism and the contemporary imperialist state

of the United States (Chávez-Moreno, 2021a, 2021b; González, 2011). An individual who

identifies through a Latinidad identity may internalize the perspective of being a perpetual

foreigner in the United States, which means they never feel a sense of belonging in any space

because that individual is always considered the other (Chávez-Moreno, 2021b; Gómez, 2020).

In terms of gender, Latino male educators must also navigate the challenge of being one

of the few, if not the only, Latino men in their school building (NCES, 2020). Being one of the

only men in the school building can lead Latino male educators to feel isolated and siloed as they

navigate their gender identities (Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh, 2019, 2020). My hope was to

begin to deconstruct masculinity/machismo and reconstruct a more inclusive definition of gender

expansiveness beyond the stereotypical heteronormative definitions and add to the spectrum of

multiple masculinities in the research field. My particular focus was how Latino men navigate,

reflect, and dismantle oppressive masculinity norms through the particular medium of sharing

their stories with other Latino men. By providing spaces for Latino male educators to engage,

confront, and reimagine issues of masculinity, I hoped this work could lead to healing, joy, and

reimagination as they co-construct a vision of progressive masculinity/machismo.

My Ongoing Journey

My particular experience in this country has been consistent with otherhood, which has

made me feel I never truly belonged in any setting (Molina, 2015). The consistent reminders that

I am different and must have a rationale for why I exist in this space and time and the constant

frustration with deficit-based language of my identities have made me struggle. This struggle has

led me to question whether I truly belong in any location because there was nothing collective

about humanity.

My mental health has been affected by an ongoing internal battle of feeling I was enough,

of being told I had to act a certain way, and never living up to everyone’s expectations of me. I

never had the language, the coping strategies, or the outlets to heal when I was younger nor when

I entered the world to begin my professional career. My experience of being a Latino male was

based on other people defining who I was, living up to expectations I never enjoyed or

questioned, and feeling there was always something missing to truly be authentic. I felt like an

actor in a role I was never meant to play.

As a Latino male educator, I was constantly asked to represent the male or boy

experience for Latinidad in the communities I served. This expectation was an added layer to my

responsibilities, which included supporting the discipline of Latino boys, being the model of

what success looks like, and explaining why boys act or behave a specific way. I was

dehumanized by people who questioned my intelligence, questioned my motives when a third-

grade female student gave me a hug, and questioned my classroom culture practices because

students “talked too much.” Too many times I was considered the unicorn in the room because I

was one of the few Latino men who stayed in the profession long enough to see success. Success

meant conforming to masculinity norms, disciplining young boys who were negatively labeled,

and withholding my comments about instruction because, as one white female administrator

stated, “Latino men don’t know what they are talking about.” These macroaggressions

(Solórzano & Huber, 2020) were constant, and I worried about the version of myself people were

seeing. My experiences as an educator provided the first feedback on how I should respond to

people, how my face was perceived, and how my sarcastic humor was a human resource related

issue. My feedback was tied to my personality, not my teaching pedagogy.

Once I was accepted into a doctoral program, the purpose had already been set for my

research because I had lived through what the literature explored. This research study was close

to my heart because I have grown so much from intentional proximity to healing with therapy,

being coached by men who have deconstructed and reimagined masculinity, being in proximity

to feminist femtors, and gaining consciousness by understanding the historical experience of

groups that are marginalized. A femtor is “a mentor who identifies as a woman and can offer a

woman’s perspective, support, guidance, and knowledge” (Lucht, 2022, p. 7). I have shared this

story as a way to connect to readers. I wanted to be careful about sharing my story with Latino

male educators so I would not influence or superimpose my experiences onto them. Also, I

wanted to be vulnerable about my experience and center my experience with

masculinity/machismo in the hope that Latino male educators would feel brave and safe in these

spaces to share their experiences.

Research Methods

Rooted in the theoretical framework of LatCrit, masculinity studies, critical sociocultural

theory, and racial identity development theory, I wanted to use a method that supported the

voices of Latino male educators by honoring their stories and elevating their perspectives (Cruz,

2012; Ginwright, 2018; I. Jackson et al., 2014). Human identities are nuanced, and I did not want

to focus on one specific theory given the intersectionalities constantly present in life. LatCrit

focuses on Latino experiences through multiple intersectional identities (Huber, 2010; Iglesias,

1997; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001). For this study, I focused on race, sex, and gender of Latino

male educators and the nuances of how they navigate and unpack these identities. Given the

power dynamics of sex and gender through a patriarchal lens, I wanted to understand how

current Latino male educators describe their experiences as marginalized educators in a field

dominated by women. In terms of masculinity studies, I wanted to expand the conversation and

dialogue beyond the constant stereotypical labeling used in research such as hegemonic,

subordinate, sticky, mosaic, hybrid, and others (Abaci et al., 1974; Ahmed, 2004; Anderson,

2010; Berggren, 2014; Bridges & Pascoe, 2014; Coles, 2008; Connell, 2005; De La Cancela,

1991; Falicov, 2010; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). My goal was to showcase the spectrum

of masculinity by highlighting Latino men’s lived experiences and how they use their identities

intentionally or express their identities unintentionally. I hoped having Latino men share what

this gender expansiveness can look like through their discussion could support future research on

the potential of multiple masculinities exploration. As a researcher, having Latino male educators

share their variety of experiences is important to me because I have been labeled or placed in a

box in almost every space and interaction I have navigated in the United States. I hoped to

showcase how all Latino male identity experiences are different, nuanced, and important to

understand.

Critical sociocultural theory supports my study in co-creating dialogic spaces with Latino

male educators where there is trust, shared power, and multiple perspectives from which to

engage in this sensitive topic (Moje & Lewis, 2020; Molina, 2015). Certain conditions, such as

growth points and growing edges, are necessary in these dialogic spaces for Latino men to

receive feedback about their identities, which may cause cognitive and emotional dissonance as

they reimagine a new way of understanding their masculinity/machismo (Drago-Severson &

Blum-DeStafano, 2018; K. E. Johnson & Golombek, 2016; Molina, 2021). Through these

dialogic spaces, learning and unlearning of critical consciousness is intentional as it relates to

sex, race, and gender of Latino male educators.

Last, being a researcher who is racialized, racial identity development theory was

important to include in this study’s framework because everyone has a different relationship to

their race. Creating a racial and gender affinity space for Latino male educators allowed for the

unpacking of cultural beliefs, ideas, and perceptions of race. Research has shown, and I was

intentional to showcase this point, Latinidad is not a monolith in experiences of all intersectional

identities when it comes to race and nationality (Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Gómez, 2020;

Huynh et al., 2011). My hope was to allow participants to display perceived understandings of

their identities and how they navigate them. All these theories guided my research and work to

support Latino male educators in gaining critical machismo consciousness through the

intentionality of these dialogic spaces, circulos enfocados, which are defined later in this chapter.

Research Questions

The following research questions guided my research study:

1. In what ways do Latino male educators understand their machismo and how it

impacts their day-to-day lives in their educational settings?

2. In what ways do Latino male educators disrupt heteronormative patriarchal standards

of masculinity and machismo in their own beliefs and actions?

3. In what ways do Latino male educators acquire knowledge and skills in their

teaching and leadership practices to help them remain and thrive in their educational

profession?

Critical Qualitative Case Study

The methodological approach used for this study was a critical qualitative case study.

Case studies are used to explore a topic of interest or phenomenon (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Stake,

1995; Yin, 2017). Mixed with constructivist ideology, a critical qualitative case study recognizes

people have their own unique ways of understanding the world (i.e., subjective), while also

considering there are aspects that have more universal understandings (i.e., objective; Baxter &

Jack, 2008; Crabtree, 1999). My approach was to center and recognize how multiple perspectives

(i.e., pluralism) come into play without thinking everything holds equal weight in knowledge

(i.e., relativism). This study emphasized an ongoing interaction between how things are seen and

what is actually being observed (i.e., subject and object). Yin (2017) asked researchers to

consider a case study approach when aiming to uncover underlying conditions relevant to a

specific phenomenon. In this study, the phenomenon explored was how Latino male educators

navigate their K–12 spaces through their gender identities of masculinity/machismo.

In addition, Stake (1995) focused on an instrumental case study type, which supported

my interest in achieving a specific goal beyond understanding the case itself. My goal was to

provide insights on the broader issue of retaining Latino male educators. As a researcher, my role

was to support a greater community aiming to add to and refine present understandings about the

phenomenon of gender identity navigation for Latino male educators using an approach not yet

fully explored. Meredith (1998) identified three strengths of a case study design: (a) the

phenomenon can be studied in its natural state while gaining meaningful understanding through

observation of practices; (b) research questions asking, what, why, and how are asked and

answered with a full understanding of the complexity and nuance of the phenomenon; and (c) the

case study supports an exploratory investigation where there is still unknown variables and the

phenomenon is yet to be fully understood. Handfield and Melnyk (1998) further supported the

use of this approach for my study with the following purposes of case study design: (a) to

continue pursuit of uncovering and deconstructing areas for theory development, (b) to engage in

intentional theory construction to identify/describe the connection between variables at play and

explain why they exist in this way, (c) to test and explore to support predicting future

opportunities and potential outcomes, and (d) to refine or extend the structures of the theories

that support the phenomenon due to the data results. It was important to me to use a case study

approach because (a) the phenomenon of understanding how Latino male educators understand

their gender identities is complex, (b) there is not much literature to support their experiences,

and (c) it allows for an unpacking of their context and lived experiences (Dul & Hak, 2008).

The intent and purpose behind using critical qualitative case study research methodology

was to support the development of consciousness for all participants involved, including the

researcher, and to the readers of this dissertation (Korth, 2002). This study particularly focused

on the hegemony of heteronormative patriarchal standards posed upon society that create

disparities in the identities of masculinity and machismo, nonbinary identities, and other genders

(Giroux, 1988; Korth, 2002). Furthermore, adding criticality to this study was politically

intentional to face the injustices masculinity and machismo gender norms have caused and hold

these norms accountable as a hierarchical authority (Kincheloe & Mclaren, 2011; Schostak &

Schostak, 2007). Kuntz (2016) cautioned critical researchers:

Any inquiry process that seeks to intervene in traditional formations of knowing

and being . . . with the hope for social justice and progressive change . . . must

necessarily grapple with the means by which truth is produced and sustained in

our culture. (pp. 95–96)

Throughout this journey, my goal has been to learn, unlearn, and continuously reflect as a

researcher.

I understand my positionality as an insider by knowing my own lived experiences of

Latinidad, machismo, American masculinity, educator, and other intersectional identities that

may be present among participants. I anticipated some level of tension in these dialogic spaces

because having similar identities does not gain me full access to or garner trust with someone’s

humanity. Being an insider can impact my study by holding a specific bias, influencing

participants to share a similar perspective, and pushing my own agenda on the research,

dialogues, and analysis. I was cognizant of these concerns and mitigated many of these

influences by centering and displaying the voices of Latino male educators as they shared their

experiences. As an outsider who is studying, researching, and engaging with Latino male

educators, I have been intentional in how I represent their stories, gain their trust through this

process, and model for them through my own vulnerability and storytelling. This critical

qualitative research inquiry consisted of “both a kind of care and kind of recklessness” (Denzin

et al., 2017, p. 491) needed to disrupt and enhance consciousness. Ultimately, the criticality of

this study came from elevating a more progressive voice to the forefront of scholarship and

continuing to push future studies to listen to the voiceless (Denzin et al., 2017). In reflecting on

the impact, I wanted this study to have in education, new knowledge was formalized through this

process that can support retention efforts through educator programming and proactive support

structures for Latino male educators. Given the limited research there has been on Latino male

educators, my hope was to add to the theoretical research to support efforts for this population.

Participant Selection Procedures

Before beginning this study, I completed my CITI training for human subjects research

and my institutional review board granted approval (see Appendix B). From that point, I

strategized on the most effective way to obtain participants for my study. This study used

convenience sampling, in which I selected participants based on a specific criterion in their

identity and demographics (Etikan et al., 2016; Ritchie et al., 2013). I sent emails to my network

of educators with whom I have directly worked in both public and public-charter K–12

environments to be forwarded to their network of educators (see Appendix C). To participate in

this study, educators had to meet the following criteria: (a) be a male, heterosexual, and

cisgendered educator; (b) have a Latinidad identity; and (c) currently work as a K–12 educator.

For this study, the term educator was expanded in its definition. Educators could work as a

teacher, an administrator, a regional or district leader, or any other roles with influence in the K–

12 environment (e.g., college counselor, mental health counselor, after-school coordinator). I

expanded this definition to overcome limitations imposed by teachers’ restricted accessibility

and aimed to dive into the nuanced experiences of Latino male educators as they advance in their

K–12 educational spaces. This expansion supported the study’s research and context and

enhanced visibility into educators’ learned strategies for remaining in the field of education.

When participants were interested, they filled out a survey to provide their contact information,

their relationship to masculinity and machismo, and the nuance of racial identity in terms of their

Latinidad (see Appendix D). Twenty-seven educators completed the survey, and 20 were

selected to participate in four circulos enfocados. Participants who were selected met criteria for

participation and had availability to attend one of four dates and time slots for a circulo

enfocado. A consent form was sent to all qualifying participants to sign before they could attend

a circulo enfocado (see Appendix E). All 20 participants signed and confirmed attendance on a

digital calendar invite. A total of 17 Latino male educators attended and participated in the

circulo enfocados in this study. The following section breaks down the demographics of the

participants.

Participant Demographics

From the 27 people who filled out the survey, there were individuals who identified in the

LGBTQIA+ community. As a researcher, I wanted to include these individuals in the study, yet I

did not want to perpetuate any harm from heteronormative beliefs and mindsets that could be

present in the space. It was a reminder of the bridge needed to expand masculinity and machismo

beyond heteronormative standards. Instead, 20 participants were chosen for the study, which

translated to five participants in each of the circulo enfocados. Actual attendance in the circulos

enfocados included 17 total participants, with three of the circulos having four participants and

one having five participants. Table 1 illustrates the participant demographics.

Table 1

Latino Male Educator Participants

Name Latinidad Years of experience

Location Educator role

Javier Latino & Chicano

4 Houston, TX K–12 district hiring role

Michael David Latino 15 Los Angeles, CA K–12 nonprofit director Dani Latino 6 Long Beach, CA K–12 teacher Antonio Hispanic &

Latino 13 Dallas, TX K–12 district administrator

Name Latinidad Years of experience

Location Educator role

Taco Hispanic & Latino & Mexican

10 San Diego, CA K–12 teacher

J.O. Latino & Chicano

6 Los Angeles, CA K–12 teacher

Espy Latino 16 Houston, TX K–12 regional director Sandro Hispanic &

Latino 15 Houston, TX K–12 regional director

Jaime Afro-Latino 12 Los Angeles, CA K–12 teacher + administrator

Kevin Latino & Chicano

12 Los Angeles, CA K–12 administrator

Christian Chicano 4 Las Vegas, NV K–12 administrator Bobby Hispanic &

Chicano 18 Houston, TX K–12 regional director

Jose Jesus Chicano 24 San Diego, CA K–12 teacher Justino Chicano 12 Houston, TX K–12 administrator Miguel Latino &

Chicano 8 Los Angeles, CA K–12 teacher

Leon Hispanic & Mexican- American

5 Los Angeles, CA K–12 teacher

Alonzo Hispanic 5 San Diego, CA K–12 teacher

The 17 participants selected from the 27 who completed the survey included a range of

Latinidad identities, showcasing how Latinidad is not a monolith. Some participants disclosed

identities pertaining to Latinidad mainstream identification such as Hispanic and Latino, whereas

others identified more with nationalities or progressive identities like Chicano or Mexican-

American. The diverse racial identities showcased what connection to Latinidad the educators

had and how they felt most comfortable identifying. I did not define these racial identity markers

and allowed participants to self-select or add the identification with which they had more

affinity. Six participants identified with the term Hispanic, 11 participants identified with the

term Latino, eight participants identified with the term Chicano, one participant identified as

Afro-Latino, one participant identified with their nationality of Mexican, and one other

participant added Mexican-American to their racial identity.

Participants’ educator roles ranged from content teachers in K–12, teacher leaders in

grade levels or content, deans of culture or instruction, principals, regional leadership

development facilitators, talent and recruitment team, college access, athletics, and nonprofit

directors with direct ties to schools. In terms of years of experience, I was surprised at the range

of responses. The mean years of experience was 10.88, the median was 12, and the mode was 12.

Latino male educators’ years of experience ranged from 4 years in education to 24 years in

education. Ten participants had more than 10 years of experience with one participant having

over 20 years of experience in education. This context can provide valuable knowledge about

what they have done to navigate their professional experiences and continue working in

education.

Data Collection

Rooted in the theoretical framework of LatCrit, masculinity studies, critical sociocultural

theory, and racial identity development theory, my data collection focused on gathering valuable

insight into the lived experiences and perspectives of Latino male educators through dialogic

spaces. The ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic created an opportunity to reimagine the

research setting and how it could provide dialogic spaces around sensitive topics such as

masculinity and machismo. The following sections break down the intentionality I took through

each portion of the process to gather data in support of answering my research questions.

Data Collection Procedures

Participants engaged in their choice of one 120-minute circulo enfocado, during which

they were asked a set of open-ended questions (see Appendix F). The selection of each group

was based on participant availability for specific dates and times. The total participation time for

one participant in the study was about 150 minutes of data collection, with 120 minutes of time

on the Zoom circulo enfocado and about 30 minutes of reviewing how their voices would be

represented in the study. Due to the topics that came from the dialogues, the time allotted was

often insufficient because (a) certain topics needed more processing time with certain groups, (b)

all the questions in the protocol could not be answered, and (c) participants wanted to follow up

with each other on specific things someone shared.

Honoring participants’ voices and experiences was the main objective in highlighting

their perspectives through these dialogic spaces. Participants were asked to think of their own

name or pseudonym for use in the study. I wanted to humanize participants and not use a generic

label of “Participant A” or “Participant 2;” using participant-selected pseudonyms allowed me to

honor their stories and how they wanted to be represented in this study. Transparency was key to

building trust with participants so they would not feel as if their experiences were represented in

a negative light. Before participating in dialogue, I modeled vulnerability by telling my story, the

purpose of my study, and sharing a small video clip on masculinity from the documentary, The

Mask You Live In (Newsom, 2015; see Appendix G). These steps were important to establish a

baseline of knowledge about masculinity/machismo from which to engage in conversation about

something we had communally experienced in the moment. I was curious about the potential

topics participants would discuss based on what was shared. The dialogues and conversations

brought up much richness in the data, which further validated why this study was important. This

experience beautifully reminded me of the opportunities these spaces can possess with

intentionality.

Each circulo enfocado was recorded and transcribed for data analysis. Participants were

asked to member check what data were presented in the study, and they were encouraged to

review, add, or edit anything they wanted. The accumulated data from the four circulos

enfocados, with a total of 17 Latino male educator participants, included 519 minutes of

transcribed recordings.

Research Setting

This study took place remotely through the Zoom virtual platform. Following the

COVID-19 global pandemic, remote virtual communication had become a more normal means

for interactions. For this study, circulos enfocados were intentionally designed to co-create a

digital space that felt safe for Latino male educators. To make the space feel welcoming, cameras

were asked to be on, norms were set on how to engage throughout the session, and participants

were able to log in from wherever they felt the most comfortable. These decisions were made to

support the health and safety of each participant as the pandemic was still very prominent at the

time of this study. In my role as a remote worker, I have seen the benefits of having dialogic

spaces on Zoom and have continued to enhance my pedagogical framework in how to approach

these spaces. The flexibility in having this option allowed Latino male educators to participate

from various locations across the United States, which added different Latinidad experiences and

gave variation in context. In developing a schedule for circulos enfocados, time zones were taken

into consideration to support the locations in which participants resided; participants Zoomed in

from Southern California, Texas, and Nevada. The time of year in which data collection occurred

was also a beneficial factor because most participants had finished the school year, which gave

them more flexibility to commit to the time frame of the data collection. I used digital tools to

reach consensus from participants on the best dates and times to have the focus groups, ensuring

the maximum number of participants in each setting.

To build trust in a remote space, norms were set to support participants in feeling safe

and brave enough to share. Participants were asked to turn on their cameras so everyone could

engage in dialogue. Having cameras on allowed me to look at facial expressions and nonverbal

cues of each participant on one screen and provided the opportunity to read the room as much as

possible, which was done during facilitation so I could respond immediately. Nonverbal cues I

focused on were facial expressions as participants shared, eye contact, body language, and vocal

intonations when they spoke (McArthur, 2022; Wood, 2018). Noticing nonverbal cues allowed

me to follow up with questions in the moment, make general statements of patterns in the space

(e.g., “I noticed most of us were nodding our heads in agreement when Christian was sharing”),

and chat with participants privately to make sure they were okay. This process reminded me of

the pedagogical knowledge I obtained in my K–12 experience as an educator and in my current

role in facilitation. I realized I had strengths in being a researcher and a practitioner by engaging

in this work.

With remote environments being a new normalcy for communication, my goal was to

create a space in which participants felt welcomed, affirmed, and a sense of belonging. Being a

facilitator of virtual training in my current role and an administrator during the COVID-19 global

pandemic afforded me the confidence to engage in this space in a way that felt authentic to who I

am. I participated when I needed to, I validated and affirmed participants’ responses, and I

pushed participants to share more about their experiences. I can only imagine what an in-person

space could have created in terms of trust, vulnerability, and belonging; however, I was satisfied

with the overall experience. In thinking about norms, content, and practices, there is potential for

in-person, virtual, and hybrid formats to support similar goals and objectives when dialoguing

around difficult themes. I discuss this potential more in the limitations section and how it

solidified an opportunity to expand these dialogic spaces to a full curricular model.

Data Collection Tools

Rooted in the theoretical framework of LatCrit, masculinity studies, critical sociocultural

theory, and racial identity development theory, the data collection tools for this research study

supported the elevation of Latino male educator voices. The goal was to collect the internal and

external dialogue Latino men have engaged in as they uncover consciousness work about their

lived experiences. I intentionally chose to use tools that support a collective dialogic approach to

gaining insight from Latino men who share many of the same intersectional identities. The two

tools used in this study were circulos enfocados, which represents a mix of various focus group

methodologies and dialogic space formation, and memo writing, which supported my reflexive

processing and analysis as a researcher. Table 2 summarizes the methods tools used to collect

data.

Table 2

Data Collection Tools

Tool Purpose

Circulos enfocados The purpose of circulos enfocados is to provide a space for radical dialoguing of gender and race of Latino men to gain insight into their reflexivity, empathy, and healing of the oppressive social structures they navigate each day (Cruz, 2012).

Memo writing The major purpose in using memos is to continuously learn and unlearn through the data collection process as an ongoing exploratory reflexive component (Charmaz, 2008).

Circulos Enfocados

Focus groups, or group interviews, provide a space for individuals to come together to

dialogue and interact (Kitzinger, 1995). Instead of a general interview protocol, in which one

question is asked and each participant answers the question, a focus group encourages

participants to respond to each other in the moment, ask questions, exchange anecdotes, and

build on others’ points of views (Kitzinger, 1995). This method can be useful in reflexive

exploration of how people behave, how they think, and why they think in a particular manner.

The dialogical spaces in this study focused on deconstructing masculinity and machismo norms

for Latino male educators. The discussions allowed for participants to share their unique lived

experiences and determine what they wanted to share regarding their machismo with people they

were meeting for the first time. The nuance of humanity is on display in focus groups because

everyone who participates has a different perspective and point of view to add when talking

about sensitive issues (Dilshad & Latif, 2013). Focus groups are a self-contained method that can

serve as a primary source of data collection versus doing individual interviews. Through the

research lens of critical sociocultural theory, learning and unlearning is participatory in nature

because participants bring in their knowledge and perspective to create collective knowledge

(Moje & Lewis, 2020). Through discourse, participants form a new consciousness by

deconstructing identities and pushing each other on previously held knowledge. In addition, I

was curious about how a group like this could empower Latino male educators to share more of

their stories, perspectives, and points of view, particularly if they see others engaging in similar

types of dialogue.

Given the criticality of this qualitative case study, I wanted to move away from traditional,

Western, research-based methodology pertaining to the use of focus groups. K. Rodriguez et al.

(2011) designed culturally responsive focus groups (CRFGs) to support researchers and

educators in understanding their own identities prior to critically questioning beliefs, ideas, and

knowledge. By understanding power dynamics present in the research process, researchers can

“minimize the intimidation and discomfort that may be experienced in traditional research

methodologies and enhance the participants’ ability to co-construct knowledge within the

research setting” (K. Rodriguez et al., 2011, p. 405). Due to the marginalization Latino male

educators’ experiences in the field of education, facilitating a CRFG was important for

understanding the delicacy of this sensitive topic, creating an affirming space, and enhancing

comfortability with being uncomfortable through intentional dialoguing (Hall, 2020; K.

Rodriguez et al., 2011; Talleyrand et al., 2022).

The focus groups were further enhanced by the use of community circle structures.

Circulos, or group community circles, has a direct connection to decolonizing methodology

focused on community building, healing, and co-creating a space of belonging (Winn, 2018)

Because virtual settings have become more of a normal practice for engaging in meetings,

interviews, and daily communication since the onset of the COVID-19 global pandemic (Falter

et al., 2022), I intentionally translated the practice of circulo into a virtual setting. I ensured

participants were able to select a space in which they felt comfortable engaging, set intentional

norms on how to engage in dialogue through Zoom settings, and monitored discussions to ensure

everyone had an opportunity to participate (Falter et al., 2022). Establishing these norms in a

Zoom setting supported various forms of communication regarding sensitive topics raised by the

Latino male educators.

A final component involved in these circulos was the inclusion of my experiences with

restorative practices. As mentioned, the subject matter in these spaces was personal to me and to

the participants. Latino male educators deal with deficit-based ideology of their identities in the

professional settings they navigate (I. Jackson et al., 2014; Milner, 2010; Romero et al., 2009). A

goal of this study was to co-construct critical countercultural communities of practice; these

communities are spaces in which direct opposition to racist and sexist environments exists to

combat and engage with internal and external conflicts posed by society to Latino male humanity

(Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Singh, 2021). My intention behind using circulo as a form of

data collection was to directly engage in the learning process with Latino men, build a safe space

for reflection, and challenge and support each other’s perspectives. As such, it was important to

establish myself as a strong and supportive facilitator in this space with the ability to provide

safety, model bravery, and promote a healthy dialogue about a potentially sensitive topic. My

role as a researcher was to stimulate participant voices, offer thoughtful follow-up questions,

keep the topics at the center of discussion, listen, and be sensitive to the needs of all participants

(Dilshad & Latif, 2013). The combination of these elements led to the creation of circulos

enfocados (i.e., community circle focus groups), in which trust, vulnerability, and healing

support the structures of group dialogue through intentional open-ended questioning,

encouragement of all participants’ voices, dialogue around conflict in an effort to understand

rather than judge, and affirmation of identities in the space (National Compadres Network,

2021). Bringing in all these elements helped to humanize the experience with Latino male

educators and showcase a way in which to engage with others in the future. This process presents

an opportunity for Latino male educators to build affinity spaces that center humanity, love of

self, and love of community and provide a support system for others in the same learning and

unlearning journey (I. Jackson et al., 2014). For this study, I also wanted to have an opportunity

to reflect on how I was affected by the data collection process.

Memo Writing

Memo writing was used to gather my thoughts, perspectives, and exploration of data in a

process that moved beyond summarization (Charmaz, 2008). My goal was to consistently

examine codes and categories of data collected to check my own biases and elevate the voices

and perspectives most important to my study: those of the participants (Charmaz, 2008; Glaser,

1999). I wrote memos during the circulos enfocados, after the group sessions, and throughout

every portion of the data reading, rereading, and my own writing. These memos were included in

the data analysis process to reflect and compare my understanding of the data with my own

biases, my own lived experiences, and how I was being affected by the words of the participants.

This process was personal to my lived experiences and my identity as both a researcher and a

Latino male educator. The memoing, reflexive component supported my own healing by

allowing me to relive my experiences and release emotions based on what was shared by

participants. Memoing also served as a reminder to focus on the participants’ stories and not

mine.

Data Organization

As I gathered all of the data for this critical qualitative case study, I developed a plan for

engaging with the data moving forward. First, the Zoom virtual platform saved and recorded all

the audio files from the circulos enfocados; I saved these files to my Google Drive folder where I

created a password-protected code to keep all of the data safe, as recommended by the

institutional review board. Google folders were organized by the dates of circulos enfocados and

included participant demographic data and consent forms. I went through each circulo enfocado

and transcribed participant responses line by line. I then created a spreadsheet, saved in Google

Sheets, with each of the questions asked and how each participant answered. This spreadsheet

helped me reference and organize how each participant engaged in the study and provided a

strategic way to come back to data pertaining to specific questions. This strategy supported me

by having everything centrally located and provided an opportunity to back up my data through

an external data drive. The transcription process was the longest portion of data organization as I

had to transcribe 519 minutes of data. However, this process allowed me to re-engage with the

data multiple times by listening to and reading what was said by each participant.

Data Analysis

For the purpose of this study, the goal was to illuminate and highlight the voices of

Latino male educators as they dialogue their critical machismo consciousness. The goal was not

to generalize the issues Latino male educators have but to illuminate the variability in their

experiences and struggles as professionals. Saldaña and Omasta (2016) stated researchers should

consider:

not taking everything at face value, of reading between the lines, interpreting subtexts

and embedded meanings, detecting hidden agendas, digging underneath to reveal the

covert . . . peeling back the layers, and assessing subliminal tactics that persuade or

motivate us to action. (p. 67)

Data were abundant in this critical qualitative case study and intentional reading, thematic

inductive coding, and reflexivity were all used in the process of analysis. Transcripts from the

four circulos enfocados and memo writing I engaged in throughout the process were coded and

analyzed. The thematic inductive coding process went through three stages of open coding, axial

coding, and selective coding (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Williams & Moser, 2019). This loop of

intentional coding forced me to constantly compare data through each stage of reading and

rereading (Williams & Moser, 2019). Themes emerged through this nonlinear process of

movement between the three forms of coding, which supported opportunities to add to current

literature and the theoretical framework for this study. This study adopted Williams and Moser’s

(2019) nonlinear process to qualitative research used in grounded theory approaches, even

though this study did not create or develop a new theory. Instead, this study sought to understand

the phenomenon of Latino male educators’ experiences in their K–12 spaces. This process is

very much aligned with the cyclical approach to coding that is used in many qualitative

approaches. Figure 2 displays the model used for coding data in this study. This process was

essential to compare data for consolidation and data reduction (Williams & Moser, 2019).

Figure 2

Nonlinear Process to Qualitative Research

Fusch and Ness (2015) noted data saturation is reached when replication of the present

information occurs and there is no more data to continue coding or gathering. A key takeaway in

reaching data saturation is to obtain enough quantity filled with nuance (Fusch & Ness, 2015).

This thematic, inductive coding process was seen through my eyes, my reflexivity, and my lived

experiences and interpreted to enhance new knowledge gathered from participants in this study.

As a critical researcher, I could not generalize one particular instance to other similar settings or

events. I used a cautious approach to recognize the uniqueness and context-specific nature of

each situation; thus, these findings may not universally apply to others. However, I did

acknowledge the relevance of research findings may be transferable to similar contexts in the

future (Bhattacharya, 2017; Gray, 2013). Schwandt and Gates (2017) noted a critical realist

researcher would not make generalizable statements extending beyond one case because the

world is so complex there are too many layers in it, even in similar settings.

Open Coding

In the first cycle of coding, I reread the data from each circulo enfocado by engaging in

line-by-line coding. This process was the initial stage of determining codes from intentional

classification of concepts by looking for words, phrases, and patterns in the data (Flick, 2009;

Williams & Moser, 2019). Using the digital software platform NVivo, I highlighted phrases and

words and began to color-code initial codes that emerged. I read each portion a few times before

determining a specific code, highlighted evidence that supported the code, and constantly

compared what I found against previous codes I had noticed. There were many moments of

pausing, rereading, and rewriting my thoughts in this initial stage. Williams and Moser (2019)

reminded researchers how “identifying a sufficiently developed theme and determining an

appropriate code requires attention to thematic association and a subjective sense of a code’s

accurate representation of the essence of a theme” (p. 48). It was my job to constantly connect

these emergent codes to the evidence and not prematurely determine codes that could tell a

different story. A quote from Javier illustrates an example of line-by-line coding that produced

emergent codes. Javier shared:

I’m always having to think and undo and think about, am I reacting this way because this

is how I viewed a man react in certain situations, or is it because this is how I’m truly

feeling? It’s been a long process.

This quote shared what it takes to deconstruct machismo. Javier showcased meaning making

around his decisions relating to his machismo. By making meaning from his machismo, he

actively developed what his identity meant or had meant based on his lived experiences. In the

open coding stage, the theme of deconstruction became a major component. I concentrated my

efforts on how deconstruction happened for participants. In the example provided by Javier, he

modeled identity development and meaning making as codes that contributed to this theme.

Through this process, I wrote memos after each stage of coding to gather my thoughts,

reflections, and push against my biases. I also added these memos into NVivo to cross reference

the codes I had initially obtained with what I processed and analyzed from my own reflections.

An example from my memo coding connected the quote Javier shared with my reflection. From

my memo:

For Javier, it was really eye-opening to hear him and Leon who talked a lot about

how normalized a lot of the things that are feminized, you know the social

emotional skills, the things that masculinity is opposition to right, they were able

to articulate how they could show up in the space and be more emotional and it is

normalized now compared to the veteran male educators who didn’t really have

that as a background to how to show up.

As indicated by this memo excerpt, I noticed a tendency in younger Latino male educators to

display more emotions, which they were able to express more freely. I coded the passage as

emotional intelligence in how they want to show up and reimagining what masculinity meant for

them in their lives. Both of these codes connected to the deconstruction of machismo and

masculinity I noticed in the data. Through this reflection, I was able to check my own thinking

and bias that all Latino male educators would struggle in expressing their emotions like I did in

my experience as an educator. That was not the case in every circulo enfocado as Latino male

educators who were in their first four years of education were able to express more emotional

intelligence than I ever had at their stages in life. From this first stage of data analysis, 45 codes

emerged from the data before intentional categorization. This process helped me determine

patterns before grouping codes together. During this process, I adhered to the following steps: (a)

deconstruct data into parts to examine, (b) group similar thoughts and ideas together, (c) begin to

conceptualize categories and subcategories as they begin to emerge, and (d) begin to experiment

with categories if they were significant to participants (Odegard & Vereen, 2010). Following this

procedure for open coding allowed me to see the connection between open coding and axial

coding and how they complement each other because one is needed as building blocks for

categorizing (Corbin & Strauss, 2007; Odegard & Vereen, 2010).

Axial Coding

The second stage of the coding process focused on the creation and construction of

categories from the emergent codes. In this stage, I looked for relationships between each of the

open codes and transitioned to the development of core codes, which have the strongest evidence

to support them (Strauss & Corbin, 1998; Williams & Moser, 2019). For this refinement, I used

constant comparison analysis. Fram (2013) focused on using constant comparison analysis

methods to systematically compare all forms of data in a study. By using this method, data

gathered were compared rather than thrown out of the study because it did not fit a theme (Fram,

2013). In this comparison process, I looked for information pertaining to the research questions

of my study, new information I did not consider or anticipate, and interesting or out of the

ordinary information (Creswell, 2013). Comparing data in this way helped me refine open codes

to ensure they were supported by strong evidence.

The process of axial coding was best captured in an example provided by Michael.

Michael shared:

Like, am I raising my voice? Am I taking a domineering stance? Am I using my

size to control in the same way that I was shown that? Like talking about the way

that your fathers did things. My dad is a product of his family and his upbringing,

but we were around some violence growing up, and that was just the way things

were. As much as I was trying to be conscious of being better—In schools, you

are put to your limit as far as stress, right? Oftentimes, you get into the point

where you’re triggered, and it’s when you’re triggered, those things that are

unconscious come out, and you have to be really, really mindful of those things.

In this specific example, I was starting to build evidence on the major code of deconstruction. As

Latino male educators gained a level of criticality to machismo, they began to showcase how

they unlearned things about “being a man.” Michael was able to articulate how he had made

meaning and how that meaning has formed his identity. For axial coding, I brought in a second

layer of codes to showcase reimagination of what it meant to be a man and the actual unlearning

and learning Latino male educators do on a daily basis, internally and externally, in their K–12

spaces. Michael displayed learning and unlearning in this example by understanding his triggers

from his traumatic machismo home life and how they impact his responses to young people.

Michael actively unlearned his responses by understanding what those triggers were and how he

did not want to respond as his father once did. This process solidified the complexity of

deconstruction based on the lived experiences of Latino male educators. Axial codes built a

stronger foundation for the major themes from the data.

After refining the open codes, I was able to create categories using the open codes that

built a strong case for each category. This process continued as I constantly compared and

referred back to the data to ensure saturation was reached in the creation of these categories.

Thus, the process of open and axial coding followed these steps: (a) employing line-by-line

coding, (b) revisiting and analyzing the data during open coding, and (c) through axial coding

and constant comparison, thoroughly reviewing all the lines again (Charmaz, 2014; Williams &

Moser, 2019). These stages of coding allowed for data stabilization by defining and redefining

themes, challenging my biases, and forcing me to stay in proximity to the data as much as

possible. Through this refinement, 45 open codes were condensed into 30 open codes. From

these codes, I generated 13 categories after multiple constant comparisons, categorical

reflections, and memo writing cycles. This process allowed me to state thematic relationships

and continue examination and categorization of those themes (Williams & Moser, 2019).

Selective Coding

The final cycle involved selective coding, which further enhanced understandings

determined in the axial coding cycle. Selective coding allowed me to systematically align the

core themes from axial coding with a deeper significance or story by presenting selective themes

from the data (Flick, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1998; Williams & Moser, 2019). This deeper

connection can foster an opportunity for theory to arise and for the construction of meaning in

how data are presented to a broader audience (Creswell & Poth, 2016; Williams & Moser, 2019).

My goal with this cycle was to create deeper meaning directly connected to the categories and

open codes of the previous cycles. This direct connection allowed me to tell a deeper story of

what participants shared, which is presented in Chapter 4. Throughout all coding cycles, I wrote

100

and analyzed memos to check my biases, reflect on how I engaged with the data, and see how I

was affected by what was shared, both as an insider and outsider in the study.

Trustworthiness and Credibility

Because critical qualitative study has not been considered as rigorous as quantitative

research in academia, I have addressed the credibility of this research both for implications of

future research and for the participants in this study. The first important concept related to the

credibility of data analysis is thick description, which:

deals not only with the meaning and interpretations of people in a culture but also with

their intentions. Thick description builds up a clear picture of the individuals and groups

in the context of their culture and the setting in which they live. (Holloway, 1997, p. 154)

As Latino male educators shared their lived experiences and their deepening of consciousness,

thick description was essential to capturing:

the thoughts and feelings of participants as well as the often complex web of relationships

among them . . . leads to thick interpretation, which in turns leads to thick meaning of the

research findings for the researchers and participants themselves. (Ponterotto, 2006, p.

543)

Ultimately, it was my responsibility as a researcher to describe and provide rich descriptions of

each participant so readers could visualize participants in this study, which directly connects to

the consciousness and intersectionality of identities (Ponterotto, 2006). Describing the

participants fully helps enhance thick descriptions of the setting and results, leading to a thick

meaning.

With relationships and trust being major elements of this study, another component,

crystallization, was vital for credibility. According to Ellingson (2014):

101

Crystallization is a relational support to qualitative research due to its ability to enhance

the voices of the participants in the study. Crystallization is ideal for constructing

portraits of everyday relating because it brings together vivid, intimate details of people’s

lives shared via storytelling and art with the broader relational patterns and structures

identified through social scientific analyses. (p. 443)

Thus, crystallization, in this study, builds a vivid interpretation of participants’ accounts while

highlighting my own vulnerabilities, lived experiences, and positionality. The goal of this study

was to learn from the experiences of Latino male educators in deepening their consciousness and

how it may illustrate a particular phenomenon regarding their potential for leaving the teaching

profession. My hope was to illustrate, through storytelling, a compelling perspective on the

opportunities missed by retention programming.

The third component used for trustworthiness and credibility was peer debrief sessions

regarding my methodology, data collection, and data analysis. In this process, peers who did not

have expertise in the field of study provided feedback to support how I was aligning, connecting,

and reflecting on my processes throughout the study. This feedback was vital in developing my

explanation of the entire process to folks who were not in my field of study and produced

insights on gaps I had missed in my own interpretation and presentation. A check for

trustworthiness instrument was created, which included sample codes and portions of transcripts,

was sent to peers via a Google Form (see Appendix H). The form included 15 quotes from

Latino male educators in total, 10 codes focused on one major theme in which each participant

had to choose between multiple themes to determine which were present in each of the quotes.

The form also included five quotes that comprised multiple subcategories to each of the major

themes in the axial coding stage to display the nuance in each of the major themes of the study. I

102

sent my codebook along with the form so participants could use it as a reference (see Appendix

I). The participants responded with more than 96% accuracy the codes matched the themes and

subcategories from the quotes. From all the questions used in the first 10 quotes, 8 out of the 10

quotes received 100% agreement. Two quotes received 83%, which confirmed the nuance and

complexity in what was shared by the Latino male educators. For the second set of five quotes, 3

of the 5 quotes received 100% agreement the subcategories matched the themes, and two of the

quotes received 83% agreement. Once I obtained these results, I met with one of my colleagues

who filled out the survey to discuss the results of the trustworthiness check and how they, as a

respondent, approached matching the codes and themes. My colleague stated the codes felt very

intentional and easy to follow because there was a clear connection to the definitions in the

codebook. Furthermore, the colleague added there were possibilities to have more than one code

based on the nuances of the quotes and how complex the Latino male educators’ experiences

were. This trustworthiness check helped determine if my approach was headed in the right

direction and allowed respondents to suggest changes or different interpretations that could push

my thinking. The trustworthiness check process supported my reflections and analysis of my

data, which affirmed and confirmed the alignment I wanted to see with my research questions.

From this point, I was able to discuss my process with my dissertation chair and have productive

conversations about how to articulate and present findings in Chapter 4.

The last focus of credibility supports the shared power of participants and researchers.

Member reflections, or member checks, provide feedback to the researcher to support the

continuation of the study and validate for participants what is being recorded and shared (D. R.

Thomas, 2017). According to D. R. Thomas (2017), “Member checks are often seen as a useful

‘validation’ technique to ensure that participants agree that findings constructed by the

103

researchers adequately represent the realities that participants have reported” (p. 12). Ultimately,

these member checks created a greater level of accuracy of what was being portrayed from each

participant and enhanced trust with my outsider–insider positionality. Participants were sent

copies of my interpretations and asked to provide feedback and enhance their responses if they

wanted to add more layers. Validity of truth was important to me; I did not want to only convey

my interpretations of data because I hold biases and lived experiences that could sway my

findings. By incorporating member reflections and checks, I ensured accountability for my

actions and interpretations. Additionally, gathering diverse perspectives helped establish a shared

understanding of power in my study.

Researcher Bias

The methodology presented in this study was complex because humanity is complex. As

an individual who identifies as a Latino male educator, I have biases about what has made me

more conscious of my actions, thoughts, and feelings. My unlearning is part of my lived

experiences, but my experiences do not illustrate the only ways to deconstruct

masculinity/machismo gender norms. My purpose was not to impose my biases on Latino male

educators but to use this research as an opportunity to engage with participants through an emic–

etic approach. I was curious about how Latino male educators navigate their educational settings

across different years of experience and what they have created as definitions for success with

regard to being a male educator, an emic perspective (Punnett et al., 2017). Hearing directly from

participants allowed me to compare their experiences and perspectives to theories on

heteronormative patriarchal standards of masculinity/machismo and to existing literature, from

which to critically analyze data in a broader context, an etic perspective (Punnett et al., 2017).

Integrating both perspectives, I developed a nuanced understanding of masculinity/machismo

104

norms by honoring the unique lived experiences of Latino male educators in their cultural

contexts while critically examining them in relation to broader socialized structures and theories

pertaining to the topic of gender. By understanding Latino male educators’ experiences through

their gender identities, I hoped to add to the literature on how to best support these educators in

K–12 retention efforts through intentional development of critical consciousness. In centering

Latino male educators’ voices, new understandings can support program development efforts for

current and future educators.

Limitations of the Research Methodology

This study centered the voices of Latino male educators in four circulos enfocados in a

virtual remote setting. I used critical qualitative case study methodology to generate themes

based on the theoretical framework from this study. The theories guided my predictions of what

to look for in the data and allowed for new information to emerge. The purpose of this study was

to understand the phenomenon of how Latino male educators understand and navigate their

masculinity/machismo in their respective K–12 spaces. Findings from this study are limited to

the experiences of these 17 Latino male educators, and I cannot generalize the findings to all

Latino male educators. However, this limitation supports the potential impact incorporating these

dialogic spaces, whether remote or in person, can have on the development of critical machismo

consciousness. There was an opportunity to break the circulos enfocados into groups by years of

experience. It was difficult to coordinate participants in committing to specific time slots. I made

the decision to make the circulos mixed groups, regardless of experience. The study also used a

remote setting, which had its own limitations for encouraging authenticity and vulnerability and

for creating a safe space for participants. Remote virtual settings have become more normalized

105

in how people communicate, and there is potential to see how these dialogic spaces may look

based on in-person, hybrid, and virtual models.

Summary

Chapter 3 provided context on how my positionality as a Latino male educator and

researcher connected to the purpose of this study. I restated the research questions to center what

was being studied and connect the theoretical framework to this critical qualitative case study.

Chapter 3 provided demographics of the participants, the procedures of the study, and the

research setting. I explained the intentional cocreation of a virtual affinity space for circulos

enfocados so participants could feel safe and be vulnerable about sensitive topics. I outlined data

collection tools, processes for analysis of the data, and opportunities to unpack my own biases. I

explained how Latino male educators’ voices were used as experts of their lived experiences as

they shared their vulnerability related to the relationships they have with masculinity/machismo.

Last, I described the credibility of this study through the components of trustworthiness

necessary to validate the study.

Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study, which include the data, themes, and dialogue

from the circulos enfocados. Chapter 5 presents a discussion on the implications of the study,

recommendations for future research, recommendations for implementation of interventions to

support and retain Latino male educators, and final conclusions.

106

CHAPTER FOUR

FINDINGS

Never use data to understand people. Use people to understand data.

–Dr. Ivory Toldson

This chapter provides an overview of the purpose and findings from this study. The

purpose of this critical qualitative case study was to understand the ways in which Latino male

educators understand their masculinity and machismo to support retention efforts given the high

attrition rates for this population. Furthermore, this study provided insight into the dynamics and

navigational experiences Latino male educators face in their K–12 spaces. A major component of

this study was to co-construct a critical countercultural community of practice, in which all

people are in direct opposition to racist and sexist environments and reimagine how to

dialogically engage in difficult conversations (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008) that actively

deconstruct dominant, privileged identities to make meaning of something new. The format in

which the data are presented is a response to each research question and provides the reader with

a glimpse into the intimate and nuanced dialogizing that took place in the circulo enfocado. As

mentioned in the Chapter 3, circulos enfocados, rooted in the theoretical framework of LatCrit,

masculinity studies, critical sociocultural theory, and racial identity development theory (Arriola,

1998; Connell, 2005; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Helms, 1990; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Moje &

Lewis, 2020; Molina, 2015; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Tatum, 2004; Waling, 2019), combined

culturally responsive focus groups (CRFGs), circulos (i.e., group community circles), and focus

groups to humanize the experience with Latino male educators by creating a dialogic space that

supported the deconstruction of difficult topics (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; I. Jackson et

al., 2014; National Compadres Network, 2021; K. Rodriguez et al., 2011; Singh, 2021;

107

Talleyrand et al., 2022). This chapter reports the themes that emerged from the data through the

presentation of voices from 17 Latino male educators. Throughout the dialogic spaces, there

were many codes created both from the literature and through the data analysis of the transcripts.

The codebook includes more information on the coding and analytical process (see Appendix I).

The following research questions informed my study:

1. In what ways do Latino male educators understand their masculinity and how it

impacts their day-to-day lives in their educational settings?

2. In what ways do Latino male educators disrupt heteronormative patriarchal standards

of masculinity and machismo in their own beliefs and actions?

3. In what ways do Latino male educators acquire knowledge and skills in their teaching

and leadership practices to help them remain and thrive in the teaching profession?

The chapter continues through an organizational order to support this qualitative case

study. This chapter includes three sections on how data themes connect to each of the research

questions that were posed. Each section includes the major findings in answering each question

through intentional data analysis, inclusion of quotes from participants, and a summary of each

section. The first section highlights the social construction of gender identity for Latino male

educators and how it supports or hinders how they show up as men or express themselves

through their intersectional identities. The second section highlights how Latino male educators

deconstruct masculinity and machismo while actively disrupting heteronormative patriarchal

standards once they have attained a level of critical consciousness in their awareness. Lastly, the

third section highlights the knowledge and skills that Latino male educators have obtained that

would support retaining their talents.

108

Exploring Latino Male Educator Identity

Research Question 1 asked the following: In what ways do Latino male educators

understand their masculinity and how it impacts their day-to-day lives in their educational

settings? My purpose in asking this question was to see how masculinity and machismo created

definitions of how Latino male educators show up or express their gender identity. Definitions of

masculinity and machismo come from many examples Latino men obtained throughout their

lives as they experimented with what it means to “be a man.” This led to findings showcasing

multiple ways Latino male educators intentionally wear masks as they experimented with what it

means to be authentic across their internal and external definitions of masculinity.

The first finding showcased how Latino male educators understood their masculinity and

machismo from their lived experiences through internal and external definitions that construct

what it means to “be a man.” This understanding of masculinity and machismo led to identity

exploration and experimentation through the concept of masking that intentionally supported

acceptance of gender norms or actively disrupted negative versions of masculinity and

machismo. Data from the circulos enfocados provided an understanding of how Latino male

educators obtained masculinity/machismo norms in their lifetimes and unpacked the masks they

intentionally or unintentionally wore as educators. From their understanding of their definitions

of manhood, participants began to unpack and deconstruct how they showed up or expressed

themselves using these specific masks, which afforded participants privilege, acceptance, and

success through external definitions of how they were supposed to show up as Latino male

educators. This process of unpacking and deconstruction led to a more in-depth look at

participants’ lived experiences, how they obtained these masks in their lives, and how these

masks influenced and affected their identities.

109

Latino male educators showed how they looked at machismo growing up, how femininity

from their mothers influenced some of their lives and expanded gender norms, and how they

explored their gender identity in silos. The constant connection to lived experiences allowed for

further deconstruction of what it meant to be authentic. Ultimately, authenticity was a struggle

for Latino male educators because they were intentionally using masks when different versions

of masculinity/machismo were not fully accepted by their peers or structures in which they

worked. This constant negotiation of identity was exhausting because participants would perform

masculinity/machismo in ways that did not fully align with beliefs they held after unpacking

toxic heteronormative patriarchal standards. Furthermore, in not fully feeling authentic,

participants questioned where they were allowed to explore multiple versions of masculinities if

they were constantly reminded they could not deviate from default gender norms. Authenticity

and exploration in this dialogic space allowed for vulnerability through the emotional and heavy

stories Latino male educators shared. Due to the vulnerability that was shared by participants, it

brought forth connection, reflection, and healing in a very short amount of time. As a researcher,

so much of my own, ongoing experience (i.e., how I wore masks to hide, masks to engage in

versions of myself I did not agree with, and constantly questioned how I was being perceived by

everyone around me) resonated with their stories.

Social Construction of Identity

Identity is socially constructed through individuals’ lived experiences and meaning-

making from the people and environment around them (Ahmed, 2004; Berggren, 2014; Chandler

et al., 2003; Connell, 2005; Erikson, 1968; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Jennings et al., 2014;

Lantolf, 2013; Meeus et al., 2010; Moje & Lewis, 2020; Molina, 2015; Quintero & Estrada,

1998; Torres et al., 2002). Latino male educators obtained how they should act throughout their

110

lives from archetypes that accepted masculinity/machismo norms in the separate spaces in which

participants interacted. Latino male educators unpacked their lived experiences of where this

performance originated. The current versions of how Latino male educators decided to express

their intersectional identities in the study were reflective of how their lived experiences impacted

how they chose to show up for their students, with their peers, and with families in the

community. Latino male educators did not want to perpetuate any harm they obtained from men

in their lives and wanted to reimagine what it meant to be a man who is more emotionally aware,

reflective, and disruptive of oppressive gender norms that are harmful to their own humanity.

The following sections highlight the influences Latino male educators obtained throughout their

lives that supported the current versions of how they express their intersectional identities and

understanding of masculinity and machismo.

Fatherhood Machismo Impact

Data showed how Latino male educators first obtained definitions of being “a man” from

their fathers through direct behaviors they were required to exhibit as well as socialization on

what they witnessed from the men in their families. Characteristics of being “a man” were taught

through fathers never showing emotion to their boys, redirecting specific behaviors Latino boys

could engage in because they were men, and how emotions by men were only shown through

alcoholism (Abaci et al., 1974; Bell et al., 2003; De La Cancela, 1991; Falicov, 2018; Gross &

John, 2003; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Romero et al., 2009; Torres et al., 2002). More importantly,

participants had few opportunities to unpack their lived experiences because they were

conditioned to hold everything in and not ask for any help or guidance from their fathers. Fathers

played a specific role in the household as providers and protectors and were present, though

without engagement, in dialogue. Some Latino male educators mentioned that they had more

111

positive expressions of the gender identity as they have gotten older and processed conversations

about lived experiences with their fathers, but their relationships have been building slowly

throughout their lives. In sharing the multiple descriptions of participants’ lived experiences, the

dialogic space observed many head nods, emojis through Zoom indicating agreement, and

gratitude in sharing the hardships of what definitions of masculinity/machismo entailed. For

three Latino male educators, they wanted to sit with the information more because they had not

unpacked it and appreciated how others were vulnerable to speak about their lives in a

transparent way. The exploration of identity started very early in Latino male educators’ lives,

and they began to connect how their lived experiences created the current version of how they

express their intersectional identities.

As a young person, Espy reflected on his upbringing in his household and how his father

was an exemplar of not being in touch with his emotions. Espy shared:

I was just reflecting on my father who didn’t really know how to be in touch with

his feelings, express feelings, talk about feelings. He was never okay . . . he’s also

the leader of the household, who sets the tone, and people follow his direction.

It’s like both of those together create this struggle that we’re facing.

Not being able to gain emotional intelligence as a skill was a struggle Espy was in the process of

unpacking and deconstructing for how he shows up in his relationship with himself and with

others. The mention of “he was never okay” was something embedded in his thoughts and

memories of how his father struggled to live up to the expectations set out by masculinity and

machismo. Espy actively disrupted the pattern he saw from his father by engaging in dialogue,

being vulnerable, and supporting his students and Latino men he coached.

112

Three Latino male educators also shared their experiences about their dads. Sandro

mentioned how his dad would reinforce gender norms like, “Hey, eres hombre guey, you got to

go outside. Don’t help your mom in the kitchen,” or “Hey, no seas mandilon, don’t be washing

or cooking. . . . Stereotypes of what is, ‘a man,’ what is ‘female’ responsibilities.” Sandro

obtained direct feedback of what activities he needed to engage in versus what he wanted to do

to help his mother. Receiving feedback on how not to be helpful, to leave specific jobs to

women, and to engage in “male” activities caused tension and harm for Sandro. Sandro knew

how problematic these norms and stereotypes were and actively disrupted them by expanding his

definitions of gender and being a supportive person in every setting.

Javier added how his father’s major role in the family was as a provider, yet “I think the

first time I ever got a hug from him might have been my graduation day in high school, and then

the next time was in my graduation day in college. So, it was very weird.” The lack of affection

displayed as a result of masculinity and machismo caused a strange dynamic in how men in

Javier’s family expressed love or care. Javier described the tension and conflict he felt because

he knew his dad served a particular role in providing care through work, his dad’s actions put

food on table, and his dad never intentionally hurt him. Seen through the lens of being a

provider, Javier also mentioned how the expression of emotion from his father was awkward,

which impacted how he expressed emotions growing up. Javier also mentioned the conflict he

saw regarding emotional expression through direct observation of his uncles, “who would drink

and get drunk to the point where that’s the only time they could show their emotions. It was a

very negative, I don’t know, just a traumatic trigger for me.” Javier shared his vulnerability in

how he continued to be triggered and learned how not to express emotions from the men in his

family. Javier actively expressed emotions, dialogued, and explored the vulnerability of his lived

113

experiences in all the spaces he worked in to disrupt the negative patterns he experienced

growing up.

Kevin mentioned how his expectations were modeled through the provider lens of

masculinity and machismo. He shared, “I just remember growing up, and everything was just

work, work, work. That’s all my dad knew. That’s all my uncles knew. The exposure that I got

was just a blue-collar mentality.” Kevin described how gender norms were established through

work ethic and providing for one’s family. Passing down the value of hard work was easier to do

for fathers than expressing emotionality. As Kevin shared multiple times, his emotions came

pouring out as he released stories about his experiences, which modeled a different reality for

him and his students. He mentioned how he has supported young people, especially boys, to

explore their skills, strengths, and aspirations and to be the best versions of themselves. Latino

male educators described how their first entry point into masculinity and machismo was passed

down through their fathers or men in their families, which gave them insight into how they were

accepted by their immediate surroundings. Outside of homelife, masculinity and machismo also

created definitions of how Latino men understood the world around gender.

External Gender Norm Impact

The outside world influenced Latino men in how they showed up as “men” as well. The

gender norms they learned from their peers and other outsiders reinforced survival skills they

would need. In their school life, once participants transitioned from middle school to high

school, they were required to handle emotions and problems on their own, engage in

homophobic and sexist stereotypes, lose friendships to become their own individuals, and figure

out ways to be accepted as a man through certain activities, like sports (Connell, 2005; Gross &

John, 2003; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Paz & Kemp, 1961; Torres et al., 2002). Most Latino men in

114

this study shared that they did not have an opportunity to express their emotions at home or at

school, they struggled to navigate any of the spaces in which they engaged. There were some

positive outlets from teachers, friends, or family members, yet it was not a consistent occurrence

to have a space to express what they were struggling with in regard to their gender identities.

Having to deal with everything alone transferred to their current versions of how they express

their intersectional identities as they continued to explore how they expressed their emotions,

how they built connections, and how vulnerable it felt to ask for support. Latino male educators

had a constant tension in wanting to explore who they were while also having others define how

they were supposed to show up. Examples of where they learned this behavior came from their

schooling experiences.

Acceptance was a key to feeling a sense of belonging for Latino men because living up to

a standard gave them credibility to navigate a space without creating conflict among the majority

of people. Jose Jesus described himself as smaller in stature and had to figure out ways to be

accepted in social circles. He explained:

You know, at school, all that pressure of being a man starts to hit you different

than it did in elementary school . . . I liked wrestling because it was individual and

you competed with people your own size and it was you . . . I think part of me

getting into that even in high school was a way of buying into the toxic masculine

culture of showing toughness of developing my body, developing my muscles as

a little guy. It gave me—What do you call it? I guess, just the street cred of, Okay,

you’re a small guy, but you’re tough, you’ll hold your own. . . . It gave you that

respect.

115

There was not a moment where Jose Jesus was accepted as a person without having to prove

himself in a masculinity and machismo standard. Jose Jesus noticed moments where he actively

chose what battles to fight with other men at his work, “when you’re socializing or comments

that are oftentimes feeling like, ‘Do I want to say something right now?’ . . . you just chuckle at a

sexist comment or not knowing how to address it with other males.” He had to be strategic in

how he showed up so he was accepted and also thought about when to disrupt patterns of

heteronormative gender norms that were problematic.

The friendship component reinforced gender norms Latino men were not ready to deal

with on their own. Unpacking and deconstructing friendships created additional tension because

of the gender norms everyone was trying to embody. Three Latino male educators shared how

they decided to disrupt patterns that negatively affected them growing up. Michael David

mentioned how difficult it was to make friends because of “the othering that goes on as you

mature as males, a lot of the things that are coded within friendship, like connection and being

close are things that you’re taught to move away from.” Michael David processed and

deconstructed those patterns in himself to engage with others, particularly when he sees those

patterns happen for his students and colleagues. Michael David actively supported young people

in not buying into the negative connotation of friendships boys get when it comes to connection,

care, and belonging.

Jaime had the same experience in learning a new rule he had to accept: “You was buddy-

buddy in middle school, but now in high school, you can’t really be that close like that.” As

Latino male educators shared in this study, as they got older, they were taught to deal with their

own emotions, understand the dynamics at play without processing or dialoguing, and accept

expected standards to belong. Jaime received these messages from other men in his K–12 spaces.

116

He shared, “I worked at my current school where people would say certain things like, ‘Man up.’

Or, ‘Don’t be a bitch.’ Or, ‘Yo, come on, bro, you being a girl right now.’” Jaime also noticed

when he did speak up and try to educate other men or coworkers, he received reactions such as,

“All right, bro. We’re not trying to offend nobody here. We know.” By expressing anything not

accepted as the standard norm for gender, which is not unique to Latino men, schooling cycles of

losing friendships continued because participants were seen as different or othered. As Latino

male educators began to experiment with different behaviors not consistent with standard gender

norms, they reverted back to heteronormative stereotypes of what it means to be “a man.”

Navigational skills developed were rooted in individualism, and participants noted if they

showcased anything different or could not handle things on their own, they internalized not being

seen as capable of success. Alonzo summarized this feeling of self-preservation, saying:

Just figuring that out on your own. It’s hard for me to reach out and ask for help

in general. It’s not so much that the support hasn’t been offered to me. I think it’s

also embedded in me to not ask for help. It’s not that I expect to know everything

to be perfect. I just think it’s a matter of self-preservation, I guess. Not showing

any vulnerability in that sense.

Alonzo described the immigrant mentality ingrained for him as a Latino child, wherein he had to

figure everything out on his own because he has no other option. Many Latino male educators in

the circulos enfocados agreed with what Alonzo stated. The data showed that Latino male

educators believed there is no time for failure, there is no time to waste because they have to

seize opportunities, and there is no time to bother someone else with your problems. Repeated in

every circulo enfocado, the conversation of never asking for help was a theme among

participants in trying to figure out what success meant in the schooling environment and

117

professional careers. Christian added how it was not just physicality in feeling isolated, it also

deal with emotionality for him, saying, “the emotional isolation that really digs a little bit deeper

and gets into you. I know that just growing up, sharing my emotions wasn't one thing that I was

necessarily invited to do or given the opportunity to do.” Data showed Latino male educators’

default behavior was to be on their own because it was what they had experienced most of their

lives as they engaged with masculinity and machismo norms as well as their intersectionality of

coming from a working class family. Latino male educators have had to survive within their

gender identities, which many connected in how problematic that siloing of doing everything

alone has impacted their current lives in many ways. As the circulos enfocados expanded on how

Latino male educators actively chose to display their masculinity and machismo identities,

participants gravitated to thinking of their actions as wearing a mask.

Creation of Masks

This portion of the findings toward which Latino male educators gravitated was not

anticipated. Participants connected to the aspect of wearing masks from the video I showed at the

beginning of the circulo enfocado. In terms of Latino male identity, the wearing of masks

supported or hindered participants’ full understanding of masculinity and machismo. For Latino

male educators, masks were a form of acceptance for masculinity/machismo norms and allowed

for navigational capital at the expense of a Latino male’s authenticity (Breault, 2016; Colwill &

Boyd, 2008; Meeus et al., 2010; Yosso, 2005). Also, masks were worn for survival purposes

when participants had to show up a particular way for a specific audience. In realizing they wore

masks, participants began to unpack the purpose of masks and how they appear in interactions at

school with young people, colleagues, and families. Ultimately, Latino male educators who were

their authentic selves in deconstructing norms established for them at a young age knew which

118

masks they wore and for what purposes (Ahmed, 2004; Berggren, 2014; Breault, 2016; Colwill

& Boyd, 2008; Meeus et al., 2010; Stoltenberg, 2000).

Internal Conflict

There were many layers to the different types of masks Latino male educators wore on a

daily basis. From the words of the Latino male educators, I noticed they experienced internal

conflict knowing they had been given opportunities because they were men, having to act or a

look a particular way to be considered a man, using masculinity to gain credibility in sustaining a

complicit culture of youth, and navigating awareness of the tension and exhaustion mask wearing

brought them (Brockenbrough, 2012; Carey, 2020; Connell, 2005; Cooper & Jordan, 2003; Moje

& Lewis, 2020; Singh, 2021; Torres et al., 2002).

Antonio displayed an ongoing identity crisis in considering what allowed him to be

successful in his career as an educator. He explained:

An ongoing challenge for me, to be honest, and should I struggle going home

knowing that I had to put a mask on? Should I be okay with it because it got me in

the room, or got me a seat at the table? Those are all questions that still, day to

day, 13 years into the game are very real.

Antonio was afforded opportunities based on his gender, and he questioned if he was actually

authentic to himself or replicating what others wanted to see of him. In addition, Latino male

educators were required to perpetuate Eurocentric norms of successful behaviors for masculinity

and machismo. Five Latino men in the circulos enfocados felt similarly and shared their

experiences.

Espy described the structure that made him feel successful in his mask wearing that he

questions now because of its impact, saying, “the oppressive systems as a disciplinarian that I’ve

119

been a part of and partaking and not having known better to further my career. A privilege it’s

been at the cost of those who I want to serve the most.” As Espy gained consciousness in his

masculinity and machismo, he knew he had caused harm to young people by perpetuating

stereotypical gender norms that made him skilled at being a disciplinarian. His administrators

would respond with “Oh, wow, you can do that a lot. Like, ‘Let’s give you more responsibility to

do that.’ . . . I’m raising my voice, posturing up, the tone in my intonation is borderline

aggressive.” Espy affirmed how wearing heteronormative patriarchal masks perpetuated harmful

stereotypes of what it meant to be “a man.” By intentionally harming and scaring children

through the usage of his gender identity, Espy was accepted and given more opportunities to

perpetuate those behaviors in his K–12 spaces.

Kevin mentioned how masking affected him, saying, “sorry, it gets a little heavy . . . how

do you show up authentically, but at the same time, how are you viewed as, right? It’s like this

double consciousness of, how can I be real and myself.” Kevin struggled with what authenticity

meant because he knew he intentionally wore masks to be seen; he worried how others would

respond to his exploration and experimentation of identity when he took the mask off. Kevin was

conscious of the spaces he was in “when [he was] in a room with just like people from all walks,

there’s like an imposter syndrome that kicks in of like just coming correct and showing up” and

said he wondered, “Am I professional enough? Am I being accepted?” Latino male educators

looked for acceptance from what the outside world throughout the sharing of masks that they

wore, even if it meant the masks were problematic based on gender norms.

Miguel wore a professionalism mask rooted in whiteness constructs for his own survival

of identity. He noted, “I also try a lot to be clean shaven at work too and keep my hair short and

keep this nice, professional, very prototypical masculine appearance about me so I’m not

120

perceived as less than.” Miguel mentioned how being seen as “less than” created a constant

mode of survival in which he had to perform being “a man” through mask wearing. One’s

outward appearance and perception of identity were constant factors in the current version, or

identity expression, of masculinity and machismo Latino male educators decided to display for

people. External pressures dictated how Latino men showed up and caused constant tension

between belonging in an environment where they could not explore their authentic selves and

replicating oppressive forms of gender expression.

Justino mentioned how he responded to students in his school, mainly boys of color, who

constantly wore masks pertaining to their gender. He shared, “When they come to school, it’s

like there’s never a moment that they want to be seen slipping . . . I don’t know if it’s that I’m

wearing the mask or that I’m interrupting it. There’s a blend there.” Justino attempted to model

taking off the mask with students and noticed how he intentionally put on a mask to be accepted

or trusted by the students he tried to support. Data showed anytime participants were seen as

“slipping” or not meeting gender expectations to masculinity and machismo, they would be seen

as less than a man.

Latino male educators were constantly negotiating when to actively disrupt these

moments for themselves and for students while also maintaining the influence they wanted to

have on the youth they served. J.O. beautifully described how he felt about the constant

negotiation: “a lot of times I’m just thrown into things that I don’t really want to do, like roles I

don’t want to play. I think it’s exhausting at times.” The constant exhaustion in having to be

different versions of one’s self because of what others expected and performing harmful

behaviors not in alignment with one’s core values, led Latino male educators to question their

authenticity and purpose in being in education.

121

Caution

By actively choosing to participate in mask wearing, there was constant tension in what it

meant to be authentic because norms had been established by society, by their professional

space, or by other people in participants’ proximity. As noted by Latino male educators, as other

participants shared the need to wear a mask to be successful or to be seen as a “man,” it began a

collective reflexive moment in thinking about what authenticity means (Breault, 2016; Carey,

2020; Singh, 2021). Data showed Latino men wore masks for different circumstances. They

wore masks because of internal and external socialization processed from their families, peers,

and community expectations and reinforced or understood as unspoken truths for survival.

Furthermore, external dominant ideologies, like Eurocentric gender masculinity norms,

whiteness constructions of professionalism, and assimilation rooted in erasure of one’s culture,

externally influenced what masks they wore. External stereotypes also influenced how Latino

men understood their masculinity and machismo, which forced them to be cautious of what they

showed to others. By being cautious about the outward perspective they portrayed to people in

their K–12 spaces, they protected themselves from being fired, created assumptions of their

character, and made sure their presence exuded safety. Some of the experiences participants

navigated ranged from making sure they did not come off as being a child sex offender, having

extra labor asked of them to support boys, being in spaces with toxic masculinity/machismo, and

allowing heteronormative stereotypes to persist to achieve acceptance (Bell et al., 2003;

Berggren, 2014; Connell, 2005; De Leon, 2005; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Torres et al., 2002;

Waling, 2019). As Latino male educators began to share these experiences, more connections

and stories emerged in the space.

122

Michael David described his caution with his masculinity through the active state of

filtering. He explained:

Just trying to be above approach with everything and making sure that parents felt

super comfortable that I’m not some creepy person who likes kids. It’s like, that’s

the elephant in the room a lot of the time . . . I loved the way that kids could go in

and hug their female teachers and felt loved. I feel like I couldn’t connect with my

kids in that way because I was so self-aware that I shouldn’t be doing those

things. I would try to find alternative ways. I’m going to give you a side hug

because I wanted kids to feel like I cared for them each and every day, but those

were things that were constantly the lens with which I had to filter through my

teaching.

Michael David filtered what masks he wore to ensure the actions he showed were socially

accepted by peers, families, and students. He mentioned the way he as a Latino man showed love

was different than what female educators in his K–12 space showcased. Michael David had to

accept that difference as a form of survival and knew his expression of how he showed love was

being dissected by the people around him. Michael David, and many of the Latino male

educators in this study, mentioned that they saw how women were allowed to express what they

believed to be love in different ways, and they struggled as men in being treated differently in

that level of expression. The topic of love expression is something most of the Latino male

educators have struggled with throughout their lived experiences.

Dani and Taco mentioned unwritten rules that forced them to make sure they had

witnesses to how their masculinity and machismo was perceived by everyone around them. Dani

mentioned what he did when meeting with a female student, saying, “that door needs to remain

123

open. For me, that was you to consciously always make that known. If somebody’s coming in,

make sure you keep that door open.” For Taco, knowing the rule of always making sure there

were witnesses to how his gender was perceived made him switch the grade levels he supported

“because of the stigma that male educators can’t be alone.” Taco explained, “There’s a notion

that we may be predators or something. For me, that left a bad taste. I actually walked away from

becoming a preschool teacher.” Taco moved into high school because there was less stigma for

him to navigate even though he still knew he had to be cautious and conscious of the decisions

he made regarding those with whom he interacts. Even though this filtering was to make sure

everyone feels safe, Latino male educators’ actions and words were not always accepted.

Othered

Data revealed when Latino male educators experimented and tried to show up in more

intentional and filtered ways, their attempts were weaponized through direct connection to toxic

masculinity. Latino male educators discussed how, regardless of the internal work, they

constantly were reminded what they had done was not enough to be seen as different or

expansive of gender norms. Justino was aware of how people perceived everything he did or said

through gender stereotypes. He described moments of conflict with others, and, instead of

working out the differences, he was labeled “unapproachable,” which determined his behavior

and actions. Justino explained:

I feel like I’m very approachable. . . . At first, I was uncomfortable with telling

people no and stuff, but it’s funny because now when I do put my foot down and

I’m like, “I’ll still listen, but I still got my choice. This is still my decision; I’m

still taking this pathway.” It’s funny how many people will be like, “Ah, he’s so

unapproachable.” . . . I don’t know, but I’ve always found that funny is that I’ve,

124

literally, had people pat me on the back and they’re like, “Man, you’re such a

great leader.” Then the moment that I say no, I can think of one experience in the

moment that I said no, it’s like I’m a tyrant. I’m like, “Wow, it’s crazy.”

He expanded on this awareness and noted how he intentionally worked on dialoguing and

expressing his emotions as an educator. Because of this dialogue and emotional expression,

people responded with, “I thought you were gay.” Justino explained, “I was like, why would you

think that? What actions? I’m humoring, I’m laughing at it. What actions or what are your

metrics? What are you gathering that makes you think that I’m gay?” If individuals he worked

with did not perceive him as a tyrant, they perceived him as gay. Justin’s expanded masculinity

was not affirmed by others and resulted in labels given based on assumptions of gendered

behavior; thus, he was targeted through a specific label that elicited a response from him. In

addition, Justino laughed at the term gay or consideration of acting gay, which he acknowledged

as something he needed to unpack further because displaying other forms of masculinity and

machismo should not be considered a negative; instead, it should affirm his intentionality to

display something different.

Kevin and Bobby had similar experiences with being othered. Kevin mentioned how he

was constantly aware of what he was going to say and how he was going to say it. He actively

considered how much his reputation would be impacted by every decision he made because he

had direct experience of othering through gender stereotypes. Kevin mentioned how he

constantly processed these experiences:

There are double standards sometimes of my words may come across whether it’s

a little too strong or aggressive. Like, “How do I get my point across?” At the

same time, I know I have these good intentions, but sometimes they’re

125

misconstrued, and it sucks, and it’s the reality of it. It’s just, I think that was

something that was a constant battle and a constant struggle, for sure.

Kevin shared how everyone he interacted with was a woman. Although he did his best to filter

his masculinity and machismo and get second opinions on what he wanted to share, he was

constantly called into the principal’s office because the person with whom he dialogued had an

issue with how he shared his thoughts. Kevin added, “It’s like now you have to defend yourself

in a way. It’s just crazy. It’s like gaslighting in a sense.” Kevin constantly had to defend his

humanity, connect his thinking to the vision of the school and the purpose of education, and fight

for equity and justice in his community. Even with all that intentionality, his masculinity and

machismo overshadowed his attempts to be authentic, live his values, and express something

different.

Bobby had a difficult experience when he managed a female staff member who was not

doing her job. As he followed the protocol laid out by his organization to hold her accountable,

Bobby also did his best to filter how he communicated, supported, and valued the staff member’s

humanity. This staff member decided to leave the organization and, during the exit process, filed

a formal complaint on Bobby “and cited, in her perspective, my male dominance, machismo,

intimidating her . . . I didn’t agree with it. It bothered me because I’ve worked so hard not to be

that because that’s what I knew growing up.” Going through this experience left Bobby with

unanswered tension and conflict about how he was showing up. Even at the time of this study, he

was thinking about this experience and said, “What did I do? So that I don’t repeat it because

that’s not a way that I ever want to show up for anybody, period.” Even though Bobby was

intentional about not harming people through his gender identity, his gender identity was

weaponized and described through toxic masculinity and machismo descriptions. Such

126

weaponization showed how one experience, one dialogue, and one person’s perspective

reminded Latino men they would revert to the default stereotype.

The final type of othering included the role of being an educator. Latinidad and

immigrant families expect their children to disrupt patterns of survival and to thrive in high-

paying jobs to increase their opportunities and gain generational wealth. Antonio’s family

othered him because he did not live up to the American Dream. Antonio received an engineering

degree, and he did not enjoy that line of work. Once he decided to go into education, Antonio

shared his family “felt like I had failed by settling for going into education as opposed to

continuing my studies with engineering because I worked so hard for it . . . That took some years

to really get over.” Antonio noted the tension he experienced in living a new purpose as an

educator and having to defend the new opportunity he wanted to pursue. His family wanted him

to be an engineer, which was a predominantly masculine profession, versus an educator, which

was a predominantly feminine profession, and uphold gender stereotypes he then had to

navigate. Antonio chose to disrupt those patterns and also knew it would take time to feel seen,

heard, and valued by his family in a profession he truly enjoyed. Latino male educators

showcased many different experiences in how they actively tried to disrupt the pattern of mask

wearing. Data revealed this gender expansion came from their understanding of masculinity and

machismo at an earlier age.

Exploring Counter-Machismo

Data showed different experiences regarding expanding gender roles based on the

influence of motherhood or counter-machismo. Data revealed counter-machismo included

fathers doing more work around the house, which was not expected in society, and the support of

a progressive, educator household that did not partake in societal definitions of identities and

127

supported a deeper exploration of values, traditions, and community (Berggren, 2014; Falicov,

2018; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). Data also revealed how motherhood (a) supported the

exploration of identity because mothers were the decision makers in the family, (b) supported

single parent households through work and education, and (c) protected their young Latino boys

from traditional archetypes of masculinity/machismo (Berggren, 2014; Falicov, 2018; Torres et

al., 2002; Waling, 2019). The role of gender expansion to show up in their identities was helpful

for some of the Latino male participants to see a different version of what was possible (Hurtado

& Sinha, 2016; Tajfel, 1981).

Dani mentioned he struggled with what it meant to be “a man” because that concept was

never modeled for him. He shared:

I am two generations of single parents. My mom was raised just by my nana, and I was

raised just by my mom . . . I was raised by women. I struggled so much understanding

what it meant to be a man which is difficult communicating this with my kids and trying

to help coach them . . . I come from a mother who was a teacher . . . she was a hairstylist,

a cosmetologist. She went to school, did hair, did nails, ran a little beauty shop out of the

back room of our house. . . . I saw that my mom was able to make a transition from a

trade into a profession that is respected and people looked up to her for that. I’m like, “I

can do this. If my mom did this, I can do this.”

With his students and his own children, he constantly questioned if he was passing down harmful

stereotypes or disrupting patterns more supportive for their futures. The lack of masculinity and

machismo left a void in his understanding of his identity, but he looked for ways to be seen as “a

man” because that was how he was accepted by others. On the other hand, he saw how his mom

sacrificed so much and had become successful in her life without the presence of masculinity and

128

machismo norms in the household. He negotiated and unpacked what gender norms are and how

they benefited or harmed the people he influences as an educator and father. Dani was not the

only person who grew up without a father.

Taco’s family owned a panaderia, and he supported his mother in running the shop. The

work was overwhelming—a constant grind culture embedded in immigrant survival. Taco

reflected on his exposure to this culture of “the only rest we get is when we die, which is

something that I’m trying to let go of because it was pushed on me sometimes. I am grateful that

she was able to protect me.” Taco was still letting go of the grind and overwork culture that had

been pushed on him. His mother disrupted those patterns, and he witnessed his mother pushing

back masculinity and machismo norms, which gave him a different perspective of identity

because his mother was the positive exemplar in his life. Taco confirmed he still calls his mom

daily as she is a major supportive structure for him, and he engages in dialogue about what he is

experiencing in his life. Having this support structure is counter-machismo because Taco

engaged in ways of being and identity exploration that built emotional intelligence, which he

passed on to his students. Taco expressed something different because a different version of his

gender identity was accepted, and he was supported in that identity exploration early.

Jaime shared another way counter-machismo showed up was his father who engaged in

domestic responsibilities around the house, such as cooking and cleaning, which was not a

normal observation in other households he visited. Because dynamics around gender identity

were not unpacked or discussed, Jaime was left with unanswered questions of why his father

disrupted these patterns. Jaime questioned how he shows up and why he chooses to act a specific

way because he saw how his upbringing created differing behaviors and perspectives in how he

129

views gender and what it means to be “a man.” Counter-machismo also showed up in ways other

than a father not being present.

Jose Jesus saw how his mother influenced the dynamics in the household. Jose Jesus said

he grew up “pretty supported at home from my mom emotionally. . . . In my house, my mom

wore the pants. My dad, he’d say things, but at the end of the day, my mom was the one that

would get things done.” Due to his mother’s support of emotionality, Jose Jesus was able to

express emotions with his partner, his students, and his colleagues. He was able to showcase a

different version of masculinity and machismo students noticed, which allowed for more

intentionality in how he expressed his vulnerability and his identity to disrupt harmful patterns.

Alonzo grew up in a more progressive household led by two educators, which allowed

him to explore identity and authenticity earlier in his life. He described how his parents both

deconstructed societal norms on his identity and they intentionally unpacked that with him to

support him living through his values. He shared:

Luckily, I was raised to be true to my identity too. My ethnicity, my race, my

gender. I was never told I had to follow this path of masculinity. I was told just to,

like I said, stay true to myself, stay true to my values, to my community.

Alonzo displayed how deeply influenced people are by their environments when imagining

something different is the norm. Alonzo was given a sense of permission and opportunity to

explore what it meant to be himself, to be true, to be authentic, and to never apologize for that

expression. He was able to engage with youth, with colleagues, and with families through this

perspective because he was not tied to a survival skill of living up to being “a man.” He was able

to make decisions based on progressive familial values that actively dismantled and

deconstructed all forms of oppressive identities to create something new.

130

In sharing about counter-machismo, there was a consistent pattern and theme throughout

the data of ongoing negotiation of what it means to be a man (Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Torres et

al., 2002). As a facilitator in these discussions, my emphasis was to name the patterns that

emerged and also leave participants with something to consider. I asked participants, are there

multiple versions of masculinity/machismo we need to continue exploring? (Hurtado & Sinha,

2016; Tajfel, 1981). The group did not get to answer this question in this dialogical space even

though it came up in every single circulo enfocado. Latino male educators revealed they knew

which traits and characteristics were problematic, harmful, and toxic to themselves and their

lived experiences. Thus, there was an opportunity to expand, reimagine, and redefine gender

norms more prevalent to who they were and how they wanted to impact the spaces they occupy

(Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Torres et al., 2002).

This section showcased the complexity of understanding the nuances in “being a man”

and how those nuances impacted Latino male educators in how they wanted to show up in their

K–12 spaces. Latino male educators constantly battled internal and external definitions of who

they were supposed to be, which led to wearing masks that supported or hindered their identities.

Ultimately, Latino male educators displayed evidence that “being a man” was something no one

could ever attain because of everyone’s perceived notions of what that phrase meant. Latino

male educators in this study struggled to be their authentic selves and to find a safe space to

explore what new versions of their gender identity they wanted to engage in. Experimentation

and exploration are something that all the Latino male educators connected with in how they

express their intersectional identities. As Latino male educators gained more criticality of

machismo and masculinity, they started to gain a heightened critical consciousness that allowed

131

them to disrupt heteronormative patriarchal patterns, internally and externally, in their K–12

spaces.

Deconstructing and Disrupting

Research Question 2 asked: In what ways do Latino male educators disrupt

heteronormative patriarchal standards of masculinity and machismo in their beliefs and actions?

The intention behind this question was to understand how Latino male educators actively

disrupted their thinking, mindsets, and beliefs of masculinity/machismo and how they were

intentional in their actions. The reason I wanted to look at this question was because the

deconstruction of gender norms and roles Latino male educators already have are important to

understanding how they continue to survive or thrive in their professional careers.

Deconstruction of masculinity/machismo can look different for each Latino male educator in

their journey and my hope was to gain insight on ways that could support other Latino male

educators as they enter the profession.

The second finding from the data provided evidence that Latino male educators built their

critical consciousness through a deep internal deconstruction of masculinity/machismo that led to

exploration and experimentation of expanding gender by disrupting gender norms in themselves,

disrupting gender norms with youth, and disrupting through critical pedagogical instructional

practices. Findings from the data provided insight into the action steps Latino male educators

intentionally experiment with in terms of their critical consciousness. Through the deconstruction

of masculinity/machismo, Latino male educators began to analyze how they wanted to be

perceived by others through a more humanizing lens, began to unpack how their identities cause

harm in spaces, and began to reimagine what masculinity/machismo means in their new meaning

making. This self-awareness in critical consciousness allowed for deeper reflexivity and constant

132

questioning of what was being done for the students they serve through curriculum and culturally

relevant experiences.

Gaining deeper consciousness and awareness gave Latino male educators the

opportunities to think through what action steps they wanted to take in their expansion of gender.

As they gained this awareness, they were able to experiment through critical pedagogy and

began to create lessons that disrupted problematic language, stereotypes, and negative

assumptions of the expansion of masculinities. They were able to create dialogical spaces for

youth to engage in difficult conversations and lessons on the criticality of gender. Furthermore,

when given opportunities to lead these spaces from awareness to action, Latino male educators

had a broader impact than the four walls of their classroom and began to shift cultural norms in

their school settings. Data showed how Latino male educators had more intentionality and

purpose in exploring their identities because they had obtained new knowledge, language, and

opportunities to engage with their authenticity, which allowed them to share those practices with

young people as well. Through this ongoing identity development, one Latino male educator

mentioned how therapy enhanced their ability to feel more liberated because they were equipped

with more skills around their emotionality. Latino male educators actively disrupted

heteronormative patriarchal norms through pedagogical exploration that directly connected to

their critical consciousness.

Deconstruction Through Critical Consciousness

Data revealed Latino male educators gained critical consciousness and were intentional in

how they disrupted patterns of heteronormative patriarchal standards because of the ongoing

reflections they had. Critical consciousness involves developing an awakening to what is

happening in the world, in this case, how masculinity/machismo impacted their identities

133

(Danielewicz, 2014; Freire, 1994). Latino male educators showed evidence of understanding the

problematic ways masculinity/machismo impacted their lives and began to disrupt those patterns.

They engaged in these actions on their own without prompting, without development

opportunities to unpack these practices, and without direct feedback about the impact of their

masculinity and machismo as an educator. The first way Latino male educators disrupted

patterns of masculinity/machismo was by decentering themselves in spaces and thinking about

how they were showing up with specific audiences, listening to others before speaking, and

understanding the perceptions others have of their specific gender identity (Berggren, 2014;

Connell, 2005; Falicov, 1998; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Lara &

Fránquiz, 2015; Paz & Kemp, 1961; Pleck, 1981; Singh, 2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres

et al., 2002).

Javier displayed the critical consciousness cycle of awareness and action. By

deconstructing the ways he intentionally or unintentionally chose to behave, he critically

analyzed if his actions were rooted in gender norms he was actively trying to disrupt or if they

were genuine human behaviors he wanted to exhibit. Javier shared:

It was just like you’re starting to see the generational effect of what it means to be

a man. I think it’s something that has been very prevalent in my own identity,

both as a teacher and even in my relationships, and how I show up as a man in my

partnerships. I’m always having to think and undo and think about, am I reacting

this way because this is how I viewed a man react in certain situations, or is it

because this is how I’m truly feeling? It’s been a long process.

134

Javier understood how gender norms of masculinity and machismo impacted the way he

was perceived and the way he perceived himself, which allowed him to reflect on ways to

express his identity in a more productive way.

Sandro also connected to how he sees his gender identity and recognized that it “comes

with stereotypes, perceptions, but then it could also be real powerful, and so just being mindful

of what space I’m in and what I’m trying to do or what am I obligated to do in that space.”

Sandro showcased an acceptance to perceptions the outside world has of his gender identity

while actively choosing to show something different to people to change those perceptions.

Sandro also mentioned how he was obligated to show up in particular ways by specific people; in

those instances, he actively chose to disrupt patterns other people have of masculinity and

machismo and to expand gender norms and ways of being. One way he intentionally decided to

disrupt a pattern he had early in his professional career was to stop overreacting and to use new

strategies from the critical awareness he gained from his experiences. Sandro shared, “I think just

to be a better person and just to be a better Latino man, I think I just listen first, and I don’t listen

for anything too specific except for themes.” Sandro used to react and go into fight-or-flight

mode, but he reflected and gained awareness of the impact of his identity, which gave him new

skills to experiment and supported how people respond to his masculinity and machismo. The

concept of being “better” was interesting to dissect given there was a negative connotation in

being “a man.” Sandro was conscious of what behaviors were problematic and addressed them

by bringing new behaviors into his daily interactions.

Two other Latino male educators revealed in the circulo enfocado they entered the

profession with context, knowledge, and outside development experiences that allowed them to

experiment with their critical consciousness in the classroom. Jose Jesus gained more awareness

135

in dialogue spaces in college through Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA) and

in learning about masculinity and machismo from peers. He shared, “I was able to put words and

concepts to things I experienced, because I think I was always grounded in being okay having

emotions, just learning how to control them.” Jose Jesus participated in debates on

homosexuality in MEChA, deconstructed machismo and what it meant to be a man, and attended

gender and sexuality workshops that supported his understanding of his identity. By having these

experiences before becoming an educator, Jose Jesus had gained critical consciousness about

how he intentionally acted regarding his masculinity and machismo, which he continued to

expand during his 24-year teaching experience.

Justino shared how his graduate course work expanded his identity development on his

own gender. He claimed he actively chose to show “the piece about acting on it or proving to be

a man, it gave me words for some things that I haven’t been able to name for people. It just made

a lot of sense for me too.” Justino gained vocabulary and knowledge on how gender impacted his

identity and humanity and was able to articulate his emotions, his thinking, and his actions to be

supportive of a more expansive masculinity and machismo. Data showed Latino male educators

were aware of the impact masculinity and machismo had on their own upbringing and identity,

and they chose to actively be someone different. For those who gained critical consciousness in

coursework and group settings, like Justino and Jose Jesus, they also were able to gain a deeper

understanding of expectations they grappled with in trying to be seen as men. By doing that

identity development work, critical consciousness supported their ongoing experimentation and

disruption of stereotypical heteronormative standards. Once Latino male educators gained a level

of critical consciousness, they also actively disrupted heteronormative standards with their

students.

136

Disrupting With Youth

The second way Latino male educators disrupted heteronormative standards was by

supporting youth in expanding their definitions of masculinity, disrupting stereotypes by setting

boundaries, and starting to redefine what it meant to be a “man” with the youth they influenced

(Berggren, 2014; Cruz, 2012; Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; I.

Jackson et al., 2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh, 2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al.,

2002; Waling, 2019). Latino male educators were able to impact youth because they saw

themselves in many of the situations their students experienced regarding the navigation of

internal and external gender norms to express their masculinity and machismo.

Through deconstruction and gaining of critical consciousness, Michael David shared how

he actively disrupted negative patterns present in his own childhood. He actively supported boys

in displaying their definitions and understandings of masculinity and machismo while disrupting

the harmful patterns he experienced. Michael David explained:

I think there’s a lot of things that I did as an educator that swung in the opposite

way of being affirming to things that do not include the full scope of being a male

teacher or being a certain gender. Then I would see the young boys who were

trying to figure that stuff out . . . How do you make space for other people, and

not affirming the things that they are actually going through in their bodies. I

have, as a way of wanting to counter my own upbringing, and trying to

deconstruct all those things that I feel were harmful in the spaces that were

created back in the ‘80s and ‘90s. Overcorrecting for these things, and also that

there’s a lot of space for people to be a boy, and be a man, and that’s okay too.

137

Michael David’s critical consciousness was hyper aware when boys were in silos trying to figure

out what it means to be “a man,” and he supported identity development that would have been

useful to him in his own upbringing. Through critical consciousness, Michael David reflected on

how he dialogues and interacts with the boys in his classroom. He stated, “I had gone through a

transformation of, again, deconstruction, and who am I as a male and patriarchal norms, but on

the day to day stuff, what was I doing to get the kids’ attention?” Michael David analyzed how

he responds to triggers he experienced as a young Latino boy and actively disrupts the patterns

he saw from male adults in his life. He explained, “like, am I raising my voice? Am I taking a

domineering stance? Am I using my size to control in the same way that I was shown that?”

Michael David actively deconstructed and reflected on his own without someone supporting his

development and understanding of masculinity and machismo. His experience growing up gave

him abilities to support youth with similar experiences beyond traditional academic instructional

practices.

Miguel shared a similar experience about how he thought about his students expressing

themselves. Miguel described himself as someone who struggled to express himself through

masculinity and machismo norms. He mentioned he never felt fully accepted as a man by others,

even though he displayed archetypical heterosexual masculine behaviors, people still questioned

his manhood. Miguel talked about how with his own struggle, he constantly experienced tension

with specific, school-wide expectations of how Latino boys should express themselves. In his

school, uniforms were used as a form of professionalism, and Miguel questioned whether this

practice was supportive for boys who are, “more at risk to not be as successful in the school

system, or is it actually hurting them and hindering their individuality . . . so they have to find

other ways to try to ‘express themselves.’”

138

Miguel thought about how to disrupt systemic approaches to support the development

and belonging young boys of color need in their lives. He considered how he struggled to

express himself because he did not go with the mainstream masculinity and machismo

expectations set out by his environment. Miguel explained, “I think for me, though, my favorite

part is [clears throat] going back to where we started highlighting differences, that being a Latino

male can mean all kinds of things.” As Miguel unpacked masculinity and machismo with young

people, mainly young Latino boys, they were able to find other ways to express their

individuality and not feel pressured to conform to heteronormative standards.

Miguel affirmed differences and supported the decisions of young boys in his classroom.

He shared, “those Latino males, like, ‘You guys love anime? That’s great. That’s your thing. Do

it.’ Really encouraging them to find the things that make them unique and individual.” Miguel

actively disrupted stereotypes and showed students he enjoys science-fiction, he reads books

when he is on a break, and not all males have to love the same things. As Latino male educators

began to expand their identities of masculinity and machismo, they directly impacted youth

perceptions of what it means to be “a man” and to express something different from what

stereotypical gender norms ask boys to suppress, which is their humanity.

Eight more Latino male educators showcased how they impacted and carried the words

their young Latino boys have shared with them. Leon mentioned how he created culture with his

boys. He explained, “I guess, in educating over 5 years that I had my own classroom, is just

putting myself in their shoes, and not always being, ‘I’m the boss. I’m the teacher.’ I feel

sometimes we forget about that.” Leon experienced the authoritative disciplinarian archetype he

was called upon to mimic to control young people. He disrupted that particular stereotype of

being dominant and authoritative by always showing empathy to the boys who struggled to be

139

seen. Leon was able to put himself directly in their shoes and support them in understanding the

world.

Antonio shared he supports his young boys learning how to ask for help by reframing the

practice as a strength rather than a sign of weakness. He explained, “We try to celebrate in that

classroom space, and so that was super valuable for me because it even pushed me to make it

okay to do the same in the spaces that I was then going into.” Antonio shared actively disrupting

masculinity and machismo stereotypes with his boys pushed him to also live up to the

expectation he sets with youth. Antonio was able to see the impact expanding masculinity norms

had with his boys and his own well-being, which supported knowing how to navigate the spaces

he had struggled with early in his life.

Kevin shared how building connections with boys around the same life experiences he

had motivated him to do this work. Kevin was able to deconstruct masculinity and machismo

with young boys by modeling a different version that was more emotional, was vulnerable with

them, and shared his own learning. Kevin shared he “feels good off the bat. I think that’s one of

the pieces of the work that I enjoy the most is being able to connect authentically and knowing

that students know that you have their best interest in mind.” Kevin also added how he saw other

people in the school struggle with this skill of building connection and relationships with boys.

He knew he was needed in his K–12 spaces because of this struggle, and this realization

supported his purpose of reimagining what masculinity and machismo meant to him and his

students.

The impact Latino male educators saw from their intentionality fueled their practices with

experimenting and exploring different versions of masculinity. Javier shared how students would

mention to him:

140

I just want to let you know, you are one of the first positive Latino male role

models I had in my life, who we didn’t need to go out drinking or shooting or

doing something like that. You showed me that masculinity meant to be just be

us. We could do other things.

Javier saw how his intentionality was affirmed through the ways Latino boys experienced his

masculinity and machismo. Many of the skills mentioned regarding how Latino male educators

built connections and relationships with boys were not highlighted as strengths by their

administrators or colleagues. These Latino male educators had strong assets and strengths to

drive positive cultural impact, if used effectively.

Jose Jesus expanded on the calling bestowed upon Latino men to expand gender

identities, which stemmed from what his students shared with him that included:

You taught me things about being a man that I should have learned from my own

father. I think it’s that. It’s not a charge I signed up for, but I realize as I got into

education, the community I teach in has a lot of single-family or mixed families

because of the socioeconomics of the neighborhood.

Jose Jesus mentioned how many students saw him as a father figure because he displayed

something that was missing for both male and female students in their Latinidad households. In a

similar fashion, Justino had students calling him uncle or tío because he gave off a vibe of

someone who supported their individuality. Alonzo allowed young people to be themselves and

unpack their values. He shared, “I think it’s important for me to push that narrative for them to

be true to themselves because a lot of these students don’t have that opportunity to learn from

their families.” Latino male educators like Alonzo actively supported identity development and

exploration of youth. Alonzo’s critical consciousness helped guide his actions in filling gaps

141

youth may need to be more successful in understanding who they are through the

intersectionality of their identities.

Data showed how Latino male educators were proactive and purposeful in how they

chose to support youth in addressing the gaps they had in their childhoods, unlearning what they

had done based on negative experiences with masculinity and machismo, and expanding their

definitions of being “a man” through exploratory moments with youth. Michael David

summarized the impact a critically conscious Latino male educator could have on boys’

academic and social development with the intentionality to disrupt heteronormative patterns,

saying:

They’re really searching for something, and if I can give them a hint of what

they’re looking for and start to push their expectations for what does it mean to be

a man, and be nurturing, and be caring, but also be physical, and be all the things

that they’re questioning about themselves and push for academic excellence,

right? Be thoughtful, be eloquent. Like give yourself this opportunity to read

incredible books, and have these discussions, and that I saw so many kids in my

classroom blossom as a result of being that type of way, and now a lot of them are

in college and it’s incredible to see the seeds that were planted then, and what

these young boys and now men have become. It was a lot, and it was necessary.

Michael David knew this work of deconstructing and disrupting negative patterns of masculinity

and machismo was necessary, for his own mental wellness and for the well-being of the next

generation of men. Michael David directly supported a new generation of expansion in gender

norms that displayed the positive impact and breaking of harmful cycles that pertain to young

Latino boys.

142

Data revealed Latino male educators had many intentional skills to build deeper

relationships with students, especially young boys. Latino male educators intentionally broke

down masculinity/machismo barriers of emotional erasure and allowed young boys to explore

their emotions, gave them space to ask for help, and displayed multiple masculinities in their

own behaviors (Connell, 2005; Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001;

Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Noguera, 2012; Romero et al., 2009; Tajfel 1981;

Torres et al., 2002). Also, participants were able to have empathy for what young people in their

communities were experiencing by reflecting on their own lives, planting seeds of potential

interests and career opportunities, and humanizing interactions with students labeled as “trouble”

or “at-risk” (I. Jackson et al., 2014; Noguera, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2017; Romero et al., 2009).

There were many examples of the impact these relationships had on the future of their youth.

Having a deeper connection in their school experience was valuable for young Latino boys, and

Latino male educators reflected how intentional they were in creating them given their

experiences growing up. A deeper level of consciousness allowed for Latino male educators to

be more intentional in how they built relationships, how they explored their identities, and they

supported youth to not experience the struggle they experienced in their own lives. These skills

were supportive of enhancing a school environment to impact the lives of all youth. The

examples showcased from the data thus far focused on relationships and social practices Latino

male educators use. Once Latino male educators had a clearer understanding of the impact they

wanted to create, they began to also support disruption in what curricular activities and

experiences they provided for youth.

143

Disrupting Through Critical Pedagogy

As Latino male educators enhanced their critical consciousness, intentional and

purposeful decisions were made in their lesson planning that directly impacted youth. These

decisions began a phase of action through critical pedagogy in how they thought about creating

shifts, changes, and disruption through their curricular experiences for students. A critical

pedagogical framework supported educators in relinquishing power to youth, created dialogical

spaces to build criticality, and supported the liberation of individuals in oppressive structures

(Danielewicz, 2014; Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994). The awareness of the

structures they navigated internally and externally supported a deeper understanding of what

power dynamics were present, and participants intentionally tried not to replicate the problematic

aspects of masculinity/machismo they had experienced. Data revealed Latino male educators

were able to deepen their exploration of expanding masculinity/machismo through intentional

planning on what they were doing for the youth they served. Latino male educators disrupted

heteronormative patriarchal norms by breaking down how they communicated with youth

without gendering them, moving to a welcoming presence rather than a fear-based compliance

environment, and disrupting stereotypical toxic masculinity/machismo language that

dehumanized multiple masculinities (Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh,

2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019).

Miguel reflected by breaking down patterns of his own masculinity and machismo

through deconstruction. He shared:

Early on in my teaching practice, I recognized, “Oh man, I sound like my

parents.” . . . I’m very gendered in how I’m talking to my students, whether

they’re male or female. Then, if I do have students that are nonbinary, that are

144

trans or anywhere on the spectrum, I am gendering them by how I’m talking to

them unintentionally. I took a few years to very intentionally unpack that, break

that habit. What I settled on is I talked to all of my students regardless of gender

identity, with a more like loving, raising my tones or I pitch sometimes, so it’s

like softer and more welcoming because that’s how I wish I would’ve been talked

to more by males and females alike. It’s not for everybody and that’s fine, but at

least it’s much more welcoming.

By gaining awareness through critical consciousness of how he presented himself to students and

gathering feedback on how he impacted youth through his communication, he was able to adjust

his tone in how he spoke to all students, regardless of gender. Miguel displayed growth through

this reflexivity, moved beyond feeling guilt or shame of what he had done, and focused on what

he could change to impact the current students he served. Miguel also experimented with his

masculinity and machismo to display something different in every single interaction he had with

anyone he encountered in his K–12 spaces. Miguel connected how he replicated something

missing in his life from adult men, and now he gets to display something his younger self

needed. Much of the pedagogical practices Latino male educators focused on pertained to the

harm they obtained as young Latino boys and what would have supported their younger selves.

Latino male educators were able to get direct feedback from youth when they experimented in

this way, which motivated them to pursue a different version of masculinity and machismo.

Additionally, five Latino male educators shared how they actively disrupted heteronormative

standards in their classroom practices.

Javier directly disrupted homophobic and transphobic language that dehumanized others

in his classroom. Javier mentioned how students would use homophobic terminology like “that’s

145

gay or don’t be a fag,” which he could have easily shut down through rules and norms. Javier

went deeper in his pedagogical practices by “taking the time to pause and unpack the history, the

implications, and the impact of that kind of language and its effects on the space we’re trying to

co-create within the classroom.” Javier provided experiential and dialogical spaces for students

in his classroom to have productive conflict conversations on topics of masculinity and

machismo. Furthermore, he gave students the power to co-create norms, structures, and cultural

collective accountability on how they were all building the existing space. Going deeper and

having academic opportunities to engage in cultural harm had a positive impact in his classroom

by fully grasping the purpose of disrupting heteronormative toxic masculinity and machismo and

becoming a space that was more inclusive of everyone’s differences.

Jose Jesus also focused on language with youth, particularly with terms used daily that

focused on the connotation of gendered Spanish words. He shared, “I’ll bring up some of the

language we use, sometimes I’ll even joke like little jokes. Why do we say when something’s

cool, we say, ‘Qué padre,’ but when it’s bad we say, ‘Qué madres?’” Jose Jesus was able to

bring in everyday terminology students do not think twice about and have a critical conversation

on the origins of words and their historic impact. Through his critical pedagogy, Jose Jesus

actively built the critical consciousness of youth so they question why they do or say the things

that are a part of their lives.

Michael David and Antonio discussed how they created practices that supported boys in

particular. Michael David mentioned needing to “be really careful that I wasn’t setting up a

precedent for kids to be listening to me out of fear, because the science teacher or the art teacher

who were female didn’t have that same presence.” Michael David intentionally filtered his

masculinity in how he communicated all directions, all instruction, and any reactions he had to

146

youth to show care, love, and support, which was something he did not experience in his

schooling experience. Antonio used his classroom as an opportunity for youth to escape from the

traumatic environment outside of the four walls he controlled. Antonio supported youth to “take

off the mask that they had to wear when they were walking the rest of the hallways, because it

was basically a defense mechanism for them to be able to get through the day safely.” Antonio

had to go against the curricular pacing plans to allow youth to build trusting relationships with

him in an environment where they did not feel safe. Antonio had to create a countercultural

space where youth were able to experiment with being themselves through intentional activities,

experiences, and opportunities to just be human. Once Latino male educators were able to start

experimenting with instructional practices, they had the potential to have a greater impact on

school-wide initiatives that support systemic approaches to inclusion, belonging, and equity.

Through work in the classroom and curriculum for over 20 years, Jose Jesus spoke about

how he was able to create a Gender Empowerment Day for everyone in the school. Jose Jesus led

a committee of educators, trained staff on pedagogical practices, and created curricular

experiences that allowed all youth to engage with gender expansion with all the adults on

campus. Jose Jesus explained:

Then in the classrooms, we reassigned all the males to different classrooms. One

of the things they watched was clips from The Mask You Live in. They watched a

small TED Talk, a little clip of a TED Talk from Jeff Duncan-Andrade on the

roses that grow from concrete . . . The Feminist on Cellblock Y. It’s in Soledad

Prison. The guy is reading bell hooks and he’s teaching other inmates about

masculinity . . . They’re breaking down these concepts, so they watch clips of that

147

as they’re having discussions. It was about maybe a 4-hour lesson that myself and

another colleague of mine put together.

Jesus Jose brought in content to supplement the experiences youth were having in his high

school. He collaborated with other educators on what content could push specific themes and

patterns they were noticing in their youth and actively engaged youth in a proactive way to learn

and unlearn. Through the Gender Empowerment Day, Jose Jesus mentioned how women

supported young girls and gender expansive students were able to obtain a space where they felt

supported in their experiences and in the topics they wanted to engage in. Through the

partnership Jose Jesus gained from his administration and colleagues, he was able to experiment

with curriculum at a level where all people in the high school were being influenced to become

more inclusive and equitable to the experiences of all their students. As Latino men gained

opportunities to engage with different forms of pedagogy, they were able to gain even more

criticality of what they were teaching youth through required content versus what they could

supplement to support youth in a more culturally responsive way.

Michael David beautifully summarized his growth in pedagogy and what he learned

through this exploratory process, saying:

My first avenue into pedagogy was actually counter. We were given a pedagogy

based upon high-performing charter schools in the East Coast, which has now

come to light as a little bit more carceral in its ways of being. I knew that was part

of why kids feared coming to school, especially in fourth grade, right? Fourth and

fifth grade, that’s not a space that you want to be, and again, this was as a result of

high expectations, right? High expectations at the cost of kid’s humanity, and so

148

that was a lesson to me that not all quote unquote effective pedagogy is good

pedagogy, and it’s not humanizing.

Michael David unpacked what it meant to humanize his content and curricular experiences for

youth. He was able to break down why certain practices he was instructed to perform were

actually harmful to the identities of young people. Through his critical consciousness, he actively

disrupted what content he put in front of students and was more intentional about experiences

that affirm all the intersectionalities his youth showcase. Through critical consciousness, Latino

male educators were able to plan, think, and execute reimagining experiences for youth in school

environments focused on inclusivity, belonging, and equity.

Pedagogically, Latino male educators questioned the curriculum based on the coded

messaging it used, provided opportunities for youth to unpack their identities through curricular-

based experiences, and intentionally supported a classroom space that helped young boys of

color take off their survival masks (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et

al., 2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2020, 2021). Critical pedagogy takes

on a political stance and provides a great opportunity for disruption of masculinity/machismo

norms, stereotypes, and beliefs (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et al.,

2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2017; Singh, 2020, 2021). Another

way critical pedagogy was enhanced was through continued identity development and intentional

unpacking. Espy mentioned how he felt more liberated going through marriage counseling and

therapy by having the emotional intelligence to navigate spaces with tools that support his

identity exploration, which he explored with youth (Falicov, 2010, 2018; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015;

Singh, 2020, 2021). Being able to acquire tools to express feelings and emotions and engage in

149

healthy conflict supported the use of critical pedagogy in knowing triggers, gaining awareness of

what continues to affect identities, and exploring new content to become more authentic.

This section showcased how Latino male educators actively disrupted heteronormative

patriarchal standards once they had a heightened level of critical consciousness. Through this

critical consciousness, they began to deconstruct what masculinity and machismo meant to them

and interrogated their intentions and behaviors. By interrogating their masculinity and

machismo, participants began to disrupt heteronormative standards through their interactions

with youth and through intentional lesson planning, expand masculinity and machismo

exploration of identity, and use critical pedagogy to critique systematic patterns that affect young

boys of color. Active disruption of heteronormative patriarchal standards supported Latino male

educators to heal their own wounds regarding how masculinity and machismo impacted their

lives and support the next generation of young men to be different, to expand their identities, and

to not hide their humanity.

Surviving and Thriving in the Profession

Research Question 3 asked: In what ways do Latino male educators acquire knowledge

and skills in their teaching and leadership practices that have helped them stay in the education

profession? Asking this question brought forth the opportunity for Latino male educators in this

study to have an impact on the future Latino male educators who want to become teachers,

administrators, and K–12 regional and district leaders. By understanding what skills and

knowledge they obtained, there is an opportunity for teacher education programs and school

professional development programs to create proactive and reactive interventions to retain Latino

male educators. I wanted Latino male educators in this study to be seen as experts of their

150

experiences, which could lead to more positive results in terms of teaching and leadership

experiences for Latino men in education.

In this study, data revealed Latino male educators acquired knowledge and skills to be

successful in their K–12 experiences in two distinct ways. One way was through intentional skill

development from mentors/femtors who supported growth opportunities for Latino male

educators to lead. The other way they obtained knowledge and skills was through lessons they

had learned independently and wished they had learned earlier in their careers to make them

more successful.

Data revealed the resilience and agency many of Latino male educators possessed

throughout their careers which led them to stay in the profession. For Latino male educators who

did not have intentional development at their schools, they created opportunities to develop skills

on their own. This siloed experience connected to masculinity studies wherein men try to figure

out everything by themselves, from early age to adulthood (Berggren, 2014; Connell, 2005;

Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Milner, 2010; Romero et al., 2009; Salisbury

& Jackson, 1996; Torres et al., 2002). This agency also connected to previous experiences

unpacked through the data in which Latino men assumed they had to navigate everything on

their own. Latino male educators gained valuable skills and knowledge in their identities, learned

how to navigate the K–12 spaces they encountered, and examined what they unlearned through

pedagogical lessons in their careers. In acknowledging the knowledge and skills they obtained,

circulos enfocados became a space to share those practices, to unpack what all Latino male

educators were going through, and to support each other through similar experiences. Circulos

enfocados became a space in which intentional learning was provided for Latino male educators

who needed to gain new insights to support their current work. My hope was for future

151

institutional support structures to take into consideration the investment Latino male educators

seek to develop their mindsets and skills and reach their full potential in their careers.

Development From Mentors/Femtors

Data revealed different ways mentorship and femtorship positively impacted Latino male

educators’ lives by obtaining valuable skills from people they trusted. Latino male educators

obtained awareness of their identities, knowledge of critical scholars who pushed their thinking,

experiential learning to support their pedagogy, and philosophical beliefs that pushed their

thinking about students (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et al., 2014;

R. Jones et al., 2019; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013; Sáenz et

al., 2015; Singh, 2019, 2021; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Torres et al., 2002). In their teaching

practices, mentors and femtors enhanced participants’ instructional toolkits, pushed them to be

reflective of their teaching practices, exhibited beliefs in their abilities to grow into someone they

had not seen yet, and supported their development to become coaches for others. Mentors and

femtors had the ability to increase Latino male educators' confidence, skillset, and purpose in

education.

Justino mentioned how someone saw something in him at an early stage in his career.

Justino stated:

I can’t remember a moment that I didn’t want to be a principal, because someone

always fed that to me. Someone was always like, “All right. Well, you’re a 1st-

year teacher right now, but when you’re a principal, here’s the knowledge you

need to have.” . . . When you make a teacher become their own driver of

development, you’re the coach now, you’re coaching me what it means to be you,

and that kind of thing. . . . When I think about my own experiences, that’s what I

152

think about. Is just being able to, one, know who I was has helped a lot, or at least

be in the progression of this is how I understand myself, and then this is how I

understand my role and myself in that role. . . . Those are just some elements, just

the identity piece, the affinity. That someone genuinely cared about my

progression, or what I was trying to accomplish. Even if it was just in the

classroom, they just knew.

Justino did not go into education to become a principal and the fact that someone intentionally

developed him to reach that potential afforded him the opportunity to unpack his impact on a

classroom and on a school-wide scale. Justino gained insights about how to become an

instructional expert, lead through others, and implement change in his school site. As a result,

Justino was able to support others as an administrator who could continue the positive

development cycle he had experienced.

Kevin mentioned a similar experience with his former principal who saw something he

had not yet seen in himself. He built trust with his principal by her actions that allowed him to

explore his pedagogy and aspirational goals of impacting his schools community at a larger

scale. Kevin shared, “I leaned on her, asked her questions. Those first 5 years, it was a lot of

learning and growing. It was easy because, again, I know that she had my best interest in mind.”

Kevin made lots of mistakes through his practice, and the feedback relationship he had with his

principal allowed him to use those moments as growth opportunities. Kevin also took advantage

of opportunities to reach out for help and learn from a person he was aspiring to become in the

future. Kevin explained, “She always made herself available. My love language is time spent. If

she was able to jump on the call, if she was able to answer questions, jump in a meeting with me,

it just means a lot.” The femtor Kevin had was able to model high support and differentiation for

153

his needs so Kevin was able to thrive in his career. Kevin added how he gained so many skills,

strategies, and tools that impacted the way he coaches teachers and how he leads through the

exemplary model he had. Like Justino, Kevin experienced someone who was invested in his

growth and development from the beginning, and both Latino men are now in administrative

roles leading in similar ways to impact their school sites. However, development and growth did

not mean participants had to go into leadership.

J.O., who won many accolades being an educator, received support to become the best

educator possible through intentional development of his pedagogy. J.O. received feedback on

his planning and execution of lessons, and he was able to process and dialogue about his own

development path with his femtor. J.O. shared, “She helps me see things that I don’t think about,

I guess, engagement-wise or proximity-wise, or what could we have done differently?” J.O.

trusted the perspective of his coach and was able to gain insights into his awareness of his

teaching practices to support his development. J.O. appreciated how he was able to transfer what

he learned in coaching sessions to his own practice on a daily basis. J.O mentioned how he was

on the same page with his coach, which allowed him to explore the creation of his curriculum

and make adjustments at any time based on the needs of his students. J.O. explained, “Usually,

even like teaching crossfits, I’m teaching the same lesson, the first one is usually like trash and

then it gets better and better. By the time it’s the end, it’s like, ‘Oh, now it’s like this is money.’”

Because of the intentional development he obtained from his coach and femtor, J.O.

implemented his own feedback after reflecting on his lessons in the moment. He made

adjustments based on what he learned and adapted to the needs of his students, which made his

lessons more meaningful and produced deeper, trusting relationships with his students.

154

Javier mentioned how his mentors and femtors supported his pedagogy through direct

feedback that enhanced his skills. Javier explained, “I had some really great coaches, and so,

they would help me with the instructional side of it, and just on the logistical, what feedback to

provide, right? Like making sure that it’s measurable, and it’s pointed.” Javier gained awareness

of his planning and execution in ways that aligned to his values as an educator, and he felt

challenged to continue growing to support his students. Through this coaching experience, Javier

mentioned how he learned to build intentional connections with people and drive results through

others by building a trusting working relationship.

Jose Jesus had a similar experience with his first principal when he began teaching. He

recalled how his principal “just knew how to let you know when you’re not doing something

right, but that you’re not in trouble. But you felt it. You’re like, I don’t want to disappoint this

man.” Jose Jesus experienced a trusting relationship with a mentor who supported his growth and

development. Jose Jesus was able to take the feedback he gained from his principal and start to

experiment with his pedagogy, apply new skills to strategies and practices, and gain confidence

in his abilities. He explained, “I learned to always be well prepared in my instruction. And it was

recognized. I got that recognition early on. He would actually send some older teachers to come

observe me and ask me to coach them.” Through Jose Jesus’s implementation of feedback, he

gained more opportunities to be recognized for the experiential learning he provided for students

in the school. Jose Jesus continued to impact newer educators in their instructional practices and

push people to have a more critical pedagogy based on the opportunities he obtained through his

mentor.

155

Bobby, who did not go into education as a teacher, worked directly with students to

support their future college experiences. He recalled how his first Latina femtor supported his

growth in seeing his own worth, which he always has struggled with, saying:

I think it’s just like seeing a lot in me that I don’t know if I’ve ever seen or said

about myself. I think that’s something I continue to struggle with is seeing what

I’m worth. It was very refreshing to have somebody see that in me.

Through the experience of seeing his worth, Bobby enrolled in a graduate program to support

knowledge and skills to further expand the theory and practices he uses in his current leadership

role. He actively sought feedback from his femtor on decisions that impacted him internally and

on external decisions that impacted other adults and students. As a result, Bobby supported all

his direct reports through an asset-based lens and guided people to reach their fullest potential,

which had been his experience with a femtor who believed in his abilities. Latino male educators

were able to gain valuable skills in pedagogy, leadership development, coaching, and identity

based on trusting relationships they had with mentors/femtors who believed in their potential.

As Latino male educators continued to grow and experience success in their K–12 spaces,

they gravitated to mentors/femtors who supported their development in acquiring skills they

could use in their pedagogy, in their leadership opportunities, and for their own critical

consciousness. Many studies have pointed to the proactive support mentorship can have by

providing models of what success can look like, enhancing navigational skills such as agency for

new opportunities, and providing a safe space for Latino men to dialogue with someone they

trust (I. Jackson et al., 2014; R. Jones et al., 2019; Quintanilla, 2017; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013;

Sáenz et al., 2015). Latino male educators appreciated having someone on their side to support

their trajectory in the development goals that made them successful in their profession.

156

Surviving and Thriving

Data revealed how Latino male educators gained certain skills and knowledge later on in

their careers and wished they had gained them earlier. Latino male educators wanted to be

developed, observed, and supported in their pedagogical instructional practices beyond

compliance-based cultures of student control (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I.

Jackson et al., 2014; R. Jones et al., 2019; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2019,

2021). They also wanted development on their identities and knowledge about how to continue a

trajectory in deconstruction, unpacking, and reimagining how they present their authenticity as

educators (Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Tajfel, 1981; Torres et al., 2002).

They wanted mentorship/femtorship opportunities in which they could connect with someone

who had knowledge, skills, and guidance on what they needed to focus on to be the best version

of themselves and what it takes to access leadership opportunities their mentors/femtors had

obtained (L. Rodríguez et al., 2013; Sáenz et al., 2015). Last, healing and mental health was part

of identity work because of how traumatic masculinity had been in the lives of Latino male

educators; these pieces of identity work had the potential to further enhance skills that support

how they show up, reflect, and continue to unpack experiences (Breault, 2016; Falicov, 2018;

Hall, 2020; hooks, 2004; Lantolf, 2013; Mahn, 1999; Moje & Lewis, 2020). Throughout Chapter

4, I discussed how identity played a major role in the development of Latino male educators.

Identity development was a key component and a skill-building opportunity to support how

Latino men understand who they are.

Antonio gained an awareness and context from which to support future Latino

male educators in unpacking and deconstructing their masculinity. Antonio shared:

157

For me, in my education trajectory or educator trajectory, I didn’t once have an

opportunity to reflect on identity broadly until I was in my master’s program

pursuing my administrative certificate. That was no part of my teacher preparation

or onboarding or development, and I think there is a recognition of not only what

are our own self-defined identities, and how we aspire to be recognized and seen,

but also recognition of what are our ascribed identities, so an opportunity to

reflect on because of the way that I look stepping into whatever space I’m

stepping in, these are potential ways in which we’ll be seen, and here is how to

navigate.

Antonio gained words, theories, and practical application skills to intentionally support his own

growth and development through his intersectional identities. Being able to navigate the school

professional structure and gain opportunities to be successful showcased his abilities to be

resilient. Antonio also noted tension between acquiring his new knowledge and unlearning many

practices, which could have supported his own development and impacted the youth in his

classroom when he was a teacher. Digging deeper into understanding his own identity, Antonio

saw how everything he did as an educator was influenced as he began to unpack his own

identity. Antonio explained, “The understanding of what navigational capital is, and how we’re

able to finagle and operate within different spaces I think are things that create value in our being

and in our practice and gives the confidence to really influence pedagogy.” Antonio saw the

ripple effects identity development could have and knew the potential impact it could have on

Latino male educators if given the opportunity.

Five Latino male educators also added how identity development skills were needed

earlier in their careers. Espy mentioned the “more we can deconstruct some of our own

158

masculinity and our own self-work and not feeling that we have anything to prove . . . I feel we

can overcome a lot of the obstacles that come from within ourselves.” Espy saw how critical it

had been for him to deeply analyze his own masculinity and machismo, which led him to break

down inner barriers that did not allow him to thrive earlier in his career. Espy gained these skills

through “identity-based leadership and values-based leadership and what it meant to lead

authentically” in his principal development program. Transferring that identity and values-based

skill development would support more Latino male educators in understanding and unpacking

who they are. Espy was able to help other Latino male educators understand his trajectory and

lessons and advise them on strategies that directly supported his gender expansiveness.

Bobby also agreed how deconstruction was a skill needed when thinking about how

identities impacted the spaces they navigate on a daily basis. Bobby shared, “In the piece of

working on ourselves because that’s, inevitably, if you truly are bringing yourself right to work

and your authentic self, then all the good and the bad is coming with you.” Bobby directly saw

the benefits deconstruction had on how he navigated spaces with more authenticity and allowed

more Latino male educators to do the same by sharing what he had done or was currently doing

in his journey of deconstruction. Bobby also mentioned how intentional development of

deconstruction skills through identity could have potential for critical consciousness if it was

employed with young Latino students who struggled in navigating their identities, especially if

those students waited to learn about their identities later in life like most of the Latino male

educators in this study.

Miguel mentioned how identity development was the focus of just one lesson in one

course in his credential program. He did not even recall what the lesson was about because it was

forgotten throughout the program and not embedded in all the curricular experiences. Miguel had

159

to employ his individual agency to seek out identity development on his own and know where he

wanted to intentionally focus. Miguel shared, “It took years, it took a while and it took a large

confluence of things. It took being able to find a mentor or two, it took unfortunately trial and

error. It took my own personal therapy.” As he gained skills in awareness and consciousness of

his identity and how it impacted him, he saw the gaps Latino male educators experienced coming

into the school settings from their teaching programs. Miguel mentioned both of the student

teachers in his classroom only had one module on identity and that module barely touched on

how identity impacts pedagogy. Miguel suggested having a deeper understanding of one’s self

through identity would support educators early in their careers. Latino male educators saw the

benefits identity development had on their own lives and how they navigated their experiences in

education. Not all Latino men in the circulos enfocados had done this work, and the ones who

participated in this setting for the first time claimed to be processing what they were hearing and

how identity development was something they had always struggled with throughout their lives.

Another recommendation that resonated for Latino male educators was mentorship.

Mentorship was something participants longed for or gained so much value from to directly

support their skill development. For J.O., the sooner one could have a mentor, the better. He

claimed, “I think that 1st year is really tough for everybody. Not having someone that you can

lean on.” Because of the hardships associated with being a 1st-year educator and having

intersectional identities, J.O. noted having a mentor who could provide guidance, insight, and

support could be beneficial for developing Latino male educators’ skills. For Sandro, mentorship

had a great potential to build dialogical skills missing in his career. According to Sandro,

creating mentorship opportunities for Latino male educators was important “to have the safe

space, to have conversations that realistically you probably won’t have with your manager, or

160

have the skill set to have that level of conversation.” Such mentorship could enhance the

experience to gain navigational perspective and capital to thrive in the profession. Sandro had a

positive impact through mentorship, and it was why he remained in education. He was able to

pass on what he learned about his identities to support what new educators go through and retain

their talents. Michael David wished he had mentors in his career but had never found one.

Learning from someone he looked up to would have been beneficial in his exploration of

pedagogy, instructional practices, and the tension he experienced with certain school initiatives.

Latino male educators also recommended other examples of practices that could be beneficial to

their careers.

Alonzo mentioned instructional practices needed an evolution of growth and not just

stagnation after reaching mastery as an educator. He noted, “We always need to update our

practices, update our understanding of the education system, and understanding of our students

as a whole because students are changing, people are changing, and we need to change with

that.” Alonzo knew his pedagogical skills would always need to grow because society constantly

changed. He wanted to advance with the times while deeply understanding the current students

he served and meeting their needs with new pedagogical skills to support a deeper understanding

of learning.

Miguel mentioned how he never gets observed by administrators, even as he sought

support to grow instructionally in his practices. He noted constantly asking, “admin, come to my

class. Tell me what I’m doing wrong. Tell me what I can improve. Tell me what I can get better

at.” Miguel believed no one came to observe him because he gave off “this male confidence that

sometimes is overinflated.” As a result, Miguel shared, “I don’t get the same levels of support

that I hope.” Miguel created an assumption of his male identity and exhausted his ability to

161

advocate for what he needed to grow. Miguel called for help and support so he could feel

challenged and affirmed in the practices he was intentionally working on and achieve the growth

he wanted to showcase for himself and students.

Michael David showcased how education and impact could be achieved through ways

other than becoming a school administrator. Specifically, Michael David said he looked for:

Having pedagogical heroes within the academy, and just people you can look up

to as people who are doing the research, and people who are making their way

through educational systems to become chief academic officers or people who are

instructional coaches, and people who have pedagogical expertise beyond just

classroom management pieces, and so, I think being able to see how you don’t

just have to become an assistant principal, or you can actually be an effective

leader in pedagogy and become a pedagogical leader, I think, that’s something

that’s highly needed in the profession.

Intentional skill building, focus on what it takes to become leaders in pedagogy, and reimagining

curricular experiences for students were beneficial in constructing a new educational model.

More importantly, Michael David mentioned learning navigational skills people use to move into

different roles and experiences could broaden the landscape of education for Latino male

educators. Michael David coached educators in understanding what was available for them to

learn about different roles and how pedagogical heroes supported his deeper critical

consciousness of what instruction looked like in his teaching experiences. Latino male educators

acquired many skills and knowledge to directly support new Latino male educators, even though

current Latino male educators continued to struggle with their careers.

162

This section showcased the knowledge and skills Latino male educators obtained to

support retention efforts of their many talents. Latino male educators are experts in their lived

experiences and can provide new knowledge to support others. If I could sum up how I want

Latino males to feel in their education careers, it would be through Christian’s words on how his

classroom felt: “It was my happy place. I loved being there. Sometimes I didn’t want to leave

because it felt good to me, and I want that for more teachers, especially teachers who look like

me.” An educator like Christian can directly impact other Latino men using the skills he acquired

through his experiences. Through intentional development from mentors and femtors, Latino

male educators were able to acquire knowledge of skill sets they needed to perform well in their

roles while also gaining insight to specific behaviors to enhance their experiences in K–12

spaces. Latino male educators gained skills in agency, advocacy, and pedagogy that enhanced

their abilities to impact the spaces they inhabit with colleagues, youth, and families. Latino male

educators thrived when they had deep relationships with leaders who saw their worth and

strengths and pushed them through intentional development to help them grow and succeed.

Latino male educators wished there was more development for those educators who still navigate

siloed experiences, and the circulos enfocados supported Latino men who continued to struggle

on their own.

Chapter Summary

The purpose of this study was to explore how deepening critical machismo consciousness

could support Latino male educators in gaining awareness about how they navigate their K–12

spaces, both internally and externally, and advocate for dismantling heteronormative patriarchal

standards. Through these dialogical spaces (i.e., circulos enfocados), Latino male educators

shared, connected, and expressed vulnerability in their thoughts, beliefs, and healing, which were

163

ongoing. There was much data from the 17 Latino men left out of this chapter. As a researcher,

there was tension in what I shared because there were so many more topics that could have been

highlighted; however, those data did not pertain to the research questions. The research questions

that drove my study were the following:

1. In what ways do Latino male educators understand their masculinity and how it

impacts their day-to-day lives in their educational settings?

2. In what ways do Latino male educators disrupt heteronormative patriarchal standards

of masculinity and machismo in their own beliefs and actions?

3. In what ways do Latino male educators acquire knowledge and skills in their teaching

and leadership practices to help them remain and thrive in the teaching profession?

This chapter synthesized and analyzed results in the data that gave a glimpse into how

participants understood their masculinity/machismo and how they navigated educational spaces.

The three main findings that emerged from the study connected to the literature review

and added nuance to support future research on Latino male educators. First, Latino male

educators constantly explored what authenticity in their identities meant by wearing masks coded

by societal constructs, tried to be accepted and affirmed on how they show up, and unpacked the

potential of multiple masculinities as they rejected heteronormative patriarchal standards and

archetypes. Second, Latino male educators enhanced their critical consciousness through their

own internal and external work on deconstruction of masculinity/machismo and actively engaged

in critical pedagogical practices in their planning and execution of lessons pertaining to gender.

Third, Latino male educators acquired knowledge and skills from intentional development by

mentors/femtors and colleagues, and they learned so many skills and knowledge to support what

beginning educators need. When Latino male educators did not have professional development

164

opportunities through their schools, they navigated their identities within this space on their own

without obtaining support and figured out how to survive and thrive in their individual contexts.

In the data, participants provided insight on what skills and knowledge could have supported

their development early in their careers. In the next chapter, I summarize the findings from the

data, discuss the implications of this study, and provide recommendations to support Latino male

educators in their K–12 spaces.

165

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

This chapter summarizes the key findings of this study. In addition, this chapter discusses

the implications of the findings to support the retention efforts for Latino male educators through

building critical consciousness in identity development, intentional development of critical

pedagogy, and using a circulos enfocados model to provide a shared group experience in

learning and unlearning. Furthermore, K–12 institutions can support Latino male educators by

providing staff and administrators with professional development in critical consciousness of

gender, supporting Latino boys and fathers with deconstructing machismo, and creating

community-wide initiatives that disrupt heteronormative patriarchal standards to create a more

inclusive environment.

Moving Away From Damage-Centered Research

This study aimed to humanize the research experience of participants in the study. Given

the complexity and delicacy of deconstructing masculinity and its effects on Latino male

educator identities, my goal was to create a supportive structure in circulos enfocados and

incorporate touchpoints in the study for participants to provide feedback on how their words

were being represented. I saw Latino male educators’ lived experiences and insights on how they

navigate K–12 spaces as expertise from practitioners in the field, which can be informative to

future Latino male educators as they enter the profession. In addition, participants were invited to

the dissertation defense to witness the culmination of the study and engage in the full process.

Tuck (2009) discussed how researchers should move away from damage-centered research,

which is flawed in its approach to creating harmful narratives of marginalized communities.

Tuck urged communities to consider long-term repercussions of viewing marginalized people as

166

broken and begin to reimagine a new research framework that empowers, rather than victimizes,

communities. My research is a letter to all Latino male educators who constantly think about

how to express or present their gender identities through the complexity of what it means to be

authentic given the myriad of definitions by others on how they should express their masculinity

or machismo. My intentionality was not to paint Latino male educators from a deficit lens

because so much research has already painted them as a problem to fix (Brockenbrough, 2012;

Campos, 2012; Carey, 2020; Cooper & Jordan, 2003; Griffin, 2018; Griffin & Tackie, 2017;

Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2019, 2020; Yosso & García, 2021). Participants

in this study were asset-based experts who provided valuable insight into the complexities of

their humanity while also providing feedback throughout the process for my practice, my

methodology, and the presentation of their data.

My research focused on Tuck’s (2009) recommendation that researchers evolve toward a

desire-based research framework (i.e., instead being damage focused) to fully understand

complexity, contradiction, and the self-determination of lived lives. I, as a researcher, constantly

reflected and questioned my approaches, my writing, and the ways in which I communicated and

interacted with participants in the study. In moving toward a desire-based framework in my

research, my hope was to dismantle stereotypes, which are damage focused, and move toward

humantypes or complex personhood, which are desired focused and depict real bodies and faces

in research as full of complexity, nuance, and contradiction (Tuck, 2009). Ultimately, this study

supported doing research with participants rather than to participants through active resistance to

deficit-based research models and, instead, used a more holistic, humanizing model that can

support reimagination of community-based research opportunities.

167

Summary of Key Findings and Policy Recommendations

This study presented three major findings that support new insights to the complex

personhood of Latino male educators as they navigate their K–12 spaces. Furthermore, this study

offered an opportunity to reimagine new ways of engaging in complex and delicate topics

through a humanizing, desire-based research framework for future research. In addition to

theoretical implications of critical machismo consciousness, the study presented evidence for

collective institutional shifts that can support the retention efforts for talented Latino male

educators. I highlight each key finding and provide recommendations for practice and policy in

K–12 spaces.

Key Finding 1

Latino male educators understood their masculinity and machismo through identity

exploration and experimentation with the concept of masking that intentionally supported

acceptance of gender norms or actively disrupted negative versions of masculinity and

machismo. This portion of the data aligned with research on identity negotiation, meaning-

making, and intentionally choosing how to express one’s intersectional identities (Ahmed, 2004;

Berggren, 2014; Breault, 2016; Chandler et al., 2003; Connell, 2005; Erikson, 1968; Ferdman &

Gallegos, 2001; Jennings et al., 2014; Lantolf, 2013; Meeus et al., 2010; Moje & Lewis, 2020;

Molina, 2015; Quintero & Estrada, 1998; Torres et al., 2002). Through the concept of masking,

data aligned to the literature on how Latino male educators intentionally chose how they behaved

in specific K–12 spaces, which required them to live up to a certain level of masculinity and

machismo and actively disrupt heteronormative standards through their own gender expansion

(Abaci et al., 1974; Bell et al., 2003; Breault, 2016; Brockenbrough, 2012; Carey, 2020; Colwill

& Boyd, 2008; Connell, 2005; Cooper & Jordan, 2003; De La Cancela, 1991; Falicov, 2018;

168

Gross & John, 2003; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Paz & Kemp, 1961; Romero

et al., 2009; Singh, 2021; Torres et al., 2002). In adding to the literature on Latino male

educators, when they began to deconstruct masculinity and machismo, they began to question

what it means to be authentic. When Latino male educators chose to expand their definitions of

masculinity and machismo maleness, they became different versions of themselves, versions

they wanted to display (Berggren, 2014; Falicov, 2018; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Tajfel, 1981;

Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). Latino male educators explored and experimented with

multiple masculinities based on learning they obtained from their lived experiences and the

ongoing tension they had with heteronormative stereotypes that defined their identities. With the

constant wearing of masks, Latino male educators struggled with what it meant to be authentic

because many of the definitions for their identities had been predetermined and affirmed when

showcased. Participants were reminded to always display the masculinity and machismo they

tried to disrupt. Through the creation of a dialogic space with Latino male educators, actively

deconstructing masculinity and machismo created a collective consensus on how problematic the

masks have been to their identities. The deconstruction of masculinity and machismo directly

supported Singh’s (2020) vision of not reconstructing masculinity or machismo into a revised

manhood while actively disrupting “real” with any connection to masculinity and machismo.

Key Finding 2

Latino male educators built their critical consciousness through a deep internal

deconstruction of masculinity/machismo that led to exploration and experimentation of

expanding gender by disrupting gender norms in themselves, disrupting gender norms with

youth, and disrupting through critical pedagogical instructional practices. This finding adds to

the literature of expanding masculinity and machismo studies by highlighting the intentionality

169

Latino male educators displayed when they obtained a heightened critical consciousness

(Danielewicz, 2014; Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016;

Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh, 2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al., 2002; Waling,

2019). Through their lived experiences, Latino male educators actively deconstructed

masculinity and machismo to expand their critical consciousness of gender norms and determine

how they applied or disrupted them, which added to the literature of understanding the potential

impact these educators can have on youth (Berggren, 2014; Cruz, 2012; Duncan-Andrade &

Morell, 2008; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh,

2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). In supporting Latino male

educator impact on youth, participants showcased purposeful actions beyond awareness and

analysis of masculinity and machismo norms through intentional decisions to redefine what

manhood meant to them and to the people with whom they interacted on a daily basis in their K–

12 spaces. Adding to the literature, Latino male educators who supported youth with

deconstructing masculinity and machismo felt almost covert in most cases because their

pedagogical decisions were rarely observed in the classroom. Through an expansion of multiple

masculinities and gender, they actively supported youth to reimagine masculinity and machismo

by centering youth’s emotionality, which most of the Latino male educators struggled with in

their lives. Latino male educators recalled their lived experiences and purposefully disrupted

those narratives through experimentation with supporting young Latino boys in their

understanding and deconstruction of masculinity and machismo. With this critical consciousness,

Latino male educators impacted all youth in their K–12 spaces through critical pedagogical

instructional practices, culture creation of inclusive practices in regard to gender, and whole

school initiatives that disrupt heteronormative standards. Future research has the potential to

170

collect more evidence and data on the impact having Latino male educators with critical

machismo consciousness working with youth.

Key Finding 3

Latino male educators acquired knowledge and skills to be successful in their K–12

experiences in two distinct ways. One way was through intentional skill development from

mentors/femtors who supported growth opportunities for Latino male educators to lead. The

other way they obtained knowledge and skills was through lessons they had learned

independently and wished they had learned earlier in their careers to make them more successful.

One way participants obtained skills was direct development from mentors and femtors who took

Latino male educators under their wings and gave them navigational skills to gain more

opportunities to develop instructional and leadership skills, which directly supported the research

on intentional support structures that mentorship has on marginalized populations (Duncan-

Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et al., 2014; R. Jones et al., 2019; Lara &

Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013; Sáenz et al., 2015; Singh, 2019, 2021;

Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Torres et al., 2002). Through mentorship and femtorship, participants

were able to gain skills like agency, identity development, and active reflection on the impact

they had on students and staff. Adding to the literature on retaining Latino male educators, data

revealed if Latino male educators were not developed intentionally, they learned many skills on

their own in regard to directly influencing their impact on pedagogy and youth. Future research

efforts can support Latino male educators in development to become better instructional leaders,

expand their knowledge of their identities, and engage in intentional mentorship and femtorship

opportunities that show possibilities for educational impact on a greater scale. Data revealed

participants noticed skills and knowledge gaps in their current versions of professional

171

development, and they knew possessing those skills could have propelled them to be more

successful earlier in their careers. Latino male educators in this study passed on what they knew

about their K–12 educational career experiences to support Latino men as they entered the

workforce in education.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, I have laid out strategic reactive and proactive

recommendations for how to support Latino male educators. The circulos enfocados

demonstrated the power dialogic spaces have when they center intentionality in disrupting

heteronormative patriarchal standards. J.O. mentioned this in the closeout of one of the circulos,

saying:

I was going to say this feels like therapy for me. All these things, concepts or

questions, I didn’t even think on a daily basis. It’s just really good to hear from all

the gentlemen here . . . After this, it makes me think maybe we should hang more

or even text more or just get on a Zoom or just hang out a little more just because

. . . I think it is important to have that camaraderie and just the conversations from

our perspective.

Hearing J.O. mention how he never thought about the topics covered in the conversation

solidified how important holding these spaces can be for Latino men. J.O. could have easily

continued to navigate his educational experience under the assumption that what he was going

through was normal and always struggled with how to express his emotions, express the needs he

had to his managers, and overcome the conflict of having to wear masks that caused him

exhaustion. In realizing the power in their stories, Latino male educators supported each other

through potential networking relationships that have the potential to continue outside of the

172

circulos enfocados. Circulos enfocados was just one example of how this work could be done,

and there needs to be more intentionality, purpose, and curriculum collaboratively created by

multiple, diverse perspectives on gender identity. Reactive recommendations to support Latino

male educators include: (a) creating gender affinity spaces with other Latino male educators, (b)

creating intentional and consistent coaching cycles on instruction and pedagogy, and (c) gaining

qualitative and quantitative survey data on their experiences in your K–12 spaces. Proactive

recommendations to support long-term impact for Latino male educators in K–12 spaces include:

(a) intentional identity development curriculum for Latino men and (b) providing mental

wellness support structures for identity development for Latino men.

Creating Gender Affinity Spaces with Other Latino Male Educators

At the foundation of reactionary response, teacher education programs and K–12

educational spaces can support Latino male educators by creating a gender affinity space. Gender

affinity spaces, as mentioned in the literature, provide Latino male educators an opportunity to

talk about their experiences, learn from others’ experiences about how to handle certain

situations, and begin to build relationships with people who share similar identities (I. Jackson et

al., 2014; R. Jones et al., 2019; Quintanilla, 2017; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013; Sáenz et al., 2015).

Singh (2021) pushed for gender affinity spaces to disrupt heteronormative standards by

deconstructing masculinity and machismo to expand the horizons of what gender means and get

rid of phrases that begin with “a real man” because authenticity is not tied to gender specific

roles. Gender expansion would support multiple masculinities to exist and create an opportunity

for Latino men to begin their critical machismo consciousness. In creating a disruptive gender

affinity space, intentionality in the development of pedagogical facilitation and leadership would

be needed to have a program that supports men through their experiences, challenges

173

problematic stereotypes, and decenters heteronormative standards through intentional content to

enhance male identity. In addition, Latino male educators need a space to experiment with their

new versions of masculinity, explore what it means to “be a man” not rooted in heteronormative

standards, and not feel “less than” in their humanity by trying to be more authentic to their

beliefs, values, and culture. Circulos enfocados ran for 2 hours with either four or five

participants. The conversations and dialogues were rich in nuanced Latino male educator

experiences. By centering on one question for each space, there was opportunity to expand

deeper into particular topics, themes, and supports in which participants wanted to engage.

Latino male educators shared they were one of few Latino men, if not the only Latino male

educator in their space; so, I also recommend partnering with other schools, districts, and

educator programs at universities or nonprofit organizations to yield a large enough group to

create meaningful spaces.

Creating Intentional and Consistent Coaching Cycles on Instruction and Pedagogy

Latino male educators want to be developed to be more than just disciplinarians. The

added labor they acquire by being the first point of contact when young Black and Brown boys

have trouble with educators who do not know how to connect with them can be exhausting.

These educators are more than just an outlet for bad teacher pedagogical school practices. Latino

male educators want to develop their pedagogical skills and enhance their instructional practices

to be more inclusive, rigorous, and critical of any dominant structure. A consistent coaching

cycle from an instructional expert or trusted mentor/femtor could support Latino male educators

feeling seen, affirmed, and valued in their K–12 spaces. In addition, coaches and administrators

need to be developed critically in deconstruction of masculinity and machismo so they do not

perpetuate stereotypical responses to how Latino male educators show up. Coaches and

174

administrators must also support the disruption of heteronormative patterns they see in the Latino

men whom they develop. Providing development through a more intentional gender lens has the

potential to provide more clarity for Latino male educators in how they intentionally or

unintentionally display their masculinity and machismo. By having consciousness in how their

gender shows up, these educators have the ability to choose to actively disrupt those patterns or

continue replicating harmful practices. K–12 institutions have the opportunity to gather insight

into the impact they create by supporting Latino male educators through intentional development

on critical machismo consciousness.

Gaining Qualitative and Quantitative Survey Data on Latino Male Educator Experience

As a former K–12 educator, I always participated in yearly staff surveys that tried to

gather my perspective of how I was experiencing the profession of teaching. Data are used to

enhance the work experience and retain staff members. Every school and district operate

differently in how they interpret survey information and implement specific feedback through

intentional strategies. My recommendation is to include a gender feedback survey for Latino men

within the K–12 space to support the understanding of their experiences, what they are struggling

with, and what recommendations they have for supporting them. Schools and districts would

then have feedback from which they can implement something. These data would honor Latino

male educators’ voices, affirm their experiences, and establish trust with people in power who

want to retain their talents. Gathering these data can also present an opportunity to incorporate

structural, cultural, and policy changes for a more inclusive environment for all educators.

Intentional Identity Development: Critical Machismo Consciousness

Latino male educators, through the circulos enfocados, described deconstruction they

engaged with in regard to their masculinity and machismo. Deconstruction happened throughout

175

their lived experiences as youth and as men. They constantly negotiated how they were supposed

to behave and act based on other people’s perceptions of their gender norms. Intentional

curriculum that centers critical machismo consciousness can be a foundational entry point in how

they understand their gender, how they actively deconstruct masculinity and machismo, and how

they begin to experiment with the possibilities of multiple masculinities rooted in more human-

centered approaches. Waling (2019) called on researchers and practitioners to support men in

finding joy in being a man while also gaining skills in agency and emotional reflexivity. Having

access to spaces where Latino male educators can actively engage, experiment, and explore their

identities without judgment can be impactful for how they begin to think of themselves in an

authentic lens. Differentiation of development opportunities are needed in K–12 spaces based on

the intersectionalities people bring in diverse spaces. If the goal of an educational space is to

create an inclusive environment, the group that needs the most support is the one that comes

from the oppressive dominant group. Schools and educational programs that center

antiheteronormative, antimachista, and antipatriarchal development of identities showcase a

stance that Latino men coming into the field must show competence in expanding their gender

consciousness to impact the lives of youth.

Providing Mental Wellness Support Structures for Identity Development for Latino Men

Supporting Latino male educators through intentional mental wellness initiatives is

crucial for their well-being and the overall enhancement of the educational environment. Latino

male educators often grapple with the complex task of navigating societal expectations,

stereotypes, and gender norms ingrained in them from such a young age. To address this

complexity, schools and educational programs should prioritize intentional mental wellness

initiatives tailored to the unique needs of Latino male educators as they undertake the

176

challenging process of deconstructing their gender identities, traumas, and negative lived

experiences.

First and foremost, educational institutions should establish a supportive and inclusive

environment that acknowledges and embraces diversity through specific vision and values. This

environment would include the creation of safe spaces where Latino male educators can openly

discuss and explore their gender identities and the associated challenges they face. Schools

should promote a culture of openness, acceptance, and respect for all gender identities;

encourage honest conversations; and foster a sense of belonging.

Mental wellness initiatives should be integrated into the fabric of the educational

experience, not just as an add-on, but as an integral component of professional development.

Regular mental wellness workshops, seminars, and training sessions should be organized to

address specific issues related to gender identity deconstruction. These sessions should be

facilitated by mental health professionals and facilitators who specialize in gender identity,

trauma, and mental well-being.

Mentorship/femtorship programs should be established to connect Latino male educators

with lifelines that have successfully navigated similar identity deconstruction processes. These

mentors/femtors can provide guidance, share personal experiences, and offer coping strategies to

ensure educators do not feel isolated in their journey. Additionally, peer support groups should

be encouraged for educators to come together, share their experiences, and provide mutual

encouragement and understanding in going through this active deconstruction of identity.

Incorporating culturally relevant practices and therapies is essential for effectively

supporting Latino male educators. Culturally tailored mental wellness initiatives can help address

unique challenges and experiences tied to their cultural and gender identities. Education

177

programs should collaborate with mental health professionals with expertise in Latino culture to

ensure mental wellness initiatives are culturally sensitive and effective. Furthermore, schools

should advocate for policies that support mental wellness and encourage open dialogue regarding

mental health. By destigmatizing mental health challenges, schools can create an environment

where seeking help is encouraged and normalized. Policies should ensure access to mental health

resources and support for educators, including confidential counseling services and workshops

focused on mental well-being.

Last, ongoing research and assessment of the impact of these mental wellness initiatives

should be conducted to tailor and improve support strategies. This assessment strategy would

involve gathering feedback from educators and making necessary adjustments to better address

their evolving needs. By implementing intentional mental wellness initiatives, schools and

educational programs can empower Latino male educators to navigate the complexities of their

gender identities and traumas effectively. Creating an inclusive and supportive environment,

integrating mental wellness into professional development, and promoting culturally relevant

practices are essential steps toward ensuring the holistic well-being of Latino male educators

and, consequently, the students they serve.

Implications

As discussed in the major themes from the data, Latino male educators gave advice to

retain their talents in the future. Latino male educators revealed one of the most prevalent skills

they wished they had more of was identity development because it had been necessary for their

success. Understanding and deconstructing all their intersectional identities, especially their

gender identity, would have supported them sooner and had a direct impact in how they showed

up to be their most authentic selves. Many Latino male educators shared how these skills were

178

learned on their own or through supplemental support in graduate programs or course work

outside of K–12 spaces. Identity development through mentorship/femtorship, professional

development training, and affinity spaces would directly support efforts to understand

themselves and the impact they could have on education.

Latino male educators mentioned how being in dialogical spaces felt therapeutic in some

ways, affirmed their experiences, and provided an opportunity to learn from men who had so

much knowledge to support their careers. Affinity spaces had the potential to be more than just

venting and processing spaces and to be intentional development spaces that deconstructed layers

of identity to directly enhance skills and knowledge needed to thrive in their careers. To further

extend retention efforts and support Latino male educators, providing staff and administrators

with professional development in critical consciousness of gender, supporting Latino boys and

fathers with deconstructing machismo, and creating community-wide initiatives that disrupt

heteronormative patriarchal standards to create a more inclusive environment would also create

meaningful proactive and reactive efforts at the K–12 level. The following sections of this

chapter focus on implications regarding retention efforts to support Latino male educators to

remain in the profession.

Identity Negotiations

The identity negotiations Latino male educators experienced support the need for

educational programming and K–12 professional development spaces to create opportunities for

Latino male educators to engage in dialogue about their experiences. Much of the literature has

focused on providing space for Latino men through mentorship and affinity spaces rooted in

what they experience as students or teachers (Crenshaw, 2014; Singh, 2019, 2021). Singh (2021)

called for active disruption of heteronormative standards and deconstruction of masculinity and

179

machismo for Latino men. This study supported the literature by displaying the possible

conversations and topics when gender norms, roles, and expectations are centered. More

importantly, through active deconstruction, dialogic spaces like circulos enfocados can focus on

dismantling heteronormative standards through active discussion of particular themes,

experiences, and reflections Latino male educators encounter (Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Moje &

Lewis, 2020; Molina, 2015; National Compadres Network, 2021; K. Rodriguez et al., 2011;

Talleyrand et al., 2022; Torres et al., 2002). The opportunities deconstruction of masculinity and

machismo present for research studies can support how this work might look for practitioners in

developing a professional development series for gender identity development. Identity

development, when connected to culturally responsive, relevant, and sustaining pedagogy, is

needed for educators to understand their intersectional identities and how those identities impact

the planning of content, instructional practices, and co-construction of classroom culture with

youth (Freire, 1970; Gay, 2018; Hammond, 2014; Paris & Alim, 2017). For Latino male

educators, heightening their critical machismo consciousness means deeply deconstructing and

dismantling heteronormative standards of how masculinity and machismo impact them while

allowing for experimentation and exploration of multiple masculinities.

Implications for Fathers and Youth

By supporting Latino male educators in deconstructing masculinity and machismo for

their own awareness and consciousness, institutions have the potential of creating greater impact

in the community that they serve. In supporting deconstruction of masculinity and machismo,

Latino male educators can participate in community-led initiatives to directly support fathers of

the young Latino boys that they work with. Having a connection between home and schooling

experiences can support the overall experience for Latino young boys in breaking generational

180

trauma in regard to masculinity and machismo. Through a fatherhood series of deconstructing

gender norms and heightening their critical consciousness, more progressive partnerships could

translate in the homes of young Latino boys as they begin to experiment with different and more

expansive versions of gender identity. More importantly, as Latino male educators mentioned in

the data, most of them currently struggle with emotional expression and dialoguing through

conflict, which are essential skills that are needed to productively communicate in society.

Research studies have the potential of creating a fatherhood series and measuring the impact on

youth, families, and the schooling environment. Raising fatherhood engagement in

understanding their positionality in how they directly impact their young Latino boys through

gender norms has the potential of expediting youth criticality in deconstructing heteronormative

standards and equipping young boys with healthier versions of masculinity and machismo in

their lives.

Implications for Policy

By supporting gender inclusive spaces in educational settings, institutional and policy

changes could support Latino male educators in having opportunities to center their experiences

as men as part of their development as educators. More importantly, by centering masculinity

and machismo through active deconstruction of heteronormative standards, institutions support

the creation of a more inclusive environment that guides the expansiveness of gender. Latino

male educators could benefit from understanding what multiple masculinities and gender

expansiveness are to support opportunities to engage in other behaviors through intentionality

and exploration of authenticity. Through intentional identity development of gender, supports for

mental health and well-being are structural needs for Latino male educators in this ongoing

renegotiation and reimagination of masculinity and machismo. Institutions can supplement direct

181

support to Latino male educators by providing therapeutic mental wellness and also adding

gender affinity spaces. Having supplemental institutional structures can set the precedent that

Latino men’s exploration of gender identity is needed for them to reflect, explore, and heal as

they actively increase and enhance their critical machismo consciousness. As Latino male

educators continue to explore authenticity, there are opportunities for long-term professional

development, skill development, and addressing specific challenges related to gender and

cultural identities. Last, Latino male educators who have a deep criticality of gender and have

actively been disrupting heteronormative patterns in themselves have the potential to lead

circulos enfocados in their schools and communities as leadership opportunities. Critically

conscious Latino male educators can create initiatives in educational institutions, in community

organizations, and with policymakers to support the creation of a more inclusive and supportive

environment for Latino male educators. Having more Latino male educators with critical

machismo consciousness would support the entire school community or K–12 spaces they

engage in if they were allowed to explore who they are and want to be from an inclusive and

supportive environment invested in their growth as men.

Critical Machismo Consciousness

Latino male educators, through their work and lived experiences, gained criticality of

gender and its impact on their identities. As discussed, all Latino male educators in this study

struggled with their identities, mainly their masculinity and machismo. They struggled with their

identities in their relationships with the men in their lives, with their peers, and with a society

that labeled how they were supposed to exist (Berggren, 2014; Connell, 2005; Falicov, 1998;

Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Paz & Kemp, 1961; Pleck, 1981; Singh,

2020, 2021; Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al., 2002). As they gained a critical consciousness of

182

what it meant to “be a man,” there was active exploration of disrupting heteronormative

standards (Abaci et al., 1974; Ahmed, 2004; Breault, 2016; Colwill & Boyd, 2008; De La

Cancela, 1991; Meeus et al., 2010; Molina, 2015; Singh, 2020, 2021).

Participants did not want to replicate the harm and trauma they experienced in their lives

by living up to standards that made them lose parts of their humanity. Many of the Latino male

educators shared how they tried to find who they were through active exploration of their

identities, going to therapy for support, and exploring different versions of masculinity they

wanted to display (Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Singh, 2020, 2021;

Stoltenberg, 2000; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). Latino male educators had an easier time

expressing different versions of masculinity and machismo with young Latino boys, especially

the ones who struggled the most in K–12 spaces. Participants actively helped redefine and

support those students to find new ways of engaging with their gender. They supported Latino

boys in tapping into their emotionality, advocating for their needs, and expressing their manhood

in different ways (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et al., 2014; Lara &

Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2020, 2021). Participants also intentionally planned

opportunities for youth to engage in meaningful dialogic spaces in curricular activities and

lessons to support deconstructions of masculinity and machismo. In beginning to experiment

with critical pedagogical strategies and frameworks, Latino male educators had the potential to

enhance, supplement, and co-create a more inclusive teaching pedagogy for their schools,

districts, and communities. Latino male educators would be able to codify a curriculum that

measured the impact of incorporating diverse perspectives, challenging gender norms, and

promoting open dialogue on identity.

183

Implications for Practice

Implications of having critical machismo consciousness educators support Latino men

experimenting with supplemental curriculum content and experiences to build more inclusive

and diverse schools. Having Latino male educators directly create their own pedagogical

curricular experiences in regard to deconstructing masculinity and machismo could create more

impactful experiences for youth that would showcase the need for Latino male educators to stay

in the profession. Retention efforts of Latino male educator talents should start with how they are

supported in creating their pedagogical framework and enhancing their opportunities to lead

classroom, schoolwide, and community initiatives in regard to disrupting heteronormative

standards. Data from this study showed Latino male educators covertly supported disrupting

heteronormative standards with young boys of color without any support, direction, or feedback

from administrators or colleagues. Participants chose to covertly show different versions of

manhood to youth because they were still required to be authoritative disciplinarians to these

boys. Latino men knew they had to engage these young Latino boys in different ways than they

had received at a young age. Administrators and instructional experts need more support in

building their critical lenses related to gender to help Latino men who are educators in their

buildings because of the added labor they acquire just by being men in school buildings.

Coaching and feedback cycles for administrators and instructional experts can support Latino

male educators in gaining even deeper criticality of how their gender impacts their planning,

instruction, and interactions with all community members. Latino male educators need targeted,

yet supportive, feedback and direction on their gender identities to expand their masculinity and

machismo.

184

Development of critically conscious leaders and educators is necessary in all

intersectional identities, and especially for gender dynamics. By developing critically conscious

leaders, teacher pedagogy would be supplemented by directly taking a stance to disrupt

heteronormative patriarchal standards in the institutions where educators serve. Leaders who

actively deconstruct gender norms can support instructional practices through direct coaching

and feedback to humanize the efforts of increasing critical machismo consciousness for Latino

men. Just as antiracism pedagogy, frameworks, and training are centered in schools,

antipatriarchal, antimachista, and antiheteronormative pedagogy also need to be incorporated in

developing curriculum, skill building, and creating new school visions for inclusive spaces.

Leaders who understand the experiences of Latino male educators would support retention

efforts because they could actively support educators’ growth in both personal and professional

goals. Normalizing the expansion of gender through intentional pedagogical development would

support Latino male educators in experimenting and exploring more diverse and multiple

masculinities to welcome new layers of authenticity. As Latino male educators actively

deconstruct gender norms, they can directly see the connection it has to their pedagogical impact

on youth. Disrupting pedagogical practices that promote standardization is needed to support a

more inclusive gender expression in how educators experiment and explore their identities and

how they engage with youth and colleagues. As the data mentioned, Latino male educators

navigate their K–12 spaces with lots of caution because of how others are hyper focused on their

movements. With having more critically conscious leaders in K–12 spaces, deconstruction of all

intersectional identities would support spaces for people to explore what authenticity means to

create a collective environment where everyone belongs.

185

Implications for Research

Ultimately, critical machismo consciousness is an entry point for researchers and scholars

to engage with the foundational knowledge and skills Latino male educators need before they

can move toward more feminist, queer, and gender expansive forms of masculinity and

machismo. Latino male educators need their own pedagogical development rooted in gender to

disrupt the harmful patterns they have been conditioned to believe are tied to their gender

expression and relocate elements of their humanity they need to feel more human, such as

emotionality. Unfortunately, Latina feminist and queer activists, scholars, and researchers seem

to be the only people naming the ongoing harm machismo and masculinity have had on women

and LGBTQIA+ folks in the community (Anzaldúa, 1987; Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Moraga &

Anzaldúa, 2022; Torres et al., 2002; Waling, 2019). Latino male educator leaders, scholars, and

researchers should be creating actionable projects, initiatives, and research topics to supplement

the foundation of gender expansion other activists have started. A more inclusive beginning to

dismantling heteronormative patriarchal standards starts by developing more Latino machismo

consciousness in men and boys.

Intentional Development

Latino male educators expressed how they struggled to obtain professional development

in their instructional and pedagogical practices. Some of them expressed, once they learned to

manage and control their classrooms, administrators left them alone and did not focus on

building their skills. By not intentionally developing their pedagogical practices, Latino male

educators struggled to know the effectiveness of their teaching and support for youth. Instead,

some Latino male educators gained affirming feedback on their display of disciplinarian and

authoritative roles, which afforded them leadership opportunities to become administrators in

186

their schools (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; I. Jackson et al., 2014; R. Jones et al., 2019;

Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; Singh, 2019, 2021). Latino male educators who are

administrators reflected how they doubled-down on heteronormative standards to be seen,

affirmed, and accepted in the educational settings. When Latino male educators gained criticality

on their gender expression by deconstructing their understanding of gender norms, they saw the

harm they had caused to themselves and youth in their careers and had to live with guilt about

replicating problematic and harmful behaviors. Latino male educators who thrived earlier and

obtained more opportunities in their careers directly obtained skills from mentorship/femtorship

relationships that gave them insight into how to successfully navigate K–12 spaces. Latino male

educators mentioned how they were able to have a trusting relationship with a mentor/femtor

who directly challenged them to grow their skills and develop their identities, which they found

extremely valuable in becoming successful leaders. To enhance mentorship and femtorship

experiences with critical machismo consciousness, opportunities rooted in the expansion of

masculinity and machismo through direct deconstruction could support retention efforts for

Latino male educators (Duncan-Andrade & Morell, 2008; Freire, 1994; I. Jackson et al., 2014; R.

Jones et al., 2019; Lara & Fránquiz, 2015; Noguera, 2012; L. Rodríguez et al., 2013; Sáenz et al.,

2015; Singh, 2019, 2021; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Torres et al., 2002).

Many of the Latino male educators in this study wished they had more opportunities to

dive into their lived experiences through intentional development. Though they were able to

obtain identity development as they became administrators or in their graduate coursework,

participants mentioned how development should have started before they became educators or

when they began their careers. The potential impact of such development on their pedagogy

could have supported more intentionality in disrupting heteronormative standards with youth.

187

More importantly, participants mentioned how they would have gained knowledge, skills, and

much needed language about what they experienced. Instead, Latino male educators gained

many skills and acquired knowledge on their own without very much development of pedagogy

and identity (Berggren, 2014; Connell, 2005; Ferdman & Gallegos, 2001; I. Jackson et al., 2014;

Milner, 2010; Romero et al., 2009; Salisbury & Jackson, 1996; Torres et al., 2002). Data showed

how researchers and scholars can support the creation of projects to intentionally support

intersectional identity development, such as racial, gender, and professional identities, for Latino

men to increase their teaching and leadership skills.

This study also showed Latino men needed their own development spaces to experiment

with their masculinity, deconstruct delicate topics, and gain affirmation on the experiences they

typically experienced in silos because there were very few Latino men in their K–12 spaces

(Hurtado & Sinha, 2016; Solórzano & Yosso, 2001; Tajfel, 1981; Torres et al., 2002).

Collaboration between multiple schools, districts, and educational teacher programs can reach

more Latino male educators instead of focusing on a single school or educational site. By

engaging in collaborative work to develop Latino male educators, Latino men can network with

more educators who look like them and are struggling with similar issues around their

masculinity and machismo. In addition, these Latino men can learn and make new meaning of

what it means to “be a man” in education. Through these types of efforts, schools and districts

would create supportive structural efforts to show Latino male educators they belong, they need

to be critical of gender in their pedagogy, and their humanity is centered through this ongoing

journey of deconstruction. Programming efforts at this scale would need practitioners to lead

through a critical machismo consciousness in their pedagogy, planning, and execution of

inclusive diverse affinity spaces.

188

Implications for Practice

The implications of creating skills and knowledge rooted in gender identities supports

how Latino male educators experience much of their careers in silos. Latino male educators in

this study were conditioned to not ask for help or support; instead, they were always cautious of

how they expressed their gender identities, based on the perceived stereotypes pertaining to their

gender. By not asking for support, continued assumptions of their interest, motivation, and

loyalty came into question by their administrators or managers. Latino male educators

experienced constant tension in how they were supposed to engage with their masculinity and

machismo with everyone they encountered. By gaining identity development through intentional

programming in their teacher education programs, district level trainings, school coaching

development cycles, and supplemental affinity spaces, Latino male educators would be equipped

to deconstruct their gender identity, have skills to navigate every space with which they

interacted, and constantly reflect on the impact of their experimentation of multiple

masculinities. Having embedded competencies in what it means to be critically conscious of

masculinity and machismo would directly benefit their criticality of pedagogy. With the

intentionality to increase skills and development through gender, researchers and scholars can

gauge the impact criticality gained by Latino men has on young boys of color, the school settings

they work in, and the relationships they have with all community members. Furthermore, future

research can measure the impact on retention efforts of Latino male educators who have

heightened critical consciousness and the intentional decisions that they make with their

criticality.

189

Limitations

Limitations were expected given the nuance of lived experiences of all participants. To

obtain quality, qualitative data, dialoguing and sharing of stories were essential to my study. One

limitation to this study pertained to trust and authenticity from participants. The more

participants trusted the space they were in, the more vulnerable and authentic they were in the

study. This vulnerability looked different for each of the participants, and it showed in the data as

some voices sharing more than others. Some participants claimed they were processing

everything as they listened, which was why they did not engage more in sharing their

experiences. My limited time with participants could have impacted the deepening of trust with

me as a researcher and among the participants in the space. Trust and vulnerability go hand-in-

hand, and it would be presumptuous for me to expect every individual to have full trust in the

space right away. I expected hesitancy, lack of trust, and methodical navigation of participants in

what they wanted to share and how they wanted to share it. By sharing my story, my history, and

my vulnerability, I hoped to break down some of those barriers. Also, I understood the bias I had

about what vulnerability means to me versus what it meant to participants, and I did not want to

inhibit progress by establishing expectations of sharing one’s humanity. The goal was for

participants to experience growth through this process, and the timeframe given for the study

may not have been enough time for growth to occur. This limitation supports the opportunity for

longer intentional identity deconstruction and development to be used with Latino male

educators.

Another limitation in this study was having a limited scope of masculinity and machismo

by not having LGBTQIA+ folks included in the study. This exclusion was intentional for me as a

researcher because I did not want to harm these folks through heteronormative patriarchal

190

perspectives that could have been shared by participants. I knew this choice limited the

expansiveness and spectrum of masculinity/machismo, but I wanted to focus on theoretical

practices that could support the identity development for Latino male educators who identify in

the dominant gender group. By showcasing what these practices could look like, they could

support development needed directly for heteronormative patriarchal archetypes before

dialoguing with folks who have been directly harmed and traumatized by masculinity/machismo.

A third limitation in this study was not being able to obtain 1st- and 2nd-year educators.

In thinking about retention efforts after hiring, the first few years are crucial to the success any

educator has. By not having their perspective, findings and recommendations are limited for

what more can be done in the moment to support Latino male educators in K–12 spaces. There

was an opportunity in the circulos enfocados for more veteran educators to give wisdom to

newer educators, and my hope was the data shared could support any Latino male educator

regardless of their years of experience.

A fourth limitation pertained to thinking about the humanity of people and how they

experience being in spaces where they are dialoguing about difficult topics. Humanity is very

complex, and understanding the healing process was an essential part of this study. There were

elements of trauma brought up in the circulos enfocados based on lived experiences of Latino

men, and I made sure to check with all participants before they left if they needed any additional

support or resources. Mental wellness was important for me and consistently mentioned before,

during, and after the groups through a follow-up email. As a researcher, I was cautious and hyper

aware of how men would show up and share their humanity with a deep topic like

masculinity/machismo. Overall, I was honored to witness what was shared and made sure to

mention this to participants as I received their stories, words, and lived experiences. I did not

191

want to replicate hierarchical masculinity and machismo identities; instead, I wanted to show

Latino male educators a different space to engage in, one which they may not have been

accustomed to (Singh, 2021).

A fifth limitation to this study was the use of Zoom to conduct circulos enfocados

through a virtual platform. If connection and humanity are essential components in co-

constructing a dialogical space based on trust, then I suspect these spaces might have felt

different if they were conducted in-person. My purpose in hosting these groups through virtual

platforms was to obtain varied perspectives from folks in different, localized contexts and

provide an opportunity for participants to network with more Latino male educators. Health and

safety were also important for me as the COVID-19 global pandemic was ongoing at the time of

this study. I wanted to ensure all participants felt safe, did not have to travel far, and were in a

comfortable space when they shared. Also, conducting the groups through a virtual platform

allowed for different time slots to host the spaces, and participants were able to self-select what

times best met their needs.

A sixth limitation was the time of year these data were collected. June, at the end of the

school year, can be a difficult time to have educators commit to a research study given the

multitude of end-of-year responsibilities they have. In my reflection of not having 1st- and 2nd-

year educators, getting through the year is success in itself and adding their voices to this study

could have been overwhelming.

Conclusion

In this study, I showcased narratives of 17 Latino male educators in K–12 spaces. Their

experiences were complex because gender identity is complex in a society that socially

constructs levels of dominance pertaining to specific intersections of identity. I specifically

192

identified how literature has perceived Latino boys and men as stereotypical archetypes of

masculinity and machismo norms that negatively portray their humanity. Latino male educators,

through their responses in circulos enfocados, described how they struggled to understand what it

meant to “be a man” and truly feel authentic in how they decided to perform their identities. I

wanted to show the complexity of how Latino male educators understand their identities, actively

explore and experiment, and constantly experience tension in how others perceive who they are.

More importantly, participants did not know who they truly were and had not been given the

opportunity to engage in multiple masculinities that could bring them more clarity, more

acceptance, and more affirmation of their humanity.

I conducted this study for the multiple versions of myself I employed throughout my life:

from the little boy Mario, who was taught to never show emotion, to display aggression through

controlled outlets of sports, and to constantly question what it meant to be himself; to the

beginning teacher Mario, who did not deserve to be questioned as if he was a child abuser,

believed he had lower intelligence than his women counterparts, and was constantly told how he

was perceived by others regardless of his intentions. I did my best to arrive at my most authentic

self, which was a daily struggle to deconstruct the effects of masculinity and machismo. I am

grateful for the support I obtained from femtors, mentors, and peers who supported my identity

development and provided guidance for me to navigate through my career. I am now in a place

where I can support other Latino male educators in doing the same.

The lived experiences shared by 17 Latino male educators reflected much of my own

lived experiences: the added pressure of having to perform a specific way in displaying

masculinity and machismo, discipline young boys of color, and never display any other form of

masculinity because it came with certain consequences. Latino male educators expressed how

193

much tension and exhaustion they experienced in trying to be enough for others, yet never

feeling like enough for themselves. Masculinity and machismo negatively affect the lives of

young Latino boys as indicated by this study; however, support to expand gender norms, roles,

and expectations to be more expansive and inclusive will have a positive impact on the future

societal expectations pertaining to gender. Critical machismo consciousness is a foundational

step that can support critical consciousness. During my involvement in K–12 spaces, much of the

training only supported racial identity development. My study focused on the specifics of a

marginalized population of educators who are actively recruited to come into the teaching

profession yet are not fully supported in their gender identities. The dialogic spaces showed the

struggles Latino men currently experience and their recommendations for what they needed, and

still need, to be more successful in their roles. I wanted to center their voices, their experiences,

and their knowledge so their stories have a direct impact in the development of critical machismo

consciousness for future educators.

This dissertation process was difficult to say the least. I have struggled with how to write

and humanize the words of Latino male educators. I wanted to honor their voices and expertise

to give guidance on how to engage with them. My hope was this dissertation would support

Latino male educators entering the profession, those who are actively working in K–12 spaces,

and leaders who are responsible for creating support structures needed to retain Latino men. I

was humbled to have been a part of this process and to have my name forever connected to the

17 Latino male educators who have done amazing work in their K–12 spaces. I hoped to support

the co-construction of a more inclusive gender environment for all individuals and to dismantle

archaic heteronormative patriarchal standards that continue to harm and oppress people. A

gender inclusive world is a more liberated, free, and healed world.

194

REFERENCES

Abaci, V., Ramos, J., & Boyce, E. (1974). A model for delivery of mental health services to

Spanish-speaking minorities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 44(4), 584–595.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1974.tb00913.x

Ahmed, S. (2004). Affective economies. Social Text, 22(2), 117–139.

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/55780

Ahmed, S. (2006). Queer phenomenology. Duke University Press.

Ahmed, S. (2012). Whiteness and the general will: Diversity work as willful

work. PhiloSOPHIA, 2(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1353/phi.2012.a486618

Allan, J. (1994). Anomaly as exemplar: The meanings of role-modeling for men elementary

teachers. Tri-College Department of Education.

Allen, Q. (2015). Race, culture and agency: Examining the ideologies and practices of U.S.

teachers of Black male students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 71–81.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.010

Anderson, E. (2010). Inclusive masculinity: The changing nature of masculinities. Routledge.

Anzaldúa, G. (1987). Borderlands/La frontera: The new mestiza. Aunt Lute Books.

Apple, M. (2013). Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in

education. Routledge.

Arciniega, G. M., Anderson, T. C., Tovar-Blank, Z. G., & Tracey, T. J. (2008). Toward a fuller

conception of Machismo: Development of a traditional Machismo and Caballerismo

Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 55(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-

0167.55.1.19

195

Arriola, E. (1998). March! Chicano-Latino Law Review, 19(1), 1–66.

http://doi.org/10.5070/C7191021083

Artiles, A. J., & Trent, S. C. (1994). Overrepresentation of minority students in special

education: A continuing debate. The Journal of Special Education, 27(4), 410–437.

https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699402700404

Baldridge, B. J. (2017). “It’s like this myth of the supernegro”: Resisting narratives of damage

and struggle in the neoliberal educational policy context. Race Ethnicity and Education,

20(6), 781–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1248819

Barkhorn, E. (2013, October 14). I almost quit Teach for America. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/i-almost-quit-teach-for-

america/280522/

Bartolomé, L. I. (2010). Preparing to teach newcomer students: The significance of critical

pedagogy and the study of ideology in teacher education. Teachers College

Record, 112(14), 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811011201410

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and

implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

Bell, A. E., Spencer, S. J., Iserman, E., & Logel, C. E. (2003). Stereotype threat and women’s

performance in engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(4), 307–312.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00774.x

Berggren, K. (2014). Sticky masculinity: Post-structuralism, phenomenology and subjectivity in

critical studies on men. Men and Masculinities, 17(3), 231–252.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X14539510

196

Bhattacharya, K. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Routledge.

Blanchard, O. (2013, September 23). I quit Teach for America. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/i-quit-teach-for-america/279724/

Breault, R. (2016). Shape shifting in the classroom: Masks and credibility in teaching. In H.

Brown, R. D. Sawyer, & J. Norris (Eds.), Forms of practitioner reflexivity: Critical,

conversational, and arts-based approaches (pp. 195–215). Palgrave Macmillan.

Bridges, T., & Pascoe, C. J. (2014). Hybrid masculinities: New directions in the sociology of

men and masculinities. Sociology Compass, 8(3), 246–258.

https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12134

Brockenbrough, E. (2012). Emasculation blues: Black male teachers’ perspectives on gender and

power in the teaching profession. Teachers College Record, 114(5), 1–43.

https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811211400504

Brockenbrough, E. (2015). “The discipline stop”: Black male teachers and the politics of urban

school discipline. Education and Urban Society, 47(5), 499–522.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124514530154

Brockenbrough, E. (2018). Black men teaching in urban schools: Reassessing Black masculinity.

Routledge.

Brody, L. R. (1993). On understanding gender differences in the expression of emotion. In S. L.

Albon, D. Brown, E. J. Khantzian, & J. E. Mack (Eds.), Human feelings: Explorations in

affect development and meaning (pp. 87–121). Routledge.

Brown, A. L. (2009). “Brothers gonna work it out:” Understanding the pedagogic performance

of African American male teachers working with African American male students. The

Urban Review, 41(5), 416–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-008-0116-8

197

Calzada, E. J., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Yoshikawa, H. (2013). Familismo in Mexican and

Dominican families from low-income, urban communities. Journal of Family Issues,

34(12), 1696–1724. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X12460218

Campos, D. (2012). Educating Latino boys: An asset-based approach. Corwin Press.

Capaccio, L. M. (2011). Harry Potter and the closet under the stairs: Coming out in the wizarding

world. Emergence: A Journal of Undergraduate Literary Criticism and Creative

Research, 2. https://emergencejournal.english.ucsb.edu/wp-

content/uploads/2018/05/Harry-Potter-and-the-Closet-Under-the-Stairs.pdf

Carey, R. L. (2020). Missing misters: Uncovering the pedagogies and positionalities of male

teachers of color in the school lives of Black and Latino adolescent boys. Race Ethnicity

and Education, 23(3), 392–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1663991

Carrigan, T., Connell, B., & Lee, J. (1985). Toward a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and

Society, 14(5), 551–604. https://www.jstor.org/stable/657315

Carrillo, R., & Tello, J. (Eds.). (2008). Family violence and men of color: Healing the wounded

male spirit (2nd ed.). Springer.

Carrington, B., & Skelton, C. (2003). Re-thinking ‘role models’: equal opportunities in teacher

recruitment in England and Wales. Journal of Education Policy, 18(3), 253–265.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930305573

Castillo, J. (2014). Tolerance in schools for Latino students: Dismantling the school-to-prison

pipeline. Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy, 26(1), 43–58.

https://hjhp.hkspublications.org/2015/05/01/tolerance-in-schools-for-latino-students-

dismantling-the-school-to-prison-pipeline/

198

Chandler, M. J., Lalonde, C. E., Sokol, B. W., Hallett, D., & Marcia, J. E. (2003). Personal

persistence, identity development, and suicide: A study of native and non-native North

American adolescents. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,

68(2), vii–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5834.00246

Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded theory as an emergent method. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy

(Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 155–172). The Guilford Press.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory. SAGE Publications.

Chávez-Moreno, L. C. (2021a). The problem with Latinx as a racial construct vis-à-vis language

and bilingualism: Toward recognizing multiple colonialisms in the racialization of

Latinidad. In E. G. Murillo, D. D. Bernal, S. Morales, L. Urrieta, E. R. Bybee, J. S.

Muñoz, V. B. Saenz, D. Villanueva, M. Machado-Casas, & K. Espinoza (Eds.),

Handbook of Latinos and education (2nd ed., pp. 164–180). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429292026

Chávez-Moreno, L. C. (2021b). U.S. empire and an immigrant’s counternarrative:

Conceptualizing imperial privilege. Journal of Teacher Education, 72(2), 209–222.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487120919928

Coles, T. (2008). Finding space in the field of masculinity: Lived experiences of men’s

masculinities. Journal of Sociology, 44(3), 23–248.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783308092882

Colwill, E., & Boyd, R. (2008). Teaching without a mask? Collaborative teaching as feminist

practice. NWSA Journal, 20(2), 216–246. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40071282

Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person, and sexual politics. Stanford

University Press.

199

Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). University of California Press.

Cooper, R., & Jordan, W. J. (2003). Cultural issues in comprehensive school reform. Urban

Education, 38(4), 380–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085903038004003

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Cormier, C. J., Wong, V., McGrew, J. H., Ruble, L. A., & Worrell, F. C. (2021). Stress, burnout,

and mental health among teachers of color. The Learning Professional, 42(1), 54–62.

https://learningforward.org/journal/looking-ahead/stress-burnout-and-mental-health-

among-teachers-of-color/

Crabtree, B. F. (1999). Doing qualitative research. SAGE Publications.

Crenshaw, K. W. (2014, July 29). The girls Obama forgot. The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/opinion/Kimberl-Williams-Crenshaw-My-

Brothers-Keeper-Ignores-Young-Black-Women.html

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five approaches. SAGE Publications.

Crosnoe, R., Riegle‐Crumb, C., Field, S., Frank, K., & Muller, C. (2008). Peer group contexts of

girls’ and boys’ academic experiences. Child Development, 79(1), 139–155.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01116.x

Cruz, C. (2012). Making curriculum from scratch: Testimonio in an urban classroom. Equity &

Excellence in Education, 45(3), 460–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2012.698185

Danielewicz, J. (2014). Teaching selves: Identity, pedagogy, and teacher education. State

University of New York Press.

200

Danylewycz, M., & Prentice, A. (1984). Teachers, gender, and bureaucratizing school systems in

nineteenth century Montreal and Toronto. History of Education Quarterly, 24(1), 75–100.

https://doi.org/10.2307/367994

Darder, A., Baltodano, M., & Torres, R. D. (2003). Critical pedagogy: An introduction. In A.

Darder, M. Baltodano, & R. D. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (1st ed.,

pp.1–21). Routledge.

de Brey, C., Musu, L., McFarland, J., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Diliberti, M., Zhang, A.,

Branstetter, C., & Wang, X. (2019). Status and trends in the education of racial and

ethnic groups 2018 (NCES 2019-038). U.S. Department of Education; National Center

for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019038.pdf

Dee, T. S. (2005). A teacher like me: Does race, ethnicity, or gender matter? American Economic

Review, 95(2), 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282805774670446

De La Cancela, V. (1991). Working affirmatively with Puerto Rican men: Professional and

personal reflections. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 2(3-4), 195–211.

https://doi.org/10.1300/J086v02n03_09

De Leon, S. A. (2005). Assimilation and ambiguous experience of the resilient male Mexican

immigrants that successfully navigate American higher education [Doctoral dissertation,

The University of Texas at Austin]. Texas ScholarWorks.

https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/1535

Delgado, R. (1989). Storytelling for oppositionists and others: A plea for narrative. Michigan

Law Review, 87(8), 2411–2441. https://doi.org/10.2307/1289308

201

Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., MacLure, M., Otterstad, A. M., Torrance, H., Cannella, G. S.,

Koro-Ljungberg, M., & McTier, T. (2017). Critical qualitative methodologies:

Reconceptualizations and emergent construction. International Review of Qualitative

Research, 10(4), 482–498. https://doi.org/10.1525/irqr.2017.10.4.482

Dilshad, R. M., & Latif, M. I. (2013). Focus group interview as a tool for qualitative research:

An analysis. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 33(1), 191–198.

https://pjss.bzu.edu.pk/index.php/pjss/article/view/189

Drago-Severson, E., & Blum-DeStefano, J. (2018). Leading change together: Developing

educator capacity within schools and systems. ASCD.

Dul, J., & Hak, T. (2008). Case study methodology in business research. Routledge.

Dumas, M. J. (2016). My brother as “problem”: Neoliberal governmentality and interventions for

Black young men and boys. Educational Policy, 30(1), 94–113.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904815616487

Duncan-Andrade, J. M. R., & Morrell, E. (2008). The art of critical pedagogy: Possibilities for

moving from theory to practice in urban schools (Vol. 285). Peter Lang.

Ellingson, L. L. (2014). “The truth must dazzle gradually” Enriching relationship research using

a crystallization framework. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31(4), 442–

450. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514523553

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton & Company.

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and

purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4.

http://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

202

Falicov, C. J. (1998). Latino families in therapy: A guide to multicultural practice. Guilford

Press.

Falicov, C. J. (2010). Changing constructions of machismo for Latino men in therapy: “The devil

never sleeps.” Family Process, 49(3), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-

5300.2010.01325.x

Falicov, C. J. (2018). Living and working in cultural borderlands. In L. Comas-Diaz & C. I.

Vazquez (Eds.), Latina psychologists (pp. 16–34). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315175706

Falter, M., Arenas, A. A., Maples, G. W., Smith, C. T., Lamb, L. J., Anderson, M. G., Uzzell, E.

M., Jacobs, L. E., Cason, X. L., Griffis, T. A. N., Polzin, M., & Wafa, N. Z. (2022,

January). Making room for Zoom in focus group methods: opportunities and challenges

for novice researchers (during and beyond COVID-19). Forum Qualitative

Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-

23.1.3768

Fausto-Sterling, A., Crews, D., Sung, J., García-Coll, C., & Seifer, R. (2015). Multimodal sex-

related differences in infant and in infant-directed maternal behaviors during months

three through twelve of development. Developmental Psychology, 51(10), 1351–1366.

https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000033

Ferdman, B. M., & Gallegos, P. I. (2001). Racial identity development and Latinos in the United

States. In C. L. Wijeyesinghe & B. W. Jackson (Eds.), New perspectives on racial

identity development: A theoretical and practical anthology (pp. 32–66). New York

University Press.

Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative analysis. SAGE Publications.

203

Fram, S. M. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory.

Qualitative Report, 18(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2013.1569

Freeman, J. (2003). Gender differences in gifted achievement in Britain and the U.S. Gifted

Child Quarterly, 47(3), 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620304700304

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

Freire, P. (1994). Education for critical consciousness. Continuum.

Freire, P. (1998). Reprint: Cultural action for freedom. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), 476–

522. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.68.4.656ku47213445042

Fry, R. A. (2005). Recent changes in the entry of Hispanic and White youth into college. Pew

Hispanic Center.

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The

Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408–1416. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2281

Gándara, P., & The White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics. (2015).

Fulfilling America’s future Latinas in the U.S., 2015. UCLA: The Civil Rights Project

https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6bt1m260

Garfield, R. (2010). Male emotional intimacy: How therapeutic men’s groups can enhance

couple’s therapy. Family Process, 49(1), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-

5300.2010.01311.x

Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers

College Press.

Gay, G., & Kirkland, K. (2003). Developing cultural critical consciousness and self-reflection in

preservice teacher education. Theory Into Practice, 42(3), 181–187.

https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_3

204

Gershenson, S., Hart, C. M., Hyman, J., Lindsay, C., & Papageorge, N. W. (2018). The long-run

impacts of same-race teachers (Working Paper No. 25254). National Bureau of

Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25254

Ginwright, S. (2015). Hope and healing in urban education: How urban activists and teachers

are reclaiming matters of the heart. Routledge.

Ginwright, S. (2018, May 31). The future of healing: Shifting from trauma informed care to

healing centered engagement. Medium. https://ginwright.medium.com/the-future-of-

healing-shifting-from-trauma-informed-care-to-healing-centered-engagement-

634f557ce69c

Giroux, H. A. (1988). Border pedagogy in the age of postmodernism. Journal of Education,

170(3), 162–181. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42748653

Glaser, B. G. (1999). The future of grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 9(6), 836–

845. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129122199

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The development of grounded theory. Alden.

Goldberg, H. (1976). The hazards of being male: Surviving the myth of masculine privilege.

Signet.

Gómez, L. E. (2018). Manifest destinies. New York University Press.

Gómez, L. E. (2020). Inventing Latinos: A new story of American racism. The New Press.

González, J. (2011). Harvest of empire: A history of Latinos in America. Penguin.

Gottfried, M., Kirksey, J. J., & Fletcher, T. L. (2022). Do high school students with a same-race

teacher attend class more often? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(1), 149–

169. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737211032241

Gray, D. E. (2013). Doing research in the real world. SAGE Publications.

205

Griffin, A. (2018). Our stories, our struggles, our strengths: Perspectives and reflections from

Latino teachers. Education Trust. https://edtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Our-

Stories-Our-Struggles-Our-Strengths-FINAL.pdf

Griffin, A., & Tackie, H. (2017). Through our eyes: Perspectives from Black teachers. Phi Delta

Kappan, 98(5), 36–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717690363

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes:

implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 85(2), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348

Hall, J. N. (2020). Focus groups: Culturally responsive approaches for qualitative inquiry and

program evaluation. Myers Education Press.

Halpern, D. F., Eliot, L., Bigler, R. S., Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Hyde, J., Liben, L. S., &

Martin, C. L. (2011). The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 333(6050),

1706–1707. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1205031

Hammond, Z. (2014). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic

engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin Press.

Handfield, R. B., & Melnyk, S. A. (1998). The scientific theory-building process: a primer using

the case of TQM. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 321–339.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00017-5

Hardman, J. (2008). Researching pedagogy: An activity theory approach. Journal of Education,

45(1), 65–95.

Harper, S. R. (2015). Success in these schools? Visual counternarratives of young men of color

and urban high schools they attend. Urban Education, 50(2), 139–169.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085915569738

206

Helms, J. E. (1990). Black and White racial identity: Theory, research, and practice. Greenwood

Press.

Herlitz, A., & Lovén, J. (2013). Sex differences and the own-gender bias in face recognition: A

meta-analytic review. Visual Cognition, 21(9–10), 1306–1336.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.823140

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. Blackwell Science.

hooks, b. (2004). We real cool: Black men and masculinity. Psychology Press.

Huber, L. P. (2010). Sueños indocumentados: Using LatCrit to explore the testimonios of

undocumented and U.S. born Chicana college students on discourses of racist nativism in

education (Publication No. 3405577) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los

Angeles]. ProQuest Dissertations and These Global.

Hurtado, A., & Sinha, M. (2008). More than men: Latino feminist masculinities and

intersectionality. Sex Roles, 59, 337–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9405-7

Hurtado, A., & Sinha, M. (2016). Beyond machismo: Intersectional Latino masculinities.

University of Texas Press.

Huynh, Q. L., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011). Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential

implications for identity and psychological adjustment. Journal of Social and Clinical

Psychology, 30(2), 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2011.30.2.133

Iglesias, E. M. (1997). Introduction to Panel Five: The inter-subjectivity of objective justice: A

theory and praxis for constructing LatCrit coalitions. Harvard Latino Law Review, 2,

467–471.

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2149&context=fac_articles

207

Jackson, I., Sealey-Ruiz, Y., & Watson, W. (2014). Reciprocal love: Mentoring Black and Latino

males through an ethos of care. Urban Education, 49(4), 394–417.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085913519336

Jackson, M. (2009). Neo-colonialism, same old racism: A critical analysis of the United States’

shift toward colorblindness as a tool for the protection of the American colonial empire

and White supremacy. Berkeley Journal of African-American Law & Policy, 11(1), 156–

192. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38K338

Jennings, L. E., Pasupathi, M., & McLean, K. C. (2014). “Intricate lettings out and lettings in”:

Listener scaffolding of narrative identity in newly dating romantic partners. Self and

Identity, 13(2), 214–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2013.786203

Johnson, K., Caskey, M., Rand, K., Tucker, R., & Vohr, B. (2014). Gender differences in adult-

infant communication in the first months of life. Pediatrics, 134(6), e1603–e1610.

https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-4289

Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. R. (2016). Mindful L2 teacher education: A sociocultural

perspective on cultivating teachers’ professional development. Routledge.

Johnson, P., & Philoxene, D. (2018). It makes me feel like I’m a monster: Navigating notions of

Black damage in this work. In N. S. Nasir, J. R. Givens, & C. P. Chatmon (Eds.), We

dare say love”: Supporting achievement in the educational life of Black boys (pp. 68–80).

Teachers College Press.

Jones, N., Marks, R., Ramirez, R., & Ríos-Vargas, M. (2021, August 12). 2020 Census

illuminates racial and ethnic composition of the country. U.S. Census Bureau.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/improved-race-ethnicity-measures-

reveal-united-states-population-much-more-multiracial.html

208

Jones, R., Holton, W., & Joseph, M. (2019). Call me MiSTER: A Black male grow your own

program. Teacher Education Quarterly, 46(1), 55–68.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1202245.pdf

Jung, C. G. (1969). The collected works of C. G. Jung, Volume 9 (Part 1): The archetypes and

the collective unconscious (G. Adler & R. F. C. Hull, Eds.). Princeton University Press.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hhrnk

Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Focus groups: Strategic articulations of pedagogy,

politics, and inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of

qualitative research (pp. 887–907). SAGE Publications.

Kincheloe, J. L., & Mclaren, P. (2011). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In K.

Hayes, S. R. Steinberg, & K. Tobin (Eds.), Key works in critical pedagogy: Bold visions

in educational research (Vol. 32, pp. 285–326). SensePublishers.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-397-6_23

Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical

Journal, 311(7000), 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299

Kohli, R. (2019). Lessons for teacher education: The role of critical professional development in

teacher of color retention. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(1), 39–50.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487118767645

Korth, B. (2002). Critical qualitative research as consciousness raising: The dialogic texts of

researcher/researchee interactions. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(3), 381–403.

https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004008003011

Kuntz, A. M. (2016). The responsible methodologist: Inquiry, truth-telling, and social justice.

Routledge.

209

Ladner, J. A. (Ed.). (1998). The death of white sociology: Essays on race and culture. Black

Classic Press.

Lahelma, E. (2000). Lack of male teachers: A problem for students or teachers? Pedagogy,

Culture and Society, 8(2), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360000200093

Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford

University Press.

Lantolf, J. P. (2013). Sociocultural theory: A dialectical approach to L2 research. In S. M. Gass

& A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 57–

72). Routledge.

Lara, G. P., & Fránquiz, M. E. (2015). Latino bilingual teachers: Negotiating the figured world

of masculinity. Bilingual Research Journal, 38(2), 207–227.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2015.1066720

Lea, V. (Ed.). (2014). Constructing critical consciousness: Narratives that unmask hegemony

and ideas for creating greater equity in education. Peter Lang.

Lenroot, R. K., & Giedd, J. N. (2006). Brain development in children and adolescents: insights

from anatomical magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews,

30(6), 718–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.06.001

Levant, R. F. (1996). A new psychology of men. Professional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 27(3), 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.27.3.259

Levant, R. F., & Pollack, W. S. (Eds.). (1995). A new psychology of men. Basic Books.

210

Levant, R. F., Richmond, K., Majors, R. G., Inclan, J. E., Rossello, J. M., Heesacker, M., Rowan,

G. T., & Sellers, A. (2003). A multicultural investigation of masculinity ideology and

alexithymia. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4(2), 91–99.

https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.4.2.91

Losen, D. & Orfield, G. (2002). Racial inequality in special education. Harvard Education Press.

Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of

educational freedom. Beacon Press.

Lucht, K. M. (2022). “They are essential”: Exploring the lived experiences of community

college women faculty members and their femtor network (Publication No. 28969707)

[Doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Machado, A. (2013, December 23). Why teachers of color quit. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/12/why-teachers-of-color-

quit/282007/

Machado-Casas, M. (2006). Narrating education of new indigenous/Latino transnational

communities in the south: Migration, life, and its effects on schooling [Doctoral

dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill]. Carolina Digital

Repositories. https://doi.org/10.17615/v2dw-hw09

Mahn, H. (1999). Vygotsky’s methodological contribution to sociocultural theory. Remedial and

Special Education, 20(6), 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259902000607

Marin, G., & Marin, B. V. (1991). Research with Hispanic populations. SAGE Publications.

Martin, C. L., & Ruble, D. (2004). Children’s search for gender cues: Cognitive perspectives on

gender development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(2), 67–70.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00276.x

211

Martinez, A. Y. (2014). Critical race theory: Its origins, history, and importance to the discourses

and rhetorics of race. Frame: Journal of Literary Studies, 27(2), 9–27.

https://www.frameliteraryjournal.com/27-2-racism-in-the-netherlands/1431/

Martinez, J. (2019, July 30). When it comes to Latinidad, who is included and who isn’t?

Remezcla. https://remezcla.com/features/culture/when-it-comes-to-latinidad-who-is-

included-and-who-isnt/

Martino, W. (2008). Male teachers as role models: Addressing issues of masculinity, pedagogy

and the re-masculinization of schooling. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(2), 189–223.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2007.00405.x

Martino, W., & Kehler, M. (2006). Male teachers and the” boy problem”: An issue of

recuperative masculinity politics. McGill Journal of Education/Revue des sciences de

l’éducation de McGill, 41(2), 113–131. https://mje.mcgill.ca/article/view/559

Matias, C. E., & Mackey, J. (2016). Breakin’ down whiteness in antiracist teaching: Introducing

critical whiteness pedagogy. The Urban Review, 48(1), 32–50.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-015-0344-7

McArthur, J. A. (2022). From classroom to Zoom room: Exploring instructor modifications of

visual nonverbal behaviors in synchronous online classrooms. Communication Teacher,

36(3), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/17404622.2021.1981959

McClure, E. B. (2000). A meta-analytic review of sex differences in facial expression processing

and their development in infants, children, and adolescents. Psychological Bulletin,

126(3), 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.424

212

Meeus, W. (2011). The study of adolescent identity formation 2000–2010: A review of

longitudinal research. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 75–94.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00716.x

Meeus, W., Van de Schoot, R., Keijsers, L., Schwartz, S. J., & Branje, S. (2010). On the

progression and stability of adolescent identity formation: A five‐wave longitudinal study

in early‐to‐middle and middle‐to‐late adolescence. Child Development, 81(5), 1565–

1581. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12256

Menakem, R. (2021). My grandmother’s hands: Racialized trauma and the pathway to mending

our hearts and bodies. Penguin UK.

Meredith, J. (1998). Building operations management theory through case and field research.

Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-

6963(98)00023-0

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Mentorship. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved September

8, 2021, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mentorship

Michalska, K. J., Kinzler, K. D., & Decety, J. (2013). Age-related sex differences in explicit

measures of empathy do not predict brain responses across childhood and adolescence.

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 22–32.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2012.08.001

Mills, M., Martino, W., & Lingard, B. (2004). Attracting, recruiting and retaining male teachers:

Policy issues in the male teacher debate. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(3),

355–369. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4128694

213

Milner, H. R., IV. (2010). What does teacher education have to do with teaching? Implications

for diversity studies. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 118–131.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347670

Moje, E. B., & Lewis, C. (2020). Examining opportunities to learn literacy: The role of critical

sociocultural literacy research. In C. Lewis, P. E. Enciso, & E. B. Moje (Eds.), Reframing

sociocultural research on literacy (pp. 15–48). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003064428

Molina, S. C. (2015). Mediating teacher learning through dialogical learning spaces integrated in

a practicum experience. Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(1).

http://doi.org/10.12785/jtte/030107

Molina, S. C. (2021). Growing emerging researchers in a TESOL teacher education program:

Implications for feedback practice. CATESOL Journal, 32(1), 145–159.

http://www.catesoljournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/CJ32-1-11_Molina.pdf

Mondale, S. (2001). School: The story of American public education: The common school:

1770–1890 [Film]. Films for the Humanities and Sciences.

Moraga, C., & Anzaldúa, G. (Eds.). (2022). This bridge called my back: Writings by radical

women of color. State University of New York Press.

Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups as qualitative research (Vol. 16). SAGE publications.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2020). Status and trends in the education of racial

and ethnic groups. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/raceindicators/

National Compadres Network. (2021). Philosophy and valores.

https://nationalcompadresnetwork.org/philosophy-valores/

214

Newsom, J. S. (Director). (2015). The mask you live in [Film]. The Representation Project; The

Annenberg Foundation; The Brin Wojcicki Foundation; Novo Foundation; Pacific Gas

and Electric; Peery Foundation.

Noguera, P. A. (2008). Creating schools where race does not predict achievement: The role and

significance of race in the racial achievement gap. The Journal of Negro Education,

77(2), 90–103. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25608673

Noguera, P. A. (2009). The trouble with Black boys: . . . And other reflections on race, equity,

and the future of public education. John Wiley & Sons.

Noguera, P. A. (2012). Saving Black and Latino boys: What schools can do to make a difference.

Phi Delta Kappan, 93(5), 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209300503

Odegard, M. A., & Vereen, L. G. (2010). A grounded theory of counselor educators integrating

social justice into their pedagogy. Counselor Education and Supervision, 50(2), 130–149.

https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00114.x

Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2003). Relations between implicit measures of prejudice: What are

we measuring? Psychological Science, 14(6), 636–639. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0956-

7976.2003.psci_1477.x

O’Neil, J. M. (1982). Gender-role conflict and strain in men’s lives. In K. Solomon & N. B.

Levy (Eds.), Men in transition (pp. 5–44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-

4211-3_2

Pabon, A. (2016). Waiting for Black superman: A look at a problematic assumption. Urban

Education, 51(8), 915–939. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085914553673

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning

for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.

215

Partee, G. L. (2014). Retaining teachers of color in our public schools: A critical need for action.

Center for American Progress. https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-

content/uploads/2014/06/Partee-TeachersOfColor-report2.pdf

Pateman, C. (1988). The sexual contract. Polity Press.

Paz, O., & Kemp, L. (1961). The labyrinth of solitude: Life and thought in Mexico (Vol. 6).

Grove Press.

Pérez, D., & Okello, W. (2017). Beyond machismo: Intersectional Latino masculinities.

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(9), 897–900

https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1300705

Pleck, J. H. (1981). The myth of masculinity. MIT Press.

Pollack, W. S., & Levant, R. F. (1998). New psychotherapy for men. John Wiley & Sons.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2006). Brief note on the origins, evolution, and meaning of the qualitative

research concept thick description. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 538–549.

https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2006.1666

Punnett, B. J., Ford, D., Galperin, B. L., & Lituchy, T. (2017). The emic-etic-emic research

cycle. Academy of International Business Insights, 17(1), 3–6.

http://documents.aib.msu.edu/publications/insights/v17n1/v17n1_Article1.pdf

Quintanilla, A. (2017). Latino males: Mentoring for the future. Excelencia in Education.

https://www.edexcelencia.org/research/issue-briefs/latino-males-mentoring-future

Quintero, G. A., & Estrada, A. L. (1998). Cultural models of masculinity and drug use:

“Machismo,” heroin, and street survival on the U.S.-Mexico border. Contemporary Drug

Problems, 25(1), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/009145099802500107

216

Rakow, L. F. (2011). Commentary: Interviews and focus groups as critical and cultural methods.

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88(2), 416–428.

https://doi.org/10.1177/107769901108800211

Rideout, V. (2017). The common sense census: Media use by kids age zero to eight. Common

Sense Media. https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/

default/files/research/report/csm_zerotoeight_fullreport_release_2.pdf

Riggs, L. (2013, October 18). Why do teachers quit? And why do they stay? The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/why-do-teachers-quit/280699/

Rippon, G. (2019). The gendered brain: The new neuroscience that shatters the myth of the

female brain. Random House.

Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013). Qualitative research

practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. SAGE Publications.

Rodriguez, K. L., Schwartz, J. L., Lahman, M. K., & Geist, M. R. (2011). Culturally responsive

focus groups: Reframing the research experience to focus on participants. International

Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(4), 400–417.

https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691101000407

Rodríguez, L. F., Mosqueda, E., Nava, P. E., & Conchas, G. (2013). Reflecting on the

institutional processes for college success: The experiences of four Chicanos in the

context of inequality. Latino Studies, 11(3), 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1057/lst.2013.24

Romero, A., Arce, S., & Cammarota, J. (2009). A barrio pedagogy: Identity, intellectualism,

activism, and academic achievement through the evolution of critically compassionate

intellectualism. Race Ethnicity and Education, 12(2), 217–233.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320902995483

217

Ryu, W., Burmicky, J., Sáenz, V. B., Viramontes, J. R. D. R., Aguayo, R., & Segovia, J., Jr.

(2021). The role of high school counselors in increasing Latino male college enrollment:

Moving from college aspirations to access. Professional School Counseling,

25(1_part_4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2156759X211040004

Saavedra, C. M. (2006). The teacher’s body: Discourse, power, and discipline in the history of

the feminization of teaching [Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University]. Texas A&M

University. https://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/3836

Saenz, V. B., & Ponjuan, L. (2009). The vanishing Latino male in higher education. Journal of

Hispanic Higher Education, 8(1), 54–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192708326995

Sáenz, V. B., Ponjuan, L., Segovia, J., Jr., & Del Real Viramontes, J. (2015). Developing a

Latino mentoring program: Project MALES (mentoring to achieve Latino educational

success). New Directions for Higher Education, 2015(171), 75–85.

https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20144

Saez, P. A., Casado, A., & Wade, J. C. (2010). Factors influencing masculinity ideology among

Latino men. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 17(2), 116–128.

https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1702.116

Saldaña, J., & Omasta, M. (2016). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. SAGE Publications.

Salisbury, J., & Jackson, D. (1996). Challenging macho values: Practical ways of working with

adolescent boys. Psychology Press.

Salter, M. (2019, February 27). The problem with a fight against toxic masculinity. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/02/toxic-masculinity-history/583411/

Santa Ana, O. (2002). Brown tide rising: Metaphors of Latinos in contemporary American public

discourse. University of Texas Press.

218

Sargent, P. (2001). Real men or real teachers? Contradictions in the lives of men elementary

school teachers. Men’s Studies Press.

Schostak, J., & Schostak, J. (2007). Radical research: Designing, developing and writing

research to make a difference. Routledge.

Schwandt, T. A., & Gates, E. F. (2017). Case study methodology. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.

Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 600–630). SAGE

Publications.

Scott, E. K. (2005). Beyond tokenism: The making of racially diverse feminist organizations.

Social Problems, 52(2), 232–254. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2005.52.2.232

Scott, S., & Palincsar, A. (2013). Sociocultural theory. http://dr-

hatfield.com/theorists/resources/sociocultural_theory.pdf

Seo, E., & Lee, Y. K. (2021). Stereotype threat in high school classrooms: how it links to teacher

mindset climate, mathematics anxiety, and achievement. Journal of Youth and

Adolescence, 50, 1410–1423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01435-x

Shenouda, C. K., & Danovitch, J. H. (2014). Effects of gender stereotypes and stereotype threat

on children’s performance on a spatial task. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale,

27(3), 53–77. https://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-psychologie-sociale-2014-

3-page-53.htm

Sherman, A. M., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2014). “Boys can be anything”: Effect of Barbie play on

girls’ career cognitions. Sex Roles, 70(5), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-

0347-y

219

Singh, M. V. (2018). Role models without guarantees: Corrective representations and the cultural

politics of a Latino male teacher in the borderlands. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(3),

288–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1395330

Singh, M. V. (2019). Refusing the performance: Disrupting popular discourses surrounding

Latino male teachers and the possibility of disidentification. Educational Studies, 55(1),

28–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2018.1545654

Singh, M. V. (2020). Neoliberal influence on Latino male identity: power and resistance in a

school-based mentorship program for Latino boys. International Journal of Qualitative

Studies in Education, 36(4), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2020.1829739

Singh, M. V. (2021). Seven justice-oriented principles for men of color working with boys of

color. Project MALES; University of Texas at Austin.

https://diversity.utexas.edu/projectmales/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2021/09/Practice-

Brief-Singh-Sept-2021-FINAL-Reduced-1.pdf

Skelton, C. (2003). Male primary teachers and perceptions of masculinity. Educational Review,

55(2), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191032000072227

Snyder, T. D., De Brey, C., & Dillow, S. A. (2019). Digest of education statistics 2017 (NCES

2018-070). National Center for Education Statistics; Institute of Education Sciences; U.S.

Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018070.pdf

Solórzano, D., & Delgado Bernal, D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a

critical race and LatCrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban

context. Urban Education, 36(3), 308–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085901363002

Solórzano, D. G., & Huber, L. P. (2020). Racial microaggressions: Using critical race theory to

respond to everyday racism. Teachers College Press.

220

Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2001). Critical race and LatCrit theory and method: Counter-

storytelling. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 14(4), 471–495.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390110063365

Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. SAGE Publications.

Steele, C. M. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. W. W.

Norton & Company.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of

African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797

Stoltenberg, J. (2000). The end of manhood: Parables on sex and selfhood. Routledge.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for

developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Strober, M. H., & Lanford, A. G. (1986). The feminization of public-school teaching: Cross-

sectional analysis, 1850-1880. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11(2),

212–235. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3174046

Sumsion, J. (2000). Negotiating otherness: A male early childhood educator’s gender

positioning. International Journal of Early Years Education, 8(2), 129–140.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760050046174

Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge University Press.

Talleyrand, R., Bailey, C. G., Saldana, M., Tran, J. T., & Li, Z. (2022). Exploring migration

experiences of undocumented Latinx youth through a qualitative lens: Implications for

mental health provide. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 6(3), 269–286.

https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/12654

221

Tatum, B. D. (2004). Talking about race, learning about racism: The application of racial identity

development theory in the classroom. In J. Bobo, C. Hudley, & C. Michel (Eds.), The

Black studies reader (pp. 401–424). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203491348

Tello, J. (1998). El hombre noble buscando balance: The noble man searching for balance. In R.

Carrillo & J. Tello (Eds.), Family violence and men of color: Healing the wounded male

spirit (pp. 31–52). Springer.

Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence. Houghton, Mifflin and Company.

https://doi.org/10.1037/10014-000

Thomas, D. E., & Stevenson, H. (2009). Gender risks and education: The particular classroom

challenges for urban low-income African American boys. Review of Research in

Education, 33, 160–180. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40588121

Thomas, D. R. (2017). Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in

qualitative research? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14(1), 23–41.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2016.1219435

Torres, J. B., Solberg, V. S. H., & Carlstrom, A. H. (2002). The myth of sameness among Latino

men and their machismo. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 72(2), 163–181.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0002-9432.72.2.163

Tuck, E. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review,

79(3), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.79.3.n0016675661t3n15

Vasquez-Salgado, Y., & Chavira, G. (2014). The transition from middle school to high school as

a developmental process among Latino youth. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences,

36(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739986313513718

222

Vygotsky, L. (1997). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole

(Eds.), Readings on the development of children (2nd ed., pp. 34–41). W. H. Freeman and

Company. (Reprinted from Mind in society: The development of higher psychological

processes, pp. 79–91, by L. Vygotsky, 1978, Harvard University Press)

Waling, A. (2019). Rethinking masculinity studies: Feminism, masculinity, and poststructural

accounts of agency and emotional reflexivity. Journal of Men’s Studies, 27(1), 89–107.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1060826518782980

Ward, J. (2008). White normativity: The cultural dimensions of whiteness in a racially diverse

LGBT organization. Sociological Perspectives, 51(3), 563–586.

https://doi.org/10.1525/sop.2008.51.3.563

Warner, M. (1993). Fear of a queer planet: Queer politics and social theory. University of

Minnesota Press.

Watson, V. (2014). The Black sonrise: Oakland Unified School District’s commitment to address

and eliminate institutionalized racism. Office of African American Male Achievement;

Oakland Unified School District. https://www.ousd.org/cms/lib/

CA01001176/Centricity/Domain/78/MDPreportWEBV14d.pdf

Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta‐analysis of theory‐of‐mind development:

The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72(3), 655–684.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1132444

Williams, M., & Moser, T. (2019). The art of coding and thematic exploration in qualitative

research. International Management Review, 15(1), 45–55.

http://www.imrjournal.org/uploads/1/4/2/8/14286482/imr-v15n1art4.pdf

223

Winn, M. T. (2018). Justice on both sides: Transforming education through restorative justice.

Harvard Education Press.

Wood, J. T. (2018). Communication in our lives (8th ed). Cengage.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE

Publications.

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

Yosso, T. J., & García, D. G. (2021). “Who are these kids, rejects from hell?”: Analyzing

Hollywood distortions of Latina/o high school students. In J. S. Muñoz, M. Machado-

Casas, & E. G. Murillo, Jr. (Eds.), Handbook of Latinos and education (pp. 309–332).

Routledge.

Yosso, T. J., Parker, L., Solorzano, D. G., & Lynn, M. (2004). Chapter 1: From Jim Crow to

affirmative action and back again: A critical race discussion of racialized rationales and

access to higher education. Review of Research in Education, 28(1), 1–25.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X028001001

Young, I. M. (2011). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press.

Zosuls, K. M., Ruble, D. N., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Shrout, P. E., Bornstein, M. H., & Greulich,

F. K. (2009). The acquisition of gender labels in infancy: implications for gender-typed

play. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 688–701. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014053

224

APPENDIX A

Diversifying the Teacher Workforce

225

APPENDIX B

CITI Certificate and IRB Approval

This is to certify that:

Mario Echeverria

Has completed the following CITI Program course:

Human Subjects Research - SBR (Curriculum Group)

Social & Behavioral Research - Basic/Refresher (Course Learner Group)

2 - Refresher 1 (Stage)

Under requirements set by:

Completion Date 08-Nov-2022 Expiration Date 08-Nov-2025

Record ID 51165833

Not valid for renewal of certification through CME.

University of San Diego

Verify at www.citiprogram.org/verify/?w812a6111-98bb-46f2-9b37-c450c186545b-51165833

Re: Expedited - Initial - IRB-2023-155, “A Real Man...”: Co-constructing dialogic spaces of deconstructing masculinity/machismo heteronormative standards with K12 Latino male educators

Dear Mario Echeverria:

The University of San Diego Institutional Review Board (USD IRB) has rendered the decision below for IRB-2023- 155: “A Real Man...”: Co-constructing dialogic spaces of deconstructing masculinity/machismo heteronormative standards with K12 Latino male educators.

Decision: Approved. This study may start no earlier than January 5, 2023.

Selected Category: 7. Research on individual or group characteristics or behavior (including, but not limited to, research on perception, cognition, motivation, identity, language, communication, cultural beliefs or practices, and social behavior) or research employing survey, interview, oral history, focus group, program evaluation, human factors evaluation, or quality assurance methodologies.

Findings: Thank you for addressing all of the previous review feedback. Research Notes: N/A Internal Notes:

The USD IRB requires annual renewal of all active studies reviewed and approved by the IRB. Please submit an application for renewal prior to the annual anniversary date of initial study approval. If an application for renewal is not received, the study will be administratively closed.

Note: We send IRB correspondence regarding student research to the faculty advisor, who bears the ultimate responsibility for the conduct of the research. We request that the faculty advisor share this correspondence with the student researcher.

Applications for full review must be submitted at least two weeks prior to the next scheduled monthly IRB meeting; see https://www.sandiego.edu/irb/updates/ for specific deadlines. You may submit an IRB application for expedited or exempt review at any time.

Sincerely,

Truc Ngo, PhD IRB Administrator

Office of the Senior Vice President and Provost Hughes Administration Center, Room 212 5998 Alcalá Park, San Diego, CA 92110-2492 Phone (619) 260-4553 • Fax (619) 260-2210 • www.sandiego.edu

APPENDIX C

Research Recruitment Email Script

Hello, My name is Mario Echeverria and I am a PhD candidate in the Education for Social Justice program at the University of San Diego in San Diego, California. I am currently in my dissertation process and my study is titled: “A Real Man...”: Co-constructing dialogic spaces of deconstructing masculinity/machismo heteronormative standards with K–12 Latino male educators. I am conducting focus groups-community circles/circulos enfocados about the experiences of Latino male educators in K12 spaces to elevate your voices. For the purpose of this study, Latino male educators include the following intersectional identities:

1. Latinidad Identity (i.e., Latino, Hispanic, Chicano, Afro-Latino, etc.) 2. Educator in K12 3. Heterosexual 4. Cisgender

If you decide to participate in the focus groups-community circles/circulos enfocados, I will invite you to participate in a virtual session lasting 90–120 minutes to understand about your experiences as a Latino male educator in K–12 spaces. The session will take place online via zoom and will be audio recorded only. All data collected from you will be coded with a pseudonym (fake name). Your real name will not be used. Focus groups-community circles/circulos enfocados will be conducted with participants based on your years in the education field (e.g., 0–1 years of teaching experience, 2–4 years of teaching experience, and 5+ years of teaching experience). With this study being completed virtually, there is the ability to bring in multiple participants from diverse locations to gain a broader perspective. There will be no compensation for your participation in this study. Your feedback will be important to my study before it is published and an additional 30 minutes will be asked of you to review the data pertaining that you shared. Your voice matters throughout the entirety of the process. I would be happy to answer any questions you have about the study. You may contact me at [email protected]. Thank you for your consideration, Mario Echeverria Ph.D. Candidate University of San Diego Dr. Sarina Molina Faculty Advisor [email protected] (XXX) XXX-XXXX If you would like to participate, please click on this link to give your demographic information (confidential) and I will contact you through email to begin the process.

APPENDIX D

Latino Male Demographic Survey

Thank you for taking the time to consider being a participant in the study: “A Real Man...”: Deconstructing masculinity/machismo heteronormative standards with K12 Latino male educators through dialogic spaces." Please take the opportunity to fill out the following demographic questions to fulfill the prerequisites of being in this study. I appreciate your time and look forward to engaging in dialogue with you. With Gratitude, Mario Echeverria PhD Candidate University of San Diego 1. What is your first and last name?

Short answer text 2. Which Latinidad Identity do you identify most with (Select all that apply)

Hispanic Latino Chicano Mestizo Afro-Latino Other:____________

3. How long have you been a K–12 educator for?

0-1 year 2-4 years 5+ years

4. Sexual Identity/Sexual Orientation (Select all that apply)

Aromatic Asexual Bisexual Fluid Gay Pansexual Queer Questioning or Unsure

Straight (heterosexual) Prefer not to disclose Other:____________

5. Gender identity (select all that apply)

Agender Man Non-Binary Questioning or Unsure Prefer not to Disclose Other:____________

6. Best email to reach you at?

Short answer text 7. Are you comfortable in dialoguing in a virtual (Zoom) setting about masculinity?

Yes No Maybe

8. Check any or all the boxes if you are available on the following dates and times (If not, offer up some times that work better for you)

June 13 9am – 11am PST June 14 9am – 11am PST June 16 9am – 11am PST June 20 10:30am – 12:30pm PST Other…

APPENDIX E

Consent Form

University of San Diego Institutional Review Board Research

Participant Adult Consent Form For the research study entitled: “A Real Man...”: Co-constructing dialogic spaces of

deconstructing masculinity/machismo heteronormative standards with K12 Latino male educators.

I. Purpose of the research study

Mario Echeverria is a doctoral student in the School of Leadership and Education Sciences at the University of San Diego. You are invited to participate in a research study he is conducting on your experience as Latino male educators at your respective school sites. The purpose of this study is to examine the experiences of Latino male educators in their teaching experience given that Latino men are twice as likely to leave the profession compared to Latina women. The goal of my study is to discuss how your masculine/machismo identity impacts your day-to-day experiences and understand how educational environments can support you. This is important so that future studies and initiatives can be directed toward retaining your talents as educators.

II. What you will be asked to do

The total participation time for this study will be about 120–150 minutes. This study will involve one focus group-community circle or circulos enfocados that will be through a virtual Zoom setting. The goal for this is to combine community circles and focus groups where dialogue among the participants is encouraged, fostered, and supported through deep questions regarding a specific topic, in this case, masculinity/machismo. The focus groups-community circle/circulos enfocados will last about 90–120 minutes and will be recorded and transcribed for analysis purposes. Only audio will be recorded in the setting. A feedback opportunity will be provided that will take about 30 minutes of your time on the transcript of what you shared in the virtual space.

III. Foreseeable risks or discomforts

This study involves no more risk than the risks you encounter in daily life. Some of the questions may invoke emotional responses. If you need further assistance, please contact the National Alliance for Mental Illness. The NAMI HelpLine can be reached Monday through Friday, 10 a.m. – 10 p.m., ET. Call 1-800-950-NAMI (6264), text “HelpLine” to 62640 or email us at [email protected]. HelpLine volunteers are working to answer questions, offer support and provide practical next steps. Another option is the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration or SAMHSA. SAMHSA’s National Helpline, 1-800-662-HELP (4357) (also known as the Treatment Referral Routing Service), or TTY: 1-800-487-4889 is a confidential, free, 24-hour-a-day, 365-day-a-year, information service, in English and Spanish, for individuals

and family members facing mental and/or substance use disorders. This service provides referrals to local treatment facilities, support groups, and community-based organizations.

IV. Benefits

While there may be no direct benefit to you from participating in this study, the indirect benefit of participating will be knowing that you helped teacher educators, school administrators, and University Teacher Prep Programs better understand the Latino male educator experience in K– 12 environments.

V. Confidentiality

Any information provided and/or identifying records will remain confidential and kept in a locked file and/or password-protected computer file in the researcher’s office for a minimum of five years. All data collected from you will be coded with a pseudonym (fake name). Your real name will not be used. The results of this research project may be made public and information quoted in professional journals and meetings, but information from this study will only be reported as a group, and not individually. You will have the opportunity to review what is written from the transcript review and findings. It is important to this research study that the information shared in the focus group to not be shared with anyone outside of the group. It is important to know that confidentiality cannot be guaranteed with what you decide to share with the group. Your name and privacy will be protected and maintained throughout this study and you should not use anyone's name from this study when talking about this study to anyone.

The information or materials you provide will be cleansed of all identifiers (like your name) and may be used in future research.

VI. Compensation

There will be no compensation for your participation in this study.

VII. Voluntary Nature of this Research

Participation in this study is entirely voluntary. You do not have to do this, and you can refuse to answer any question or quit at any time. Deciding not to participate will have no effect on your employment status with your respective school site. You can withdraw from this study at any time without penalty.

VIII. Contact Information

If you have any questions about this research, you may contact [include yourself and your advisor]:

Mario Echeverria Dr. Sarina Molina Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX

I have read and understand this form, and consent to the research it describes to me. I have received a copy of this consent form for my records.

________________________ ______________________________ ________

Name of Participant (Printed) Signature of Participant Date

_________________________ ________

Signature of Investigators Date

APPENDIX F

Circulo Enfocado Protocol

PhD Research Title: “A Real Man . . .”: Deconstructing Masculinity/Machismo Heteronormative standards with K–12 Latino Male Educators through Dialogic Spaces. Framing Focus Groups-Community Circle/Circulos Enfocados Facilitator states: “I appreciate the opportunity to be in community with you all today. The goal of this study is to listen to your voices about your experiences as Latino male educators. Your experience can be very beneficial in understanding how masculinity/machismo impacts your lived experiences as a teacher. This study will involve our participation in focus groups- community circles or circulos enfocados, which is rooted in our connection to our Spanish language, culture, and intersectional identities here in the United States. Latinidad is complex and we must always showcase how we are not a monolith in our lived experiences. The goal for this is to combine the purpose of community circles, which is a restorative justice practice in creating dialogic spaces of trust and healing with the concept of focus groups, which tackles a specific topic through deep questions in this case, masculinity/machismo.” Confidentiality: “Confidentiality is very important for me as a researcher in this study. Although I will take every precaution to maintain confidentiality of the data, the nature of focus groups prevents me from guaranteeing confidentiality. I would like to remind you as participants of this study to respect the privacy of your fellow participants and not repeat what is said in the focus group to others. Can we agree to confidentiality in our group today?” (Have participants unmute and verbally agree to confidentiality) First, I will share with you my story of who I am and where my journey has taken me personally and professionally. I, like all of you, identify as a Latino male cisgendered heterosexual educator who taught for 10 years and was an administrator in elementary and middle schools in Los Angeles. Facilitator shares story:

• Purpose of becoming an educator • Experience in Catholic Schools • Move to public charter schools • Experience with masculinity/machismo and stereotypes perpetuated for me as an

educator • How I was able to become a successful teacher and administrator • Purpose of becoming a researcher that can further support Latino male educators in K–12

“I appreciate you all listening to my story and journey and hope that it has made connections to your journeys.”

Agenda for Today Facilitator states: “The goal for today is to create a space where we can have a conversation about masculinity/machismo and how it shows up for us male educators. All our experiences are different and I do not want to state that my story connects to your experience. Having you here is an opportunity for your voice to be elevated and to be heard. We are going to watch a movie preview clip from the documentary: “The Mask We Live In” and that will jumpstart our conversation for today. I have a set of questions that I have for you as well as we get deeper into the topic. We will not be going in a particular order; we will have an open forum where anyone who is ready to speak can respond and anyone can reply to a person’s response. This is by no means a space that will bully, belittle your experience, judge your responses, or question your lived experiences. As a facilitator, my role is to keep the conversation going, ask further questions to elaborate, and push your thinking so that your words and experiences are documents thoroughly for this study” Confidentiality Facilitator states: Your responses will be kept confidential; nobody will know your identity. This focus groups-community circles/circulos enfocados will be recorded through audio settings via the Zoom platform. Video will not be recorded during this session. We will use pseudonyms to represent the different people participating in this focus group (you have the choice to come up with a name that supports your identity). Does anyone have any questions before we begin?

• Watch a clip from “The Mask We Live In” • Time frame of video:

o Start Time: 0:00 o 3 minutes and 9 seconds (3:09)

Within their peer group culture. Each of them is posturing based on how the other boys are posturing, and what they end up missing is what they each really want, which is just that closeness. In good times, guys are really close to each other, but when things get a little bit worse, you're on your own. From Middle school, I had a four really close friends, but once I kind of went into high school, I struggled finding people I can talk to because I feel like I'm not supposed to get help. Our kids get up every morning. They have to prepare their mask for how they're gonna walk to school. A lot of our students don't know how to take the mask off. What is it you don't let people see? Almost 90% of you have pain and anger on the back of that paper. If you never cry, then you have all these feelings stuffed up inside of you and then you can't get them out. They really buy into a culture that doesn't value what we feminized. If we're in a culture that doesn't value caring, doesn't value relationships, doesn't value empathy, you are going to have boys and girls. Men and women go crazy. I have anger issues. In high school, I felt like an outcast. I've been suspended at least once every year I was here; we would just look for trouble and just like try to fight. Boys are more likely to act out. They're more likely to become aggressive. Most people miss that as depression or see it as a conduct disorder or just a bad kid. I felt like just giving up on life. You know, I had suicide thoughts in my head at sixth grade. I felt alone for a long time and I actually thought about killing myself. Whether It's homicidal violence or suicidal violence, people resort to such desperate behavior. Only when they are feeling shamed and humiliated or feel they would be if they didn't prove that they were real men. If you're told from day one, don't let nobody disrespect you, and this is the way you handle it as a man. Respect is linked to violence. If I can man up, why step down from that? You feel me? It's like instinct. So, man up! Man up! Man up! Man up! Grow some fucking balls! Act like a man. Be a Man. Be a man. For my kids. I was gonna end this hyper masculine narrative here.(End transcript)

Focus Group/Circulos Enfocados Question Set: Shared Experience (Watching the Movie Clip)

• What reactions or feelings did you have as you watched the movie clip? • Where do you wear a mask as a teacher and how does it benefit you? • As an educator, what would you add or take away from this movie clip about boys'

experience in K–12? • How important is your masculinity/machismo identity as a K–12 educator?

Probing Questions • Do you agree with how masculinity was described in the video of having to wear masks

which forces us as young boys to withhold our emotions? Why or why not? Purpose

• What made you want to become an educator? What made you want to teach the grade you are currently in?

• What people influenced you to become an educator? • What are your goals as an educator?

Masculinity/Machismo

• What do you enjoy the most about being a Latino male educator? • How does your masculinity, manhood, machismo, show up in the work that you do every

day as a teacher? o Would you say that you are your full authentic self in all K–12 spaces? Why or

why not? o How are you changing the perspective of masculinity/machismo in your school

setting? • Have you been othered (treated differently/negatively) based on your

masculinity/machismo during your time as an educator? How? • What do you believe your women colleagues think of you as a Latino male educator? • What do families, parents, say about a Latino man teaching their children? What are

some things you have heard, processed, or reflected on? • When you are in a room or space with other male educators, do you act differently than

when in a room full of women educators? Why? • What are some ways you support young boys in your school or classroom?

o What would you say the young boy's experience in K–12 is versus when you were a K–12 student? What is different? What is the same?

Probing Question • How would you describe how you are respected as a Latino male educator by other

teachers? Parents? Students? Administrators? Pedagogy

• How have you been developed to become a better educator at your school? • What have you heard that are your strengths and areas of growth as an educator?

o Do you get observed and are given feedback? o What have your evaluations said about your teaching practices?

Inclusivity • How are you inclusive to all gender identities in your classroom? In your school? • If we walked into your classroom, what would you say is the culture that we would see in

that space? Retention

• How long do you see yourself teaching or being in the K–12 educational space and why? • (If returners) Why have you chosen to stay in the teaching profession? What keeps you

coming back? • What is some advice that you have for future Latino male educators that would help them

stay in the profession like you? • What are things happening in your school setting that if they do not change soon, would

impact your decision to stay in the teaching profession for your future? • How would you describe how you are respected as a Latino male educator by other

teachers? Parents? Students? Administrators?

APPENDIX G

The Mask You Live In Transcript

Full Transcript of Video: (Begin Transcript) Stop Crying, stop with the tears. Don't cry. Pick yourself up. Stop with the emotions. Don't be a pussy. Don’t let nobody disrespect you. Be Cool and be kind of a dick. You always keep your mouth shut. Nobody likes a tattle-tale. Bros come before hoes Don't let you woman run your life. You a bitch. What a fag. Get laid. Do something. Be a man. Be a man. Grow some balls. The three most destructive words that every man receives when he is a boy is when he is told to be a man. We've constructed an idea of masculinity in the United States that doesn't give young boys a way to feel secure in their masculinity, so we make him go prove it all the time. Within their peer group culture. Each of them is posturing based on how the other boys are posturing, and what they end up missing is what they each really want, which is just that closeness. In good times, guys are really close to each other, but when things get a little bit worse, you're on your own. From Middle school, I had a four really close friends, but once I kind of went into high school, I struggled finding people I can talk to because I feel like I'm not supposed to get help. Our kids get up every morning. They have to prepare their mask for how they're gonna walk to school. A lot of our students don't know how to take the mask off. What is it you don't let people see? Almost 90% of you have pain and anger on the back of that paper. If you never cry, then you have all these feelings stuffed up inside of you and then you can't get them out. They really buy into a culture that doesn't value what we feminized. If we're in a culture that doesn't value caring, doesn't value relationships, doesn't value empathy, you are going to have boys and girls. Men and women go crazy. I have anger issues. In high school, I felt like an outcast. I've been suspended at least once every year I was here; we would just look for trouble and just like try to fight.

Boys are more likely to act out. They're more likely to become aggressive. Most people miss that as depression or see it as a conduct disorder or just a bad kid. I felt like just giving up on life. You know, I had suicide thoughts in my head at sixth grade. I felt alone for a long time and I actually thought about killing myself. Whether It's homicidal violence or suicidal violence, people resort to such desperate behavior. Only when they are feeling shamed and humiliated or feel they would be if they didn't prove that they were real men. If you're told from day one, don't let nobody disrespect you, and this is the way you handle it as a man. Respect is linked to violence. If I can man up, why step down from that? You feel me? It's like instinct. So, man up! Man up! Man up! Man up! Grow some fucking balls! Act like a man. Be a Man. Be a man. For my kids. I was gonna end this hyper masculine narrative here.(End transcript)

APPENDIX H

Member Checking Form

Response Number Respondent Email Date Submitted Q1: I think just like growing up, I look at my educational experience, and then what it means to jump into the professional world as a man of color. Something that I struggled with was that aspect of a mask. Sorry, it gets a little heavy. I think the struggle of like, how do you show up authentically, but at the same time, how are you viewed as, right? It's like this double consciousness of, how can I be real and myself, but then come off as I didn't attend an Ivy League, I didn't go to UC, but nonetheless, I know I'm educated, I know I'm powerful and proud. When you're in a room with just like people from all walks, there's like an imposter syndrome that kicks in of like just coming correct and showing up, but then I feel like in the recent years when society has become more embracing of anti-racist work, I feel like more doors have been open, and I think that's been welcoming, but for a minute, it just felt like I was walking on eggshells, like, "Am I professional enough? Am I being accepted?" Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q2: It's helped me a lot, just reflect on my growing up. I grew up pretty supported at home from my mom emotionally. I was the fourth kid of six. In my house, my mom wore the pants. My dad, he'd say things, but at the end of the day, my mom was the one that would get things done. I had that as a model . . . We had some kids that came from some very, very machista households, where the whole be a man concept was something that you grew up around. I think for me, I grew up just being okay knowing if people were going to mess with me, I was going to talk my way out of the fight. I could count two instances that I'd got in two fights that I could remember in school. One of them was just with the other small kid because all our friends were thinking who would beat who up and we were friends but we ended up getting into a fight in middle school and then laughing about it when we were in the principal's office. I remember that's one of the reasons why I joined wrestling because I did feel even though I have the support at home, it's like, you don't know what it's like when I get to school, mom. Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence

Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q3: I was going to share when I think about the many masks that I wear, I feel like it was one that was given to me in a way, in that, I was young, I just wanted to earn a paycheck, pay out loans. I was in the classroom, and then just happened to be pretty good at managing students. It's like, "Oh, wow, you can do that a lot." Like, "Let's give you more responsibility to do that. Let's give you the grade level chair role, let's-- man, you'd be a really great dean. You have a knack for using your masculinity to instill fear in students." Like, "Stand up, sit down, sit down now," and I'm raising my voice, posturing up, the tone in my intonation is borderline aggressive. Like, "I'm going to do something if you don't, do not." That just what pays the bills. I for a long time put that mask on because it fit, and it's afforded privilege along the way. I look now, and it's exciting, the story in one narrative, but it's also a bit sad. The oppressive systems as a disciplinarian that I've been a part of and partaking and not having known better to further my career. A privilege it's been at the cost of those who want to serve the most. Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q4: They were like, "Oh, you're going to work wonders at the school, you're going to change things up. These kids are going to love you." I'm like, that's a lot of pressure. I want to make sure these kids are academically ready for the next school year, and so that they can live a choice filled life, and et cetera . . . I was like, "Dude, what?" I got parents relying on me to try to change the lives of the kids, and I'm like, I don't even know what to do. I don't know how to properly manage behavior . . . This all came with its own expectations. That was always like a chip on my shoulder. It's like there's a lot of expectations as to the impact that you can have, but at the same time, you just need to focus on your relationships with your students, and building a strong relationship with them, and then also building their academic capacities, because those are the two things that you should focus on . . . As I shared earlier, I think because there was an expectation as to the good that I could do with my identity, I think I showed up more confident, and because of that high expectation, I could make a lot of change, I felt more comfortable leaning into that identity and talking about it in the classroom, especially with my lesson plans. My school leaders were like, "Oh, this is so incredible." All six admin I had, they loved seeing culturally relevant lessons. I think that was very much celebrated in those spaces, but then at some point, you become the point person sometimes of that work. Check all that apply.

Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q5: Then I was in fourth grade and having to be really careful about how I talk to kids, and all of that stuff that made me valuable, that I thought made me valuable as a human being growing up in high school and in college, and I had to really check, like, can I talk to kids?. . . I had gone through a transformation of, again, deconstruction, and who am I as a male and patriarchal norms, but on the day to day stuff, what was I doing to get the kids' attention? What was I doing to show frustration with kids? Those are things that I, over 15 years, that I am still processing. Like, am I raising my voice? Am I taking a domineering stance? Am I using my size to control in the same way that I was shown that? Like talking about the way that your fathers did things. My dad is a product of his family and his upbringing, but we were around some violence growing up, and that was just the way things were. As much as I was trying to be conscious of being better, in schools, you are put to your limit as far as stress, right? Oftentimes, you get into the point where you're triggered, and it's when you're triggered, those things that are unconscious come out, and you have to be really, really mindful of those things . . . From, again, this machismo, like, this is on me and I'm going to do this, versus what does it mean to be part of a school system and help families and kids be self-determined, and I'm just a part of this puzzle, has also been liberatory for me as I go through this and think of myself more as a servant than I am a leader. Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q6: I think being from the community, and knowing the community, and seeing either the presence of males in these students' lives or the lack of presence of males in these students' lives was really telling about the types of care that these young boys would need, and entering into like, so they're 9 and 10 years old, right? They're really searching for something, and if I can give them a hint of what they're looking for and start to push their expectations for what does it mean to be a man, and be nurturing, and be caring, but also be physical, and be all the things that they're questioning about themselves and push for academic excellence, right? Be thoughtful, be eloquent. Like give yourself this opportunity to read incredible books, and have these discussions, and that I saw so many kids in my classroom blossom as a result of being that type of way, and now a lot of them are in college

and it's incredible to see the seeds that were planted then, and what these young boys and now men have become. It was a lot, and it was necessary. Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q7: Similar to what was said earlier, I do appreciate too pointing out the commonalities with my students and myself. When you ask them what they did this weekend, "Oh, we all went to the carne asada. The whole family came over." Like, "Oh, man. I remember those." Talking to them, music, interests, food, just cultural things, growing up, you can share that. I think for me, though, my favorite part is [clears throat] going back to where we started highlighting differences, that being a Latino male can mean all kinds of things. Yes, it means you have very similar cultural experiences, but we don't all love soccer. We don't all love Reggaetón. We don't all love the same exact things. If you do, that's fine, but I share with my kids all the time, "I'm a nerd. I'm a huge Sci-Fi guy." Those Latino males, like, "You guys love anime? That's great. That's your thing. Do it." Really encouraging them to find the things that make them unique and individual. If they are things like soccer and Reggaetón, that's fine. People love those, those are great. I love them too, but you can also have other interests that maybe sometimes are more coded as like White and Asian and society, or more coded not as Macho and cool and things. Like you said, Alonzo, like a book. I love reading them always to my kids. I don't often make enough time to read, but reading is so important. Like, "Let's, actually, pick up books." You're going to watch me pick up a book on my break and not just scroll through my phone. When I'm on my lunch I'm either working or I'm reading. Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q8: Not only in my teaching, but I'm filtering through my masculinity. I'm filtering through how I'm being perceived. I was given a lot of the behavioral challenges because I had a certain presence, and a certain tone. I had to be really conscious of how, again, I was using my voice. I'm a huge believer that you teach in schools and not classrooms. I had to be really careful that I wasn't setting up a precedent for kids to be listening to me out of fear, because the science teacher or the art teacher who were female didn't have that same presence. Check all that apply.

Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q9: I think for me, putting time back to what I impact is, I don't know if it was year one or year two, but pretty early on in my teaching practice, I recognize like, "Oh man, I sound like my parents." Sometimes that was just like how I gave classroom management directions about being direct, but it was also the gendered way that my parents talk. For example, my dad, when he talked to other males, it was a very matter of fact, straightforward tone, not a lot of inflection in tone. Not using like pet names, like my friend, my buddy, whatever, just like, "Hey man." With females, my dad would be like, even receptionists, waitresses, whatever, like, "Hi, dear? How's it going? How's your day like?" Like rise in tone and much more like endearing and sweet language. I recognized in my first couple years teaching that I was mimicking that. When I talked to female students, it was like, "Oh, hi. How are you? What do you need?" My tone would, literally, go up and with male students like, "Hey man? How's it going? How are you doing today?" Reach your hand out for a fist bump or a handshake and like, "Wow." I'm very gendered in how I'm talking to my students, whether they're male or female. Then, if I do have students that are nonbinary, that are trans or anywhere on the spectrum, I am gendering them by how I'm talking to them unintentionally. I've always took a few years to very intentionally unpack that, break that habit. What I settle on is I talked to all of my students regardless of gender identity, with a more like loving, raising my tones or I pitch sometimes, so it's like softer and more welcoming because that's how I wish I would've been talked to more by males and females alike. It's not for everybody and that's fine, but at least it's much more welcoming than the matter of fact like, "Hey, how's it going?” Check all that apply. Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness Q10: This, to me, it's having pedagogical heroes within the academy, and just people you can look up to as people who are doing the research, and people who are making their way through educational systems to become chief academic officers or people who are instructional coaches, and people who have pedagogical expertise beyond just classroom management pieces, and so, I think being able to see how you don't just have to become an assistant principal, or you can actually be an effective leader in pedagogy and become a pedagogical leader, I think, that's something that's highly needed in the profession. Check all that apply.

Deconstruction Circle of Influence Identity Masking Ethos of Care How to Retain Us Critical Consciousness The next set of quotes focuses on more specific axial codes. The selections on the checklist contain the codes that connect to the themes. Please select as many themes that you feel represent the quotes that are shared. You may look at the codebook to help you as you go through each of the examples. (Identity Masking Exploration) I think for me, and this may not make me the most friendly teacher, but I tend to just stay on my own. I've been known as a mad scientist in my previous school, the only STEAM teacher. I didn't go to staff meetings. I only went when I went to IEPs, but I always just felt like I'm doing my own thing. The kids and I get along. Do I really need to get along with the teachers? I just avoided it . . . When you're a teacher, there's all these protocols. At a certain point, I decided I don't want to deal with too much, so I would just hide in my room and that's it. That's what I would do. Check all that apply. Impostor Survival + Self Reliance External Pressure Othering Benefitting (Deconstruction) I was just reflecting on my father who didn't really know how to be in touch with his feelings, express feelings, talk about feelings. He was never okay . . . he's also the leader of the household, who sets the tone, and people follow his direction. It’s like both of those together create this struggle that we're facing. Check all that apply. Meaning Making Identity Development Emotional Intelligence Joy Dialogical Power (Critical Consciousness) It wasn't until I started teaching using materials like this, going to workshops, dialoguing in spaces, that I remember like understanding the concept of masculinity more. I was able to put words and concepts to things I experienced, because I think I was always grounded in being okay having emotions, just learning how to control them. I remember in college at a MECHA conference, we were in a male circle and they were discussing should MECHA accept homosexuals in the movimiento . . . Yes if someone's down to help people, who cares who they're with?" I remember that discussion

was pretty heated . . . I was like, dude, we're in college and these guys are also being college educated but they're holding on to this. They're threatened by their manhood. Check all that apply. Purpose Disruption Gender Expansion (How to Retain Us) Have a good understanding of yourself before starting the work or very, very early on in the work. When I was in my credential program, I think we had a lesson on your identity and how that factor into the classroom. It's like a very, very first lesson in your credential program, so by the time you're done, you've forgotten it. I had a student teacher a couple years ago and I have another one for this upcoming year, and in both of their credential programs, it's a module on your identity and how it affects the classroom. I don't remember anything in my induction program about my identity and how that seeps into my teaching practice in both good ways and in ways that may be harmful to students. It took years, it took a while and it took a large confluence of things. It took being able to find a mentor or two, it took unfortunately trial and error. It took own personal therapy at my end to really start to unpack and figure out who I am. Check all that apply. Develop Us Include Us Help Us Heal Stop Tokenizing Us Disrupt Hidden Rules (Ethos of Care) The advantage is I feel like I can connect with them quickly and they view me differently whether it's through a disciplinary lens or whatever that is . . . I want to make sure that I'm coming off as approachable and not like authoritarian or whatnot. It is an advantage where just checking in with them, they already see me off the bat. They see me differently . . . We grew up with shared experiences so being able to connect. The selfishness is there's other teachers that struggle with it. There's other admin that struggle with it. That just feels good off the bat. I think that's one of the pieces of the work that I enjoy the most is being able to connect authentically and knowing that students know that you have their best interest in mind. I think that's definitely, it fills my cup, for sure, man. Check all that apply. Student Response Impact Success Affinity Belonging Use this to add anything you would like to add

APPENDIX I

Codebook

Selective coding Axial coding Open coding

Themes Definition

Code Definition

Deconstruction (Hall, 2020; Moje & Lewis, 2020)

Learning is the internalization of ideas and taking them to reformulate who one is compared to who one was before the learning occurred. This growth leads to an unlearning that happens through active resistance to what we have known, reevaluating meaning, and co- constructing new discourses (Moje & Lewis, 2020). This is an ongoing practice that Latino men exhibited in their stories. Hall (2020) argues that identity is constructed and deconstructed through discourse and continuously shifts on the influences in society, community, and culture. These identity shifts are seen throughout

Learning + unlearning Cyclical opportunities to gather new information that creates new meanings.

Meaning making

Actively deconstructing their identities in relation to gender, race, ethnicity, language, and as educators to align with who they want to be seen as.

Identity development

This process is ongoing from childhood to the present and which identities they gravitate more to in terms of where they have influence and where they still need to grow in.

Reimagining Expansion of masculinities and how to express manhood.

Emotional intelligence

Gathering of a life essential skill that shows emotional growth and consciousness of how to use these new skills in interactions, in making meaning of situations, and displaying a counter archetype.

Joy Understanding the joy in being a man that has something to support all

the lives of people as a constant negotiation and resistance of where they identify based on specific beliefs.

students, adults, and the K–12 system.

Future support Affinity spaces where deconstruction can be safe to have these conversations while holding accountability to toxic masculinity/ machismo.

Dialogical power

The pushing and analysis that was brought forth through this dialogical space and how it can support in meaning making for Latino male educators.

Circle of Influence (Levant et al., 2003; Saez et al., 2010)

The people in Latino male educators lives that supported their understanding of how to survive and succeed. Counter to that, villains can be examples of people they did not want to be like, and in most cases, it was their fathers or previous male teachers, family members, or community members (Saez et al., 2010). This allows for the continued exploration of multiple version of masculinities rather than once

Rejection of identity Moments where there is questioning and rejection of being a “man” based on what was observed by loved ones, educators, and professionals.

Machismo Stereotypical and negative experiences of what it means to be a man in their lived experiences.

Villains Counter- machismo focuses on catalyst moments where machismo redirects the formation of an affinity to masculinity/ machismo for Latino male educators. Direct questioning of how problematic this behavior and characteristics are.

Counter- machismo People that showcased more

Mentor/ Femtor

Positive role models that guided Latino male educators both in their lives

archetype that men have to follow (Levant et al., 2003; Saez et al., 2010).

than the general stereotypes and provided reimagination and redefining gender roles/dynamics.

and in their professional careers.

Motherhood/ Femininity

Positive view on gender dynamics and how mothers and women in the lives of Latino male educators took on the responsibilities of caretaking, redefinition of roles, and passing of femininity toward the development of identity.

Identity Masking Exploration (Breault, 2016; Colwill & Boyd, 2008).

Masking is a way that Latino men try to replicate who society/schooling is informing them of how to show up and also a survival mechanism to not fully show their authenticity for fear of not belonging. Breault (2016) describes pedagogical masking as a preparation by educators on what character would be the most appropriate to portray in the

Follow the script

Latino male educators performing to archetypes because of what society and people have defined or need of them in replication of masculinity/ machismo.

Impostor Performing stereotypical roles and definitions of how to be a man and not feeling like one belongs. In addition, there is relation to trying to be authentic and not feeling.

Survival + self-reliance

Having to put up with constant feedback on how one is supposed to show up and continuing to endure it because there is lack of agency/advocacy for Latino male educators to disrupt (Sáenz et al., 2015).

next moment where you are in front of a specific audience or setting. To further expand on this concept, it is important to understand why people use specific masks and how it benefits them or harms them through its usage (Breault, 2016; Colwill & Boyd, 2008).

External pressure

People in specific proximity require Latino male educators to act and behave in a specific way in their professional settings. An added layer is Latino men know they benefit from performing certain masculinity traits.

Constant confusion Latino male educators’ confusion of how they are supposed to act and haven tension in performing what is expected of them rather than who they are.

Othering When Latino male educators do not show up in the way people expect, they are othered for showing a gender expansion or reimagined version as they experiment.

Benefitting Conscious that they benefit from specific archetypes and tension of acting in this way based on professional goals.

Real me A continued exploration of gender roles and dynamics. Experimentation of what is “real” and authentic and not wearing a mask.

Authenticity Space where Latino male educators feel they can be themselves and not act in a specific way. The safest space is with students.

Ethos of Care (I. Jackson et al., 2014)

At the core of their pedagogy and how they navigate the world, Latino men look for strong relationships to support their identities, their worth, and how they are affirmed. Their impact and belonging is rooted to young people and the impact they create in the classroom (I. Jackson et al., 2014). Once Latino men feel reciprocal love from youth and families, they begin to create an ethos of care where they feel they are planting seeds to support generational impact and they care about the success of young people’s futures.

Creators of culture Latino male educators support creation of positive student culture by focusing on relationships with youth

Student response

Immediate respect for just showing up and engaging with youth. Easily connects to youth without pedagogical training.

Impact A continued and constant state of affirmation on why they became educators and seeing the short term and long term impact from students.

Success Success is highlighted when classroom culture or “management” is seen as exploratory or when admin do not think the class is on fire in any way. Success is rooted control of bodies through masculinity characteristics.

Acceptance Opportunities to feel connected to a greater community based on the strengths that are seen about their identity.

Affinity Latino male educators seek connection from people around them. It is rare they have affinity to other Latino male educators in their own buildings. They see how they benefit in creating

easier connections with youth based on their gender and race.

Belonging There is a sense of belonging to the greater community if they serve in predominantly Latino/a/x communities. They are connected to the purpose of education based on their own lived experiences.

How to Retain Us (Griffin, 2018)

This is a call to action for K–12 spaces, education teaching programs, and educational department initiatives to support the recruitment, hiring, and retention efforts for Latino male educators. Griffin (2018) highlights the experiences and struggles of Latino educators and this adds on to what specific ways changes can be effective to the retention of Latino male educators.

Proactive development Latino male educator development needs to be intentional and focused on the ongoing support of critical pedagogy.

Develop us Develop us through intentional proactive opportunities for growth in pedagogy, in identity, and reaching professional goals.

Include us Include us as creators of initiatives, culture, and projects that support a proactive measure to increase positive student and school culture.

Help us heal Help us heal by supporting our mental wellness in unpacking our identities so that we can become

our most authentic selves.

Reactive response Immediate changes to the experiences that Latino male educators go through and support a sense of belonging.

Stop tokenizing us

Stop tokenizing us by believing that we speak for all Latino masculinity/machi smo and do not treat us as the saviors in the space because we are the only Latino male educator you have

Disrupt hidden rules

Disrupt hidden rules of how people expect us to act. Disrupt biases and microaggressions to support a sense of belonging for us as educators.

Critical Consciousness (Freire 1970, 1994; Duncan- Andrade & Morrell, 2008)

A tenet of critical pedagogy is critical consciousness where educators develop an awakening about inequities for marginalized people within society (Freire, 1970, 1994; Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2008). Even more important is the critical action that people with a deep sense of

Critical pedagogy Latino male educators that have critical pedagogical knowledge are able to take action steps that model effective disruption of heteronormative patriarchal standards and create long term impact in their professional environments.

Purpose Once Latino male educators have more criticality, they begin to create a more meaningful purpose on how they want to engage as educators in their careers.

Disruption Once Latino male educators have more criticality about different portions of their identity, they begin to disrupt this through

critical consciousness take to actively disrupt and dismantle oppressive structures. Critical consciousness allows educators to question what they are teaching, how they are teaching it, and if they are supporting young people in also becoming critically conscious (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2008). This is more than just racial critical consciousness for Latino male educators though, they must also focus on creating inclusivity of all the spaces they take up. Critical consciousness is understanding the inequitable social conditions created by society and developing an awakening to combat these structures (Freire, 1994).

intentional moments in their teaching practice, interactions, and structurally.

Gender expansion

Once Latino male educators have more criticality about gender, they begin to take steps in creating an inclusive environment for all forms of gender in the spaces they work in.

ProQuest Number:

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality and completeness of this reproduction is dependent on the quality

and completeness of the copy made available to ProQuest.

Distributed by ProQuest LLC ( ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author unless otherwise noted.

This work may be used in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons license or other rights statement, as indicated in the copyright statement or in the metadata

associated with this work. Unless otherwise specified in the copyright statement or the metadata, all rights are reserved by the copyright holder.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code and other applicable copyright laws.

Microform Edition where available © ProQuest LLC. No reproduction or digitization of the Microform Edition is authorized without permission of ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 USA

30817248

2024