Chapter two (3)

1

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON

STUDENT LEARNING EXPERIENCES IN

AMERICAN SCHOOLS

by Darlene Grayson

A Capstone Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Education

South College, Knoxville, TN

Graduation 2026

APPROVED BY:

Dr. Matthew Johnson, Ed.D., Capstone Chair

2

Table of Contents

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................3

Overview..................................................................................................................................... 3

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework.................................................................................4

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy: Origins and Evolution 4

The Three Principles of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy 5

Sociocultural Learning Theory as a Supporting Conceptual Framework 8

Relationship Between the Frameworks and the Proposed Study 10

Literature Synthesis.................................................................................................................13

Culturally Responsive Teaching: Definitions, Principles, and Evolution 13

Student Engagement in Middle School 17

Characteristics of Middle School Learners 22

Classroom Climate, Belonging, and Student Engagement 25

Culturally Responsive Teaching Practices 29

Teacher Preparation and Professional Development 35

Challenges to Implementing Culturally Responsive Teaching 38

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Middle School Education 42

Social-Emotional Learning and Student Engagement 44

Research Gap........................................................................................................................... 46

Action Research in Educational Settings 52

Summary...................................................................................................................................58

References.................................................................................................................................60

3

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

Overview

As the middle-grade classroom becomes more culturally and linguistically diverse,

studies on practices that promote student engagement have become increasingly critical

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). Teaching practices that facilitate student engagement go beyond

providing information and materials to include interactions with students and consideration of

their identities and backgrounds in instruction (Gay, 2021; Hammond, 2021). Student

engagement, in turn, has been conceptualized as a multidimensional construct that includes a

student’s behavioral, emotional, and cognitive response to relationships in the classroom,

relevance, and belonging (Fredricks et al., 2023). Each of these areas has been shown to be

particularly salient in middle-grade education, as students begin to grapple with questions of

identity, navigate complex social groups, and seek a sense of belonging (Byrd, 2019; Wang et al.,

2020). Therefore, this literature review aims to provide an integrated synthesis of the research on

culturally responsive teaching and student engagement by combining the findings, theories, and

methodologies of prior works rather than treating them as individual studies (Booth et al., 2021;

Snyder, 2019). While much research has centered on culturally responsive pedagogy as a

potential solution to the challenges of teaching diverse middle-grade classrooms, most have

focused on theoretical underpinnings and teacher perspectives, leaving teaching practices and

student experiences understudied (Anyichie et al., 2023; Franco et al., 2024). Thus, this literature

review will serve as a foundation for the study by providing theoretical and conceptual

background while also identifying the research gap that the proposed study will address.

4

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

A theoretical framework is an integral component of a study, as it helps situate the

phenomenon of research within the scholarly context and ensures that the research questions,

analysis, and conclusions align with the existing knowledge. It guides the interpretation of

findings, provides a conceptual basis for the study, and connects the new research to the broader

academic field while preventing theoretical or ideological biases (Mertler, 2024). Culturally

Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) has been selected as the primary theoretical framework of this study

because it provides a comprehensive understanding of how culturally responsive instruction

promotes student engagement while advancing equity by taking into account students’ diverse

cultural backgrounds and worldviews (Ladson-Billings, 2021). A sociocultural learning theory

serves as another theoretical framework for the study because it views learning as a socially

mediated and socially patterned process, thus supporting the CRP-informed instruction’s focus

on interactions between students and teachers (Vygotsky, 1978).

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy: Origins and Evolution

CRP is grounded in the scholarship of Gloria Ladson-Billings who identified that

successful teachers could facilitate positive learning outcomes for African American students

using culturally responsive practices, despite the social and economic disadvantages these pupils

faced (Ladson-Billings, 2021). By shifting the focus from why culturally diverse students were

not meeting grade-level expectations to how students could succeed academically while

embracing their cultural identity, Ladson-Billings moved away from “deficit thinking” and began

asking more equitable questions about the role of curriculum, instruction, and classroom

interactions in learning (Gay, 2021). As such, CRP is more than just a set of strategies; it is an

5

educational worldview that champions inclusiveness and celebrates diversity, which has broader

pedagogical implications (Ladson-Billings, 2024).

Since its initial conceptualization, the focus of CRP has expanded to include ways in

which educators can go beyond merely enhancing academic outcomes to also ensuring equitable

pedagogy that promotes cultural responsiveness in the classroom as well as broader educational

engagement (Franco et al., 2024). Culturally responsive pedagogy is therefore both a process and

a practice that draws on classroom interactions and relationships, as well as reflective

self-inquiry, in an effort to transform teaching and learning (Franco et al., 2024). Although

inconsistent in its implementation, CRP has been associated with improved instructional support

practices, classroom management, and increased indicators of student engagement (Debnam et

al., 2024). This has occurred despite the complexity associated with implementing

comprehensive, multidimensional CRP across different educational settings and contexts. In

general, the research presented highlights the relevance of CRP as an overarching theoretical

framework for interrogating the engagement of culturally and linguistically diverse students in

middle-grade learning (Debnam et al., 2024).

The Three Principles of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

Culturally Relevant Pedagogy rests on three principles, namely, academic success,

cultural competence, and critical consciousness (Ladson-Billings, 2021). These principles inform

CRP’s emphasis on creating learning environments that promote student academic success while

affirming cultural identities and encouraging critical understandings of the sociohistorical

contexts in which education takes place (Gay, 2021). The three principles that define Culturally

Relevant Pedagogy are interconnected while also informing distinct aspects of teaching and

learning that must be present for students to experience success in school. They represent a more

6

holistic view of education that goes beyond simply acknowledging the learning needs of students

from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds to transforming teaching and learning

environments in ways that validate students’ identities while also empowering them to transform

society for the better (Gay, 2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021; Lozano Castillo, 2024).

Academic Achievement Through Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

The principle of academic success is concerned with providing high academic

expectations while also ensuring relevance whereby learning is contextualized in ways that

connect it to students’ personal aspirations and cultural beliefs (Ladson-Billings, 2021). In

general, CRP rejects the notion that high expectations lead to low achievement for culturally and

linguistically diverse students and argues that these learners can achieve positive learning

outcomes when provided with the resources and support they need (Gay, 2021). Research

indicates that culturally responsive pedagogy facilitates higher levels of engagement, persistence,

and hope as well as positive academic expectations, with learners being more likely to participate

actively in the learning process when they recognize the relevance of what is being taught to

their lives (Hammond, 2021). These findings are especially pertinent in middle-grade education

where identity formation and affiliative social connections are key developmental concerns that

influence students’ affective and behavioral responses to school and learning (Eccles & Roeser,

2023). From a similar perspective, learners who perceive school lessons as irrelevant become

disengaged and subsequently have poorer overall educational experiences (Byrd, 2019).

Cultural Competence Through Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

The principle of cultural competence emphasizes the importance of validating students’

cultural identities and supporting them to become more successful in mainstream society

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). By helping learners to embrace their own cultures and encouraging

7

them to operate in a manner that affirms their identities, CRP challenges the notion that

assimilation into mainstream culture is necessarily a good outcome (Gay, 2021; Hammond,

2021). Student engagement research highlights the motivational role of identity affirmation in

promoting educational success, particularly in adolescence when students begin navigating

complex social dynamics that affect their sense of belonging (Byrd, 2019; Eccles & Roeser,

2023). As such, CRP encourages teachers to become more conscious of how their attitudes and

actions can be used to affirm students’ cultural identities, with benefits accruing to all parties

involved as learners are then more likely to meaningfully engage in teaching and learning (Gay,

2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Critical Consciousness Through Culturally Relevant Pedagogy

The tenets of CRP encourage educators to move beyond academic success and cultural

competence to challenge learners to become critically conscious (Ladson-Billings, 2021). In this

regard, CRP calls on teachers to facilitate students’ critical analyses of the sociohistorical factors

that contribute to unequal educational outcomes and learning opportunities (Gay, 2021). Asking

these “big questions” allows learners to become more empowered because they begin to

understand the mechanisms that create and sustain social inequities and how these relate to their

own lived realities (Lozano Castillo, 2024). In particular, critical consciousness helps students to

recognize social, historical, and political contexts in their communities and connect them to

classroom learning (Lozano Castillo, 2024). Discussing social justice issues in the classroom can

help facilitate more meaningful educational experiences for middle-grade students who are

interested in activism and community improvement, as engaging in such activities makes

classroom learning more relevant to them (Eccles & Roeser, 2023).

8

Sociocultural Learning Theory as a Supporting Conceptual Framework

Although the proposed study focuses on Culturally Relevant Pedagogy as its theoretical

backdrop, another conceptual framework that supports the mechanisms by which CRP can

promote positive outcomes in the classroom is Sociocultural Learning Theory (Vygotsky, 1978).

The theory by Vygotsky highlights the learning mechanism that takes place among students in

culturally diverse classrooms (Vygotsky, 1978). It has been a foundational background in which

learning is argued to take place through social interactions among students in a classroom. The

theory has been applied extensively by modern researchers since learning is inherently social and

takes place in a specific cultural background (Kilag et al., 2024). Sociocultural Learning Theory

is related to the proposed study since students’ learning processes involve the interaction with the

content as well as teachers and peers to gain knowledge (Osher et al., 2020).

Furthermore, sociocultural learning theory suggests that learning takes place through

dialogue as well as participation as well as collaboration between the student and peers

(Vygotsky, 1978). The student’s mind is constructed by the interactions of people with different

backgrounds and perspectives (Alkhudiry, 2022). Language plays a pivotal role in learning as it

is used for sharing information and facilitating the assimilation of new concepts (Daniels, 2023).

Therefore, communication in the classroom is key to engaging students and influencing their

interactions (Hammond, 2021). Communication becomes more relevant in a classroom with

students from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds where each one brings in their

communication styles and linguistic competence (Gay, 2021). The premise is relevant to the

current proposed study since it focuses on middle school where students come with a variety of

social interactions and communication styles.

9

Moreover, sociocultural theory postulates that there is a zone of proximal development

that is relevant when a student is interacting with a more knowledgeable member of society.

Vygotsky (1978) argued that scaffolding in the context of learning takes place when teachers or

peers help students learn and develop concepts. In addition, scaffolding is relevant in a CRP

context since it involves leveraging on the strengths of the students and using their linguistic and

cultural backgrounds to promote education, highlighting the strengths-based approach used in

CRP (Hammond, 2021). Indeed, evidence shows that students with strengths-based teaching are

more likely to participate than when teachers focus on their gaps in learning (Anyichie et al.,

2023; Gay, 2021).

Additionally, sociocultural learning theory highlights that culture and cognitive

development are deeply intertwined. Students interact with knowledge using the cultural tools

they use in their lives to navigate the different aspects of life. Therefore, if a teacher fails to use

appropriate context, they might fail to engage the student in learning (Vygotsky, 1978).

Culturally relevant pedagogy aims to leverage the students’ social backgrounds to facilitate

conceptual learning (Gay, 2021; Hammond, 2021). Recent findings indicate that CRP leads to

more engagement, especially for learning-oriented culturally diverse students (Anyichie et al.,

2023; Franco et al., 2024). Therefore, these findings can be used to argue that sociocultural

learning theory has merit in classroom interactions.

Finally, sociocultural learning theory is relevant in understanding the mechanisms that

influence student engagement in learning in the middle school context where the students are

navigating complex social relationships while building their identities. Thus, the interactions in

classrooms and school settings need to be conducive to promoting healthy relationships and a

safe learning environment (Byrd, 2019; Osher et al., 2020). In addition, engagement is not only a

10

product of the student or teacher’s attributes, but rather it is argued to be a dynamic process

whereby the interactions between them are key to influencing student engagement (Alkhudiry,

2022). Sociocultural learning theory perspective is relevant and provides a theoretical

background for the proposed study because it can help argue that in attempting to address the

student engagement issue, teachers’ behavior and the students’ cultural backgrounds must be

considered (Byrd, 2019; Osher et al., 2020).

Relationship Between the Frameworks and the Proposed Study

The choice of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy and Sociocultural Learning Theory as the

theoretical framework is justified by their emphasis on the role of the context of learning in

student engagement (Gay, 2021; Hammond, 2021). The two theories are similar in that they do

not view engagement as an exclusive characteristic of students but as something that emerges

through the relationships between students, teachers, curricula, and the classroom environment

(Ladson-Billings, 2021; Vygotsky, 1978). The two theories are relevant to the proposed study

because they view engagement as a consequence of instruction that recognizes cultural contexts

and encourages meaningful interactions (Osher et al., 2020). Therefore, the aim of this paper is

to explain the relationship between the proposed study and the chosen frameworks.

CRP is the preferred framework for analyzing the problem because it highlights the

importance of learning environments that promote student engagement through culturally

relevant teaching practices. CRP suggests that teachers can increase student engagement by

providing academic rigor while also validating students’ cultures and worldviews (Gay, 2021;

Ladson-Billings, 2021). This approach is appropriate for the current study because it helps

understand how teachers can use their instructional interactions to create classroom

11

environments that recognize students’ identities and encourage behavioral, emotional, and

cognitive engagement (Byrd, 2019; Hammond, 2021).

Sociocultural Learning Theory complements CRP by providing an explanation of how

classroom relationships influence student engagement. Unlike CRP, which focuses on the goals

of culturally relevant teaching, Sociocultural Learning Theory highlights the mechanisms by

which engagement emerges. It views learning as a socially mediated process, which means that

students engage with the curriculum through interactions with teachers and peers (Vygotsky,

1978). This perspective is relevant to the current study because it explains how teachers can

facilitate engagement by building relationships with students and encouraging collaborative

learning (Alkhudiry, 2022; Eccles & Roeser, 2011). Both theories are integral to understanding

the research problem because they demonstrate how teachers can use culturally relevant practices

to build relationships with students and thereby increase their engagement. Such an approach is

appropriate for the current study because it acknowledges the role of interactions in engagement

while also recognizing the importance of validating students’ cultural identities (Gay, 2021).

The two frameworks also contribute to the understanding of student engagement in the

proposed study. They help expand the perspective on student engagement beyond attendance and

participation because they highlight the importance of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive

engagement (Fredricks et al., 2019). According to CRP, students are more likely to be

behaviorally and emotionally engaged when they see their cultures reflected in the curriculum

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). At the same time, Sociocultural Learning Theory suggests that

cognitive engagement emerges from instruction that facilitates positive interactions and

encourages students to build on their cultural worldviews (Vygotsky, 1978). Therefore, analyzing

12

the study through the lens of these frameworks can provide a more comprehensive understanding

of student engagement.

Finally, the chosen frameworks are integral to the current study because they align with

the proposed methodology. Action research is appropriate for this study because it allows for

examining how teachers can use CRP to facilitate student engagement (Mertler, 2024). This

approach is consistent with the two frameworks because they both emphasize the teacher’s role

in instruction while also acknowledging the importance of students’ cultural contexts (Gay,

2021; Mertler, 2024). As a result, the current study can rely on these frameworks to ensure that

the action research methodology is appropriate for examining how teachers can use CRP to

increase engagement.

In conclusion, the integration of CRP and Sociocultural Learning Theory is essential for

this study because it allows for examining how teachers can use culturally relevant practices to

build relationships with students and thereby increase their engagement. While CRP emphasizes

the importance of validating students’ cultures, Sociocultural Learning Theory highlights the role

of relationships and interactions. The combination of these perspectives is crucial for the current

study because it recognizes the complexity of the relationship between student engagement and

culturally responsive teaching practices. Overall, the proposed study aims to contribute to the

discussion of student engagement in culturally and linguistically diverse middle school

classrooms by demonstrating how CRP can be implemented in actual teaching practices. This

study will complement previous research on student engagement and CRP, which primarily

consists of conceptual discussions and quantitative studies, by generating qualitative insights into

how teachers can implement culturally relevant practices (Franco et al., 2024; Gay, 2021).

Indeed, while CRP has been shown to be a useful framework for understanding student

13

engagement, most of the discussion centers on its theoretical and policy implications (Anyichie

et al., 2023). The current study will fill this research gap by generating qualitative data on how

CRP can be used in actual classrooms to facilitate student engagement in culturally and

linguistically diverse middle school classrooms.

Literature Synthesis

The reviewed literature in this chapter is related to each other in a number of ways. First,

they are all concerned with culturally responsive teaching, student engagement, classroom

relationships, and equity. Second, the literature reviewed here have focused their studies on

understanding how instruction, students’ lived experiences, classroom practices, and contexts

influence students’ engagement in learning. Third, all the reviewed literature agree that culturally

responsive teaching is more likely to contribute to student engagement among linguistically and

culturally diverse students (Gay, 2018; Osher et al., 2020). Additionally, the reviewed literature

has identified both the areas where there are convergence and contention in the research findings.

Lastly, the literature highlights the limitations in the studies conducted so far, which form the

basis of addressing the research gap proposed in this study (Anyichie et al., 2023;

Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). The discussion examines how these practices relate to student

engagement and the broader middle school learning environment.

Culturally Responsive Teaching: Definitions, Principles, and Evolution

Culturally responsive teaching (CRT) has emerged as one of the most promising new

frameworks for addressing the needs of an increasingly diverse classroom. However, researchers

have used it interchangeably with other terms, and it has evolved significantly over time (Gay,

2021; Hammond, 2021). The main concepts are similar but were developed by different scholars

who approached the problem from different angles. Overall, CRT is a broad term that includes a

14

number of related approaches to teaching that acknowledge and account for cultural differences

among students (Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Gay (2018) was one of the first researchers to formally propose the concept of CRT. She

defined it as using students’ cultural knowledge, experiences, communication styles, and

preferences to improve learning outcomes. In her view, diversity was an asset that could be

leveraged to improve education, as opposed to a characteristic to overcome (Gay, 2018).

Hammond (2021) later added that incorporating cultural considerations into teaching actually

capitalized on years of cognitive science research about the role of culture in developing trusting

relationships and promoting higher-level thinking. Gay and Hammond used different frameworks

to describe CRT, but both agreed that culture played a critical role in learning.

Gay (2018) and Hammond (2021) are not the only voices in the conversation about

culturally responsive teaching. Ladson-Billings (2021) developed the concept of culturally

relevant pedagogy, which later evolved into CRT. She argued that teachers needed to be aware of

the need to help students achieve academic success while also embracing their culture and

empowering them. Unlike previous approaches to multicultural education, culturally relevant

pedagogy did not require students to renounce their cultural identities to conform to the dominant

one. The need to balance these objectives has remained at the forefront of discussions about

CRT, with researchers such as Pathak et al. (2024) noting that it has become increasingly

complex in the context of classrooms with multifaceted diversity.

The evolution of CRT has been nonlinear. Early initiatives such as multicultural

education were largely superficial, only scratching the surface of necessary changes (Banks,

2008). The initial emphasis was on ensuring that the curriculum included materials and subjects

relevant to diverse groups of students (Byrd, 2019). Sleeter (2018), however, pointed out that

15

multicultural education often failed to question or change the status quo in education, making it

difficult to address systemic issues. Researchers therefore began looking for ways to go beyond

representing diverse groups in the curriculum and start transforming classroom relationships and

instruction in ways that acknowledged diversity (Gay, 2018). These ideas eventually led to

culturally relevant pedagogy and then to the current understanding of CRT.

Another important development in the discussion of culturally responsive teaching was

the emergence of the concept of culturally sustaining pedagogy. Paris and Alim (2017) argued

that educators should acknowledge and sustain the linguistic and cultural diversity of their

students as opposed to trying to assimilate them into the existing monolith. Researchers have

since begun advocating for nurturing diverse cultures within the school environment (Pathak et

al., 2024). Paris and Alim (2017) proposed that education must evolve to meet the needs of

minorities as opposed to the other way around. It is important to note that most scholars,

including Pathak et al. (2024), agree that culturally sustaining pedagogy is an extension of the

earlier concepts of multicultural education and CRT.

Regardless of the variations in definitions, several themes relating to principles appear to

be common to most discussions of culturally responsive teaching. Byrd (2019) and Hammond

(2021) highlight the importance of building good relationships with students since trust and a

sense of belonging promote engagement and learning outcomes. Scholars such as Gay (2018),

Hammond (2021), and Pathak et al. (2024) all stress the importance of making learning relevant

to students’ cultural lives and community experiences. Similarities can also be drawn in their

emphasis on encouraging student voice, collaboration, reflection, and high expectations.

Hammond (2021) explicitly states that successful CRT is teacher-centered but promotes

academic rigor. Researchers therefore seem to agree that CRT entails making learning accessible

16

and inclusive while also maintaining high standards of achievement (Camiring-Picpican et al.,

2025; Pathak et al., 2024).

While several studies describe the general principles of CRT, scholars differ significantly

in their views on what constitutes its successful implementation in practice. Some researchers

such as Gay (2018) focus on classroom practices, suggesting that educators can enhance learning

outcomes by incorporating more culturally relevant materials and methods into instruction.

Others argue that successful CRT requires teachers to undergo a long-term introspection about

their role and responsibility in education (Ladson-Billings, 2021). Hammond (2021) takes a

different angle and proposes that implementation should be informed by recent neuroscience

research that examines how culturally responsive relationships enhance learning readiness and

engagement. Cantrell and Powell (2021), on the other hand, emphasize the need for leadership to

be involved in the process of reviewing the school’s culture, learning environment, and related

aspects. Overall, researchers seem to agree that teaching and learning within a culturally

responsive framework require a multifaceted approach but differ in their views on the specific

steps that need to be taken (Hammond, 2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Although considerable research has been done to demonstrate the benefits of CRT, there

are still several questions that warrant further investigation. Most studies, including those by Dee

and Penner (2017) and Hammond (2021), demonstrate the potential of such an approach to

improving student outcomes. However, many of these studies are conceptual or based on surveys

and fail to analyze its long-term effects (Hammond, 2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021). There is a

need for more empirical, qualitative studies, particularly in the context of middle school

education, to evaluate how CRT can be successfully implemented in practice (Hammond, 2021).

In particular, there is a lack of studies on students’ perceptions of CRT and its impact on their

17

engagement and learning outcomes (Caingcoy, 2023). This information is critical in

understanding how culturally responsive practices affect learning in a middle school setting

where adolescents begin to develop deeper relationships with their peers and become

increasingly aware of their place within their community (Byrd, 2019). Addressing this gap in

research would help explain how teachers can benefit from adopting a more culturally responsive

approach.

The reviewed literature demonstrates that the academic field has made considerable

progress in embracing diversity by evolving from multicultural education to CRT (Hammond,

2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021). Various scholars have made significant contributions to the

discussion by examining different aspects of the issue. It is apparent that diversity and cultural

awareness are critical considerations in education (Hammond, 2021; Ladson-Billings, 2021). At

the same time, the literature makes it clear that there is a gap between theory and practice, with

researchers failing to sufficiently address how schools, in general, and teachers, in particular, can

successfully incorporate CRT into their practices (Caingcoy, 2023; Idrus & Sohid, 2023).

Identifying practical solutions to this challenge is the focus of the proposed qualitative action

research study.

Student Engagement in Middle School

Student engagement has been one of the most widely researched phenomena in the field

of education since it has been proved that student engagement positively correlates with

academic achievement, school retention, class participation, and other important variables

(Fredricks et al., 2016). The term student engagement is multifaceted and context-dependent as

the majority of studies highlight the tripartite nature of engagement that simultaneously

comprises behavioral, emotional, and cognitive subtypes (Fredricks et al., 2016). Subsequent

18

investigations have expanded this notion to highlight how students’ behavioral, emotional,

cognitive responses to the school environment emerge through reciprocal interactions with peers,

teachers, curriculum, and other factors (Kahu, 2013). As a result, there is a growing body of

evidence that highlights the focus of scholars’ attention to student participation in the learning

process as a context-dependent and multifaceted construct (Skinner et al., 2009).

The simplest way to conceptualize behavioral engagement is to think of it as the extent to

which a student demonstrates adherence to classroom expectations, participation in class,

attendance, persistence, and other similar behaviors (Fredricks et al., 2016). Behavioral

engagement was the focal point of a number of initial investigations into the nature of student

engagement and was frequently used as the sole indicator of students’ participation levels

(Skinner et al., 2009). However, the reliance on behavioral indicators as the sole determinant of

student engagement is now viewed with skepticism because compliance with classroom rules

does not necessarily equate with positive attitudes toward learning (Appleton et al., 2008). This

line of reasoning has gained traction in recent years as a number of scholars have noted that

behavioral compliance as a demonstration of student engagement is especially prevalent among

culturally diverse student groups (Byrd, 2019). As such, the shift has occurred in the last two

decades or so that has seen emotional engagement increasingly prioritized in the literature as a

key component of student engagement.

Emotional engagement is characterized by students’ sense of belonging, enjoyment,

interest, trust, and other similar positive emotions in the school environment (Skinner et al.,

2009). Students that feel that they are genuinely cared for by the adults in the school building

tend to report the highest levels of emotional engagement as they feel included and supported

throughout the learning process (Byrd, 2019). In contrast, students that are not viewed as

19

deserving of the school’s resources often develop feelings of isolation that undermine their

emotional engagement in learning (Osher et al., 2020). Hammond (2021) stated that positive

emotional engagement plays a critical role in student learning as it lowers students’ levels of

cortisol, promotes trust between students and teachers, and facilitates deeper learning. Indeed, a

number of recent papers have argued that emotional engagement is the vital element in

determining whether culturally responsive education initiatives will gain traction among students

because students are more likely to be emotionally engaged when they see elements of their

culture in the curriculum (Anyichie et al., 2023; Wang & Hofkens, 2020).

Finally, cognitive engagement is best described as the extent to which the students utilize

higher-level cognitive processes to actively try to understand and make sense of new information

they are exposed to in the classroom (Fredricks et al., 2016). Cognitive engagement practices

typically include such behaviors as deep processing of the material, elaboration, regulation of

learning, and strategic behaviors to overcome the challenges posed by the course content

(Appleton et al., 2008). The majority of scholars have concluded that cognitive skills and

attitudes are not taught explicitly but rather emerge in contexts when learners are intrinsically

motivated to learn for the sheer joy of learning (Kahu, 2013). Hammond (2021) held that

culturally responsive teaching was uniquely suited to facilitate cognitive engagement because it

allowed the students to build upon their pre-existing cultural schemas to truly understand the

academic material.

Rather than operating independently, the three components of classroom engagement

constantly affect each other. Students who feel emotionally connected are more likely to

participate behaviorally (Byrd, 2019). In turn, the discussion and collaboration inherent in such

participation allow them to engage cognitively (Fredricks et al., 2016). On the other hand, a lack

20

of emotional connection often leads to reduced behavioral and cognitive engagement over time

(Skinner et al., 2009). These connections suggest that engagement should be regarded as a

process stemming from students’ classroom experiences and not as an intrinsically formed trait

(Appleton et al., 2008). The next several paragraphs will discuss how the multidimensional

nature of student engagement can be better understood by taking developmental characteristics

into account.

The developmental stage of middle childhood is linked to increased complexity in

students’ cognitive, emotional, social, and psychological domains, and their relationships with

others (Wentzel, 2017). As such, it is a critical period for understanding how children begin to

engage in learning. For example, students who transition from elementary to middle school often

have to deal with higher academic demands, additional teachers, larger social circles, and

increased independence compared to earlier grades (Eccles & Roeser, 2011). Such changes often

create opportunities for heightened levels of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive participation

while also presenting challenges to students’ engagement with learning.

According to developmental theory, early adolescents begin to explore their emerging

identities, which in turn affects their relationships with their peers, teachers, and classrooms

(Eccles & Roeser, 2011; Erikson, 1968). During this period, students begin to think about

whether their classrooms recognize and accommodate their developing identities, which in turn

affects their behavioral, emotional, and cognitive participation (Wentzel, 2017). For instance, if

students begin to feel that their cultural identities are respected and accommodated in the

classroom, they are more likely to experience higher levels of behavioral participation, emotional

attachment, and cognitive investment (Byrd, 2019). However, an inadequate recognition of their

21

cultural identities may lead to becoming disengaged later on, despite high abilities (Osher et al.,

2020).

Furthermore, peers become increasingly important for students during early adolescence

(Wentzel, 2017) and play a crucial role in their engagement. For example, when interacting with

peers in class, students will think about their social acceptance in the group, as well as what

norms of conduct and discussion are acceptable therebefore participating (Ryan & Deci, 2020).

The role of teachers remains important, as students’ relationships with them affect their

confidence and participation levels (Wentzel, 2017). Recent research also suggests that positive

peer relationships are particularly likely to develop in culturally responsive classrooms because

they make students feel welcome and encourage inclusive collaborations (Debnam et al., 2024;

Pathak et al., 2024).

According to motivation theory, students are more likely to experience enhanced

behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement when their basic psychological needs for

autonomy, competence, and relatedness are met in school settings (Ryan & Deci, 2020; Wentzel,

2017). A number of researchers have found that culturally responsive teaching can facilitate such

processes by creating the conditions needed for students to develop psychological needs and feel

supported in pursuing their goals (Gay, 2018; Hammond, 2021).

As discussed, the literature points to a general consensus among researchers that

engagement is better understood as a process stemming from relationships between students and

the classroom. However, few studies have highlighted how this idea may be particularly relevant

for middle school students. Indeed, most scholars have acknowledged the uniqueness of

adolescence while also suggesting that engagement is more complex than just observable

behavior or even students’ academic performance (Byrd, 2019; Fredricks et al., 2016).

22

Researchers note that engagement is a multi-faceted concept best understood through the

interaction of developmental characteristics, classroom behavior, instruction, and students’

perceptions in culturally responsive classrooms (Byrd, 2019). Nonetheless, few studies have

attempted to examine how such processes operate within the contextual reality of culturally and

linguistically diverse middle school classrooms (Caingcoy, 2023; Carey et al., 2018). This gap in

the literature highlights the need for the current qualitative educational action research study

seeking to understand student engagement from a multidimensional perspective, which takes

developmental characteristics into account.

Characteristics of Middle School Learners

It is common knowledge that middle school is a period of profound cognitive, relational,

and identity exploration (Barksdale et al., 2021). Researchers note that students entering early

adolescence begin to construct a sense of self while also becoming more concerned about how

they are perceived by others (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). Such developmental patterns impact both

social and classroom behavior since students start to interpret teacher behaviors and classroom

conduct through a personal lens (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012). In this regard, contemporary studies

highlight the role of middle school as a context within which student engagement should be

examined (Wang & Hofkens, 2020; Wang et al., 2020).

Student identity plays a critical role in classroom dynamics in middle school, as

adolescents begin to negotiate their social, cultural, and academic identities (Eccles & Roeser,

2011). Accordingly, researchers note that students start to critically evaluate how their classroom

experiences affirm or negate their cultural identity (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). For instance, a study

by Gay (2021) shows that students who feel affirmed in the classroom have positive academic

identities, whereas those who are dismissed have negative academic identities. In addition,

23

findings indicate that adolescents who do not see their cultures reflected in the classroom

environment have lower self-concept and participate less in class (Hammond, 2021). Identity

affirmation is vital to promoting engagement as a social outcome and a process. Andrews and

Wright (2024) and Jagers et al. (2025) note that identity affirmation has a positive role in

encouraging academic persistence, confidence, and participation among culturally diverse

adolescents.

Peer relationships is another critical aspect of student engagement and is especially

relevant in early adolescence. At this stage, students begin to focus on developing friendships,

and peer norms increasingly influence their behavior (Wentzel, 2017). For example, adolescents

may be encouraged or deterred from participating or even attending school based on interactions

with peers (Andrews & Wright, 2024). Research indicates that culturally responsive classrooms

foster peer connections while also highlighting cultural differences as assets (Gay, 2021).

Therefore, such classrooms encourage collaborative approaches that allow students to participate

more actively in learning (Andrews & Wright, 2024; Eccles & Roeser, 2023). Overall, the topic

of peer relationships is considered by researchers to be an essential engagement mechanism that

is influenced by culturally responsive teaching (Hammond, 2021).

Motivation is a critical factor in student engagement since it impacts students’

perceptions of classroom experiences (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). The traditional view of

motivation held that it was an individual phenomenon, but researchers note that it may also be

collective (Ryan & Deci, 2020). As such, students’ motivation is dependent on classroom

context, peer relations, teacher feedback, and perception of relevance among other factors (Ryan

& Deci, 2020). According to Self-Determination Theory, motivation is enhanced through

autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2020). Such themes are reflected by

24

culturally responsive teaching, which emphasizes affirming students’ identities, collaborating

with them to enhance learning, and sharing power (Gay, 2021). Culturally responsive classrooms

may motivate students to learn since they feel heard and respected in the classroom (Aronson &

Laughter, 2020). Furthermore, since such classrooms emphasize relevance, they also increase the

possibility of enhancing engagement by making students connect course material to their

experiences (Hammond, 2021).

Another theme recurring in the reviewed literature is the developmental characteristics

typical of the middle grades (Nelemans et al., 2018). Transitions to higher levels of education

often involve challenges such as increased school size, multiple teachers, and changing social

and academic expectations, which may lower students’ engagement and sense of belonging

(Andrews & Wright, 2024). The literature confirms that adolescents tend to become less

motivated and involved if their teachers do not provide sufficient social and emotional support

during the transition to a higher grade (Nelemans et al., 2018; Wang & Eccles, 2013).

Instructional strategies are especially important in middle school since learners are faced with

new challenges while also dealing with questions of identity (Andrews & Wright, 2024; Osher et

al., 2020). Therefore, by focusing on responsiveness to individual needs and promoting positive

relationships, culturally responsive instruction can become a protective factor for adolescents

facing developmental challenges (Cantrell & Powell, 2021).

The literature further suggests that developmental needs should not be viewed separately

from instructional practice because the two continually influence one another (Boat et al., 2025).

Since different cultures often involve varied approaches to learning, communication, and

socialization, culturally responsive teaching is essential in meeting the diverse needs of such a

heterogeneous group of students (Gay, 2021). Researchers note that developmental science and

25

culturally responsive pedagogy are similar in several aspects, including an emphasis on

relationships, identity, and participation rather than discrete practices (Hammond, 2021).

However, there is limited research investigating developmental characteristics in relation to

classroom practices, with few articles providing action research or qualitative analysis to explore

the connection (Andrews & Wright, 2024; Yelder-Stovall, 2026). Therefore, the proposed study

on developmental issues and instructional strategies fits into the existing scholarly conversation

by attempting to fill this gap, as it examines whether and how culturally responsive practices

affect student engagement.

Classroom Climate, Belonging, and Student Engagement

Student engagement is influenced by both learning processes and their contexts

(Monteiro et al., 2021). Educational researchers increasingly conceptualize classroom climate as

a critical contextual factor associated with students’ motivation, perseverance in the face of

challenges, and general willingness to participate (Wang & Degol, 2016). Engagement is not

defined by internal characteristics alone but is instead produced through reciprocal relations

between students’ learning processes and the classroom context including teachers, peers, and

the overall environment (Monteiro et al., 2021). Such an approach to studying student

engagement is particularly relevant for investigations centered on culturally and linguistically

diverse populations since students’ experiences within classrooms are often directly linked to

their perception of schools as welcoming, inclusive, and conducive to learning (Gay, 2021). The

extant literature provides varying conceptualizations of classroom climates, yet most agree that

positive relationships within classrooms benefit students’ academic engagement compared to

hostile and impersonal settings (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Kondo, 2022).

26

Teacher-student relationships are often highlighted as an essential part of classroom

climate and student engagement (Boat et al., 2025). Contemporary researchers increasingly

acknowledge the critical role of students’ perspectives on educators, including their perception of

support, care, and respect (Lawson & Lawson, 2020; Roorda et al., 2011). Teacher-student

relationships become especially important in middle school, where adolescents begin to actively

seek acceptance, recognition, and respect from various social groups while also exploring

options for their adult lives (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). Students who feel understood and

supported by their teachers are more likely to actively participate in classroom discussions, turn

to them for help, and persist in facing challenging academic tasks (Barksdale et al., 2021;

Wentzel, 2017). The reviewed literature highlights several mechanisms through which educators

can enhance such classroom relationships, including demonstrating cultural humility and

acknowledging children’s experiences as valid and relevant to instruction (Gay, 2021;

Hammond, 2021). Researchers who investigated teacher-student bonds in middle school settings

generally agree on their strong association with student engagement, though the long-term nature

of such relationships within culturally responsive practices is poorly understood (Anyichie et al.,

2023; Franco et al., 2024).

The concept of psychological safety is closely linked to teachers’ ability to foster positive

student engagement trajectories (Chang & Viesca, 2022). The term generally refers to the extent

to which students feel safe in sharing their ideas, asking questions, and making mistakes inside

and outside the classroom (Edmondson, 2018). The concept was originally advanced by

organizational behavior scholars who documented its links to innovation and productivity

(Edmondson, 2018). Since then, psychological safety has been increasingly operationalized

within educational contexts, as scholars note that students benefit immensely from the

27

opportunity to take risks and make mistakes while studying (Edmondson, 2018). Multiple

researchers note that culturally responsive classrooms contribute to a sense of psychological

safety by validating students’ identities and encouraging open and honest discussions

(Hammond, 2021). Students who feel psychologically safe tend to be more willing to participate

in class, study challenging subjects, and express their perspectives (Jagers et al., 2025). The

reviewed literature rarely discusses opportunities for educators to build psychological safety

within their classes, though such a phenomenon may be linked to students’ cultural

responsiveness to classroom relationships.

The examined literature highlights student belonging as an essential source of

psychological and academic support for students (Allen et al., 2021). The concept generally

refers to students’ feelings of being valued, respected, and accepted by their classmates and

school staff. Most researchers agree that such an aspect of the classroom climate is strongly

associated with students’ behavioral, emotional, and academic engagement (Lawson & Lawson,

2020). For instance, studies have shown that children who feel they belong in school tend to

actively participate in educational activities while those who feel like outsiders are less likely to

engage (Allen et al., 2021; Lawson & Lawson, 2020). One literature source note that students’

feelings of belonging are particularly salient for culturally and linguistically diverse populations

since such children often value inclusion and representation in their academic settings (Osher et

al., 2020). Gay (2021) notes that educators can foster such an inclusive school culture by

emphasizing their students’ cultural backgrounds in all teaching practices, including

communication and curriculum choices. Similarly, Hammond (2021) notes that such inclusivity

often leads to better cognitive outcomes for students since they do not need to constantly worry

about their acceptance in the classroom. The reviewed research literature generally agrees that

28

classroom belonging is an essential source of academic and psychological support for students,

though most scholars note that such a feeling is often cultivated through comprehensive,

long-term cultural responsiveness efforts rather than a few carefully selected classroom

interventions (Chang & Viesca, 2022; Hernández et al., 2025).

Another theme that emerged in the literature is inclusive classroom environments and

classroom trust as factors that influence student engagement (Anyichie et al., 2023). Inclusive

classrooms are characterized by instructional practices that recognize, acknowledge, and validate

students’ diverse cultural perspectives (Gay, 2021). Within such settings, trust is manifested

through teachers’ practices, expectations, communication, and opportunities for sharing (Bryk &

Schneider, 2002). While Bryk and Schneider’s work was focused on the reform of schools, other

researchers have noted that trust is integral to CRP since students are likely to interact with

greater autonomy if they perceive teachers’ conduct as fair (Hammond, 2021; Muñiz, 2020). In

turn, inclusive practices promote students’ willingness to share varied perspectives, participate in

collaborative activities, and boost their confidence in achieving academic success since

differences are reframed as resources (Anyichie et al., 2023). Nevertheless, there are reports that

most institutions have adopted formal strategies to inclusiveness while neglecting to implement

substantive measures to foster trusting relationships necessary for achieving

relationship-centered instruction (Aguayo et al., 2023).

Overall, the reviewed articles reveal that classroom climate, belonging, psychological

safety, and trust, as well as teacher–student relationships, are part of the processes by which

engagement is manifested and should not be considered as independent influencing factors

(Anyichie et al., 2023). This is because students are only able to become actively engaged in

learning when they feel that they are being treated with respect and dignity (Osher et al., 2020).

29

In other words, most studies have reported that CRP fosters student engagement by creating the

necessary conditions for building relationships, which in turn enable interactive participation in

classroom activities (Gay, 2021; Hammond, 2021). However, there is a need for more qualitative

action research exploring how educators can integrate relational practices to engage middle

school students in instruction. Such studies are rare in the reviewed literature, making the

proposed research both relevant and integral to addressing existing gaps. The next section will

discuss the instructional practices utilized by teachers to achieve culturally responsive teaching

practices.

Culturally Responsive Teaching Practices

The need for transforming culturally responsive teaching theory into practice in a

classroom has become the focal point in research recently (Anyichie et al., 2023). The

researchers allude to Gay’s (2018) view that culture should be regarded not as a peripheral aspect

of instruction but rather as a resource for learning. While Gay (2018) views culturally responsive

education as the use of students’ culture, experience, and communicative habits, Ladson-Billings

(2021) aims to respond to the tripartite educational needs of empowering students academically,

culturally, and intellectually. In turn, the recent works claim the need to address classroom

relationships, adaptability, and responsiveness (Anyichie et al., 2023; Hammond, 2021). Overall,

all cited works tend to agree, despite some differences, that responsive education should be

regarded as extensive and prolonged processes rather than discrete practices of multicultural

education (Paris & Alim, 2017).

One of the strongest areas of agreement within the literature concerns the importance of

instructional strategies that actively connect curriculum to students' lived experiences (Gay,

2018). Indeed, scholars claim that the critical element of culturally responsive instruction is the

30

teacher’s ability to connect academic subjects with students’ cultural knowledge, community,

languages, and experiences (Gay, 2018). Hammond (2021) states that such instructional

strategies enhance students’ cognitive engagement as they enable them to connect to cultural

knowledge, which, in turn, assists them in acquiring new information. In other words, culturally

responsive instruction does not undermine intellectual rigor; instead, it empowers students with

tools to learn academic material, which is not the case for traditional approaches (Hammond,

2021). Indeed, recent studies confirm that students are more likely to participate, be motivated to

learn, and discuss academic concepts if they can relate it to their experiences (Evans et al., 2020;

Franco et al., 2024). Still, several scholars argue that the concept of relevance cannot apply to

particular lessons by inserting examples that might resonate with some students (Anyichie et al.,

2023). To achieve responsiveness, teachers need to reflect on how much the lesson includes

cultural knowledge and whose voices they amplify or fail to amplify (Anyichie et al., 2023; Boat

et al., 2025). Thus, although the majority agree that instruction should be culturally relevant and

integrated, it is complicated by various factors, including teachers’ and students’ voices in the

classroom.

Another common theme is the issue of curriculum relevance (Paris & Alim, 2017).

Earlier studies on multicultural education attempted to address the lack of representation by

assigning different days/months to cultures, bringing more diverse authors, politicians, and

historical figures into the syllabus (Banks, 2019). Scholars believe that while acknowledging the

value of increasing representation, its impact on classroom learning is limited since

representation is just one element of responsive education (Paris & Alim, 2017). Gay (2018) and

Ladson-Billings (2021) argue that for curriculum to be relevant to students, it needs to build on

their cultural knowledge, perspectives, and experiences. In other words, a responsive curriculum

31

focuses on students’ exploration of complex realities and their reflections on that exploration

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). Recent studies also note that learners achieve higher rates of classroom

participation, confidence, and belonging when the education is relevant to their lives (Boat et al.,

2025). However, researchers also stress the difficulty of the task due to the absence of

educational policies that allow more flexibility and responsiveness in education (Anyichie et al.,

2023). Indeed, standardization resonates with the theme of the absence of student voice in

education as students are unable to shape their study schedules/contents and are constantly held

accountable for meeting the same goals (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Once again, the

scholars agree that curriculum content should include students’ cultural knowledge, but it is

unclear how this inclusion should be implemented.

Another common theme is the student voice in education (Aguayo, 2024). Indeed,

culturally responsive education seeks to empower students by engaging them in instruction and

allowing them to bring their voices into the classroom (Gay, 2018). As such, the student voice

refers to both classroom participation and collaboration with the teacher in constructing the

learning process (Aguayo, 2024). Scholars find that students who can influence the educational

process develop higher levels of engagement, confidence, and willingness to participate in class

discussions/study groups (Boat et al., 2025; Chang & Viesca, 2022). However, the other authors

note that student voice is limited by the traditional teacher-centered instruction when teachers,

not students, design the course and determine student learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).

In other words, students have voices, but they are muffled due to the education system that is not

set to hear and benefit from those voices. Therefore, the concept of student voice highlights the

need to transform the classroom into a place where the teacher shares responsibility for learning

32

with students (Aguayo, 2024). Such a learning environment helps achieve responsiveness and

empowerment, which are essential for student success.

Overall, the literature combines several topics addressed by scholars in the field. The

main themes are student empowerment through responsive instruction, curricula built on

students’ experiences, and students’ voices in the educational process (Boat et al., 2025; Chang

& Viesca, 2022). All themes share the focus on student needs and the ability of teachers to

address these needs within the classroom. Most scholars agree that it is necessary to transform

the traditional roles and build more cooperative, responsive learning settings (Chang & Viesca,

2022). However, several factors, including institutional flexibility, hinder such transformations

(Franco et al., 2024). It is also unclear exactly how such processes as student voice, cultural

responsiveness should be implemented by teachers.

Besides curriculum design and instruction, the reviewed literature highlights

relationship-centered practices as a key domain for cultivating teaching practices that respond to

cultural and other individual differences among students (Gay, 2021). Historically, scholars

focused on addressing gaps in curricula, materials, and representation (Franco et al., 2024).

Recent studies, however, highlight that CRP also involves building relationships with students

based on trust, respect, empathy, and open communication (Gay, 2021). Students need to feel

understood and appreciated by their teachers in order to be motivated to participate, question,

and pursue challenging tasks (Wentzel, 2017). Consistent with this idea, studies conducted in

culturally heterogeneous settings found that positive teacher-student relationships enhanced

students’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement due to their sense of classroom

belonging (Chang & Viesca, 2022; Choe, 2021). At the same time, several scholars have argued

33

that relationships are not an end in themselves but should serve to complement CRP practices

that directly address students’ cultural contexts (Franco et al., 2024).

A rising number of studies have explored CRP in the context of assessment, highlighting

its critical role and the need for innovative approaches to grading and evaluation (Chang &

Viesca, 2022). The traditional emphasis on standardized procedures and generic rubrics has been

challenged, with scholars advocating for alternatives that allow demonstrating proficiencies in

multiple formats, collaborative settings, performance-based tasks, and reflective formats

(Hammond, 2021; Walker et al., 2024). Allowing multiple modes of demonstrating competence

does not lower standards but instead creates more opportunities for students to show what they

know and do not know while addressing cultural bias and imbalances in typical assessment

practices (Nortvedt et al., 2020; Walker et al., 2024). At the same time, multiple researchers note

that standardized assessments currently dominate school settings, often with high stakes, limiting

the scope for CRP (Aguayo et al., 2023; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Thus, there is an

inconsistency across studies in terms of the practical implementation of assessment practices that

respond to students’ cultural backgrounds.

Collaboration with families and broader communities is another important theme in CRP

that has drawn increasing attention from scholars (Gay, 2021). Earlier works highlight the

importance of building alliances with families as centers of cultural capital that can help enhance

learning and engagement (Gay, 2018). More recent studies have provided evidence in support of

this claim, demonstrating that collaborative approaches improve parent-school communication,

cultural responsiveness, and student engagement across diverse settings (Gay, 2021; Ishimaru,

2019). Notably, scholars have argued that family involvement should not be limited to

participation in formal school events but should also consider their diverse social, cultural, and

34

linguistic backgrounds (Ishimaru, 2020). By building partnerships with families and drawing on

their cultural knowledge, schools create more inclusive and equitable learning environments

where students feel genuinely engaged (Daniel et al., 2019; Herrera, 2022). At the same time, a

number of studies have argued that such collaborations are often limited by teachers’ lack of

time, preparation, and capacity (Anyichie et al., 2023).

Overall, many of the reviewed studies have demonstrated the general benefits of CRP for

engagement while also noting certain contradictions and limitations. Some works highlight the

importance of specific areas of CRP, such as culturally relevant curriculum, as the main drivers

of increased student engagement (Ladson-Billings, 2021). Others stress the importance of

building relationships with students in order to enhance trust and psychological safety

(Hammond, 2021). Finally, a number of scholars argue that CRP should not be reduced to

particular areas but should be implemented as an integrated framework where curriculum,

instruction, assessment, communication, and classroom dynamics are all considered (Anyichie et

al., 2023; Gay, 2021). Each of these perspectives provides a useful understanding of how CRP

can be used to enhance student engagement, but the cumulative evidence suggests that this

approach to instruction has a broad effect in this area (Gay, 2021). In addition, although scholars

agree on the benefits of CRP, they also highlight the need for further research on how it can be

implemented in practice.

The reviewed literature includes a number of limitations in terms of the design and scope

of the studies. First, many works provide general descriptions of CRP, such as cross-sectional

surveys or analyses of the correlation between CRP and engagement, without exploring

classroom dynamics in sufficient detail (Mertler, 2024). Second, a number of studies examine the

role of CRP at elementary and secondary levels without focusing on the specifics of middle

35

school students, who tend to be especially culturally heterogeneous (Eccles & Roeser, 2023;

Portes et al., 2018). Finally, the literature lacks in-depth qualitative action research studies that

could explore how CRP practices are implemented, perceived, and adjusted by teachers in order

to enhance engagement (Aronson & Laughter, 2016; Franco et al., 2024). Therefore, the current

literature provides a general consensus on the importance of CRP for student engagement but

does not provide sufficient details about the practical aspects of implementing such practices

with middle school students.

Teacher Preparation and Professional Development

The effectiveness of culturally responsive pedagogy relies on teachers’ beliefs about

equity and inclusivity as well as teachers’ level of preparedness to implement such beliefs in

practice (Gay, 2021). Literature highlights contradictions in teachers’ perceptions of culturally

responsive education. The majority perceive its importance but also admit uncertainty in its

application; they see the need for validating culturally diverse students’ identities but lack the

confidence to implement it (Gay, 2018). Researchers also note a gap between teachers’

recognition of the role of acknowledging their students’ cultural backgrounds and their readiness

to employ such approaches (Hammond, 2021). These contradictions are deeply embedded in

debates on culturally responsive pedagogy, making it one of the most pressing issues explored in

teacher education research (Khalifa et al., 2020).

Teacher efficacy is a critical factor in addressing the issue of contradictions between

teachers’ beliefs about culturally responsive pedagogy and their ability to employ it effectively.

Studies show that teachers who adopt culturally responsive pedagogical approaches are confident

in their capacity to deliver these approaches (Siwatu, 2007). Researchers also note that efficacy

beliefs affect teachers’ ability to engage in classroom practices that embrace cultural diversity, as

36

well as their attitudes and behaviors towards implementing culturally responsive practices

(Siwatu, 2007). Recent studies explore the connection between culturally responsive pedagogy

and teachers’ level of educational competency, finding the latter to contribute more to their

effectiveness in teaching culturally diverse student populations compared to theoretical

understanding (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). However, literature also reveals that efficacy is

not innate but rather emerges through practice and reflection (Ciampa & Reisboard, 2024). As

such, many scholars highlight the need to focus on professional learning in teacher education to

equip these professionals with the necessary skills to implement culturally responsive pedagogy

(Gay, 2018).

Professional learning is thus a key component of teacher education (Darling-Hammond et

al., 2020). Earlier literature focused on developing educators’ multicultural awareness or

provided general diversity-related professional learning (Hammond, 2021). However, later

studies highlight the significance of classroom teaching and practice and place a strong emphasis

on professional learning to facilitate teachers’ engagement with culturally responsive education

(Hammond, 2021). Researchers argue that professional learning should encourage inquiry,

collaboration, and coaching to affect sustainable changes in educators’ approaches

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Studies also show that teachers benefit more from ongoing and

continuous professional learning experiences, during which they can further their understanding

of students’ diverse backgrounds, rather than a one-day workshop (Anyichie et al., 2023).

Moreover, teachers state that they need continuous professional learning and collaboration to

acquire knowledge about culturally responsive education; a one-time experience does not suffice

(Nganga & Kambutu, 2024).

37

Professional learning in culturally responsive pedagogy is also closely intertwined with

reflective practices and coaching (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Researchers highlight

reflective practice as a critical aspect of educators’ experiences, during which they assess their

practices, thoughts, and beliefs about teaching (Muñiz, 2020). Reflective practice encourages

teachers to evaluate culturally responsive pedagogy, including assessing which voices are heard

in the classroom, how their perspectives affect students’ experiences, and how they can alter the

status quo (Gay, 2021). Coaching processes that promote reflective practices allow educators to

connect theory to practice and are essential in affecting sustainable changes because they enable

individuals to engage in dialogues that relate to their professional work (Lundgren et al., 2025).

However, studies note that coaching in culturally responsive pedagogy is unavailable to the

majority of educators (Lindsey et al., 2019).

Teacher Preparation is another aspect of research on culturally responsive education.

Even though most teacher preparation programs now provide appropriate classroom preparation

for students in diverse settings, many studies have shown its inadequacy for learning to teach in

culturally responsive ways (Sleeter, 2018). Researchers agree that preservice preparation focuses

too much on conceptual knowledge and not enough on practicing culturally responsive skills

(Milner, 2021). Therefore, it leaves new teachers with an optimistic view of culturally responsive

teaching but unaware of their own abilities to effectively engage in it (Darling-Hammond et al.,

2020). This study’s findings are consistent with others’ in that they show that preparation is only

a part of a much larger system that requires professional development and adequate support in

actually implementing new teachings, regardless of the setting, to promote success

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Teacher readiness seems to be the common theme in most of

the research conducted on culturally responsive education (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).

38

However, despite the apparent agreement on the importance of training in implementing

culturally responsive pedagogy, few studies provide an in-depth understanding of what kind of

teacher preparation is most needed for teachers who work with culturally and linguistically

diverse students in middle school settings to promote successful learning (Franco et al., 2024).

Challenges to Implementing Culturally Responsive Teaching

Although the notion of culturally responsive teaching has become widely recognized as

an effective way to provide education, there is a substantial amount of literature shedding light

on its inconsistent implementation (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). There is no doubt that it has

become a popular approach to improve the quality of learning and promote equality in education

(Hammond, 2021). Nevertheless, the researchers underline the fact that the failure to deliver it

consistently derives from multiple factors associated with teachers’ practice, as well as external

policies and organizational issues they face (Gay, 2018). More recent articles attempt to go

beyond the debate on whether it should be implemented and begin exploring possible reasons

why it has not been fully integrated into the educational practice yet (Hammond, 2021). Such

attention to this issue is crucial because it helps understand that not only teachers’ beliefs

influence their capacity to transform the teaching process but also the overall system within

which they operate (Khalifa et al., 2020).

To begin with, most of the reviewed articles highlight the teachers’ perception of the

conflict between standard curriculum and their desire to provide education relevant to students’

culture and lived experience (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Researchers argue that the current

tendency towards standards-based reform made teachers stick to prescriptive curricula, depriving

them of the opportunity to adjust the teaching process according to students’ needs

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). For instance, some participants in the study revealed the

39

pressure to comply with the standard pacing guides, benchmarks, assessments, and exams

(Anyichie et al., 2023). Despite the opportunity to make the curriculum relevant to students’

cultural backgrounds, many participants agreed that the teaching practice did not allow them

sufficient flexibility to adjust lessons and include various cultural phenomena (Gay, 2021).

Experienced teachers, however, could comment on their ability to negotiate the use of culturally

relevant pedagogies within the framework of the standard curriculum (Ciampa & Reisboard,

2024). The participants revealed that their flexibility was based on their own agency rather than

the support of the established system. Thus, the reviewed literature confirms the persistent

contradiction between standardized instructions and teachers’ need to deliver education that

respects students’ cultural backgrounds (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020).

The discussed contradiction between standard curriculum and culturally responsive

teaching could be explained by the fact that school organizational cultures play a critical role in

teachers’ willingness to transform their practice (Muñiz, 2020). Recent research has devoted

special attention to this issue, emphasizing that culturally responsive teaching requires educators

to be committed to school-level initiatives aimed at sustaining such pedagogy (Khalifa et al.,

2020). For instance, participants in the study revealed that school leadership, through its

inclusive and equitable behavior, could create the necessary environment to adjust the teaching

process according to students’ cultural backgrounds (Muñiz, 2020). On the contrary, the absence

of supportive school culture and ineffective leadership hampered the participants’ efforts to

implement culturally responsive strategies (Ciampa & Reisboard, 2024). Thus, the researchers

argue that achieving school-level organizational change plays a pivotal role in teachers’ attempts

to make the curriculum more relevant to students’ lived experiences.

40

In addition, limited resources and multiple educational policies also serve as factors

influencing teachers’ choices and behaviors (Muñiz, 2020). The reviewed articles confirm that

teachers need sufficient support, planning time, and instructional resources to provide culturally

appropriate education (Hammond, 2021). However, as the researchers note, such resources as

time and financial support are not always available, especially in marginalized communities

(Franco et al., 2024). Besides, participants argue that the tendency to address numerous

educational concerns makes it difficult to meet the students’ diverse needs (Milner, 2020).

Educational policies related to learning recovery, improvement, safety, digitalization, and

multiple other issues add to the growing demands on educators (Ciampa & Reisboard, 2024).

The researchers note that, instead of prioritizing one over the others, education policymakers

should be aware of the need to consider various aspects of learners’ experience (Muñiz, 2020).

Another issue reviewed in the articles is the teachers’ beliefs about themselves, their

students, and the educational process. Even though most participants in the study expressed a

positive attitude towards the concept of culturally responsive teaching, the scholars argue that it

was not always easy for the teachers to embrace it (Gay, 2018). For instance, educators

mentioned multiple issues that prevented them from using the strategies that would be beneficial

for their students (Aguayo et al., 2023). Although the researchers did not indicate the details of

the discussed barriers, there is a notion that teachers were unsure of their ability to make choices

that would support both students’ cultural backgrounds and the necessity to adhere to the

standard curriculum (Gay, 2021). On the other hand, scholars underline that education

policymakers and school leaders face serious challenges addressing the issue of inequality while

complying with the idea of diversity (Ciampa & Reisboard, 2024). There is a concern that

educators are uncertain whether any adjustments to the standard curriculum should be regarded

41

as acceptable. Although the reviewed literature does not cover this topic in detail, it certainly

draws attention to the fact that most teachers feel that implementing culturally responsive

teaching is rather challenging. The majority of articles do not go beyond the idea of the need for

culturally responsive education but do not address how teachers could integrate such approaches

into the existing system, especially at the middle-school stage.

Across the literature, therefore, it should be evident that much of the research undertaken

to date highlights potential areas of difficulty in implementing culturally responsive teaching

practices, whereas limited scholarly work examines the actual instructional actions teachers take

in their teaching practice to overcome challenges and engage students in their learning in a

culturally and linguistically diverse classroom (Mertler, 2024). Most of the reviewed studies

concentrate on documenting the obstacles, whereas teachers’ instructional decision-making

processes in implementing culturally responsive practices remain understudied despite the

complexity of the decisions they have to make within the confines of the school system

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). The relevance of the proposed study is justified by the findings

of the review, which highlight barriers that impede the adoption of culturally responsive teaching

by educators across schools, including standardized curricula, accountability, organizational

constraints, resources, leadership, and policy (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Concurrently, the

review highlights the need for more empirical studies on the strategies teachers use to modify

instruction and engage students in their learning processes when using culturally responsive

practices in actual classroom settings to overcome the identified barriers. This consideration is

critical for action research, which presupposes continual reflection on actions taken and their

impact on the targeted issue (Mertler, 2024). Therefore, the analysis of the ways of responding to

challenges in implementing culturally responsive teaching provides an opportunity to generate

42

knowledge beyond the identification of barriers and focus on processes applicable in actual

practice.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Middle School Education

Diversity, equity, and inclusion have become increasingly critical areas of research in

education, as they guide both policy and practice in teaching in diverse settings (Geesa et al.,

2021). While these terms are often used interchangeably, recent studies highlight the differences

in their definitions and implementation. Diversity is manifested in the presence of students who

differ in race, culture, socio-economic status, and other characteristics, whereas equity stresses

the need for providing individualized opportunities and resources for achieving success

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). In turn, inclusion presupposes both physical and social aspects

of access to education, meaning that it goes beyond diversity by calling for creating positive

social environments where all members feel engaged and empowered (Osher et al., 2020). These

concepts are interrelated but cannot be separated when discussing education, since it is through

equity that diversity is promoted and inclusion is reached (Gay, 2021). Considering that middle

school is when students explore and accept their identities, it is evident that diversity, equity, and

inclusion guide their interactions and engagement.

According to the review, the majority of the researchers agree that representation can

improve student engagement, as it validates their identities and enables them to see themselves in

the curriculum (Geesa et al., 2021). Students feel more involved when they understand that their

voices matter and that the materials and resources reflect their lives and perspectives

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). Indeed, the inclusion of diverse perspectives facilitates deeper learning

by enabling students not only to accept but question different worldviews, which is linked with

enhanced learning and social acceptance (Paris & Alim, 2017). However, representation can fail

43

if it is reduced to a superficial inclusion of diverse topics and characters without addressing

related issues, such as challenging students to think critically and empathize with others

(Hammond, 2021). This is why diversity has to permeate through all levels of curricula and

teaching practices, including communication, assessment, participation, and leadership (Franco

et al., 2024). This consensus underscores the importance of incorporating diverse perspectives in

classroom practices to ensure student involvement and empowerment by affirming their

identities in learning (Hammond, 2021).

Another critical issue that affects engagement is related to language diversity, since many

students live in linguistically diverse settings and speak more than one language (Schanding et

al., 2023). While the early studies addressed language diversity as a deficit, recent research

highlights its potential to enhance learning if harnessed properly (Paris & Alim, 2017). When

teachers engage students’ linguistic diversity, they can actually promote their participation in the

learning process and encourage collaboration with peers (Hammond, 2021). Nevertheless, there

is also evidence that educational settings fail to support language diversity, which limits students’

opportunities to succeed (Caingcoy, 2023). Particularly, the tendency to follow the same

instructional practices undermines students’ opportunities to learn and participate, which is why

teachers need to develop multilingual competence and rethink their practices accordingly

(Schanding et al., 2023).

Several studies discussed in the article indicate that the factors associated with

educational inequity contribute to the lack of engagement in learning among culturally and

linguistically diverse middle school students (Schanding et al., 2023). Indeed, the differences in

disciplinary outcomes along racial lines, disparities in academic performance, unequal access to

advanced classes, and differences in attachment to schools continue to impede the progress of

44

culturally and linguistically diverse students (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Although some of

the researchers argue that student engagement is influenced by a range of factors, it is evident

that the inequities in classroom practices, including the presence of teachers’ expectations,

representation, relationships, and participation opportunities, affect students’ opportunities to

learn (Milner, 2021). At the same time, several studies question the emphasis on achievement as

the central aspect of equity, arguing that social and emotional dimensions, such as mutual respect

and responsibility, also contribute to students’ ability to participate and succeed (Osher et al.,

2020). While the reviewed articles discuss the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion in

education, few actually address how middle school teachers can incorporate these themes to

ensure successful and engaged learning in everyday practice (Aguayo et al., 2023). This is why

the next section will focus on social-emotional learning, which can build students’ skills and

competencies that will help navigate diverse settings and feel empowered.

Social-Emotional Learning and Student Engagement

Social-emotional learning (SEL) has become increasingly conflated with culturally

responsive instruction in recent years because the concepts have been found to intersect with

regards to learning outcomes (Yang et al., 2018). Students benefit from emotionally supportive

environments where their identities are recognized, accommodated, and affirmed to feel safe

(Cavioni, 2024). Studies confirm that social-emotional skills, identity, relationships, and

decision-making all combine to improve engagement and performance in school (Mahoney et al.,

2018). However, researchers note that these skills are only valuable when taught in contextually

appropriate ways that recognize students’ cultural identities (Jagers et al., 2018). Programs that

promote social-emotional learning must acknowledge students’ varied backgrounds to be truly

effective (Mahoney et al., 2018; Singha et al., 2025).

45

While the topic of culturally responsive instruction and social-emotional learning seems

to have arisen independently, the literature on both is becoming increasingly convergent (Yang et

al., 2018). Culturally responsive teaching practices prioritize learning through a cultural lens,

seeking to establish affirming, collaborative, and inclusive learning environments (Gay, 2021).

By contrast, social-emotional learning practices emphasize developing interpersonal

competencies to function effectively in society (Cavioni, 2024). Both concepts, however, have

been found to have overlapping components that promote student engagement and achievement

through identity affirmation, mutual respect, empathy, and collaborative problem-solving (Osher

et al., 2020). Classrooms that integrate both social-emotional learning and culturally responsive

strategies have been found to foster stronger connections to learning than those that employ

either method in isolation (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Singha et al., 2025). This synergy can

be seen as both concepts complementing each other’s strengths to create a holistic approach to

education.

The intersection between social-emotional learning and culturally responsive instruction

has been further advanced by the concepts’ shared emphasis on identity affirmation (Singha et

al., 2025). Students thrive when their classroom experiences reflect their cultural perspectives

and validate their identities (Ladson-Billings, 2021). In fact, researchers note that

social-emotional skills in culturally responsive classrooms only emerge as students interpret the

emotional meaning behind events in their lives (Hammond, 2015). This perspective is especially

relevant in middle school, where students grapple with questions of identity, belonging, and

self-discovery (Eccles & Roeser, 2011). As such, identity affirmation is inextricably linked to

students’ emotional well-being and ability to perform academically during this developmental

46

period (Osher et al., 2020). Students need to feel safe and supported in affirming environments if

they are to be receptive to learning and meaningfully engage with their peers (Osher et al., 2020).

The concepts of social-emotional learning and culturally responsive instruction each have

substantial bodies of supporting research, yet both have limitations in the literature. Studies

investigating both concepts mostly examine their use in isolation, with few exploring how they

combine to influence student learning (Mahoney et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2018). Meanwhile,

researchers note that the intersection between the two is understudied, particularly in terms of

how teachers can implement them together in middle school contexts (Singha et al., 2025).

Specifically, little qualitative research has investigated how students respond to lessons that

integrate both SEL and culturally responsive practices to improve engagement and learning

outcomes. The present study seeks to address this gap in the literature by investigating how

culturally responsive instruction supports student engagement through classroom relationships

and belonging in culturally diverse middle school settings.

Research Gap

The reviewed literature provides substantial theoretical and empirical support for

culturally responsive teaching (CRT) as an approach for addressing the educational needs of

culturally and linguistically diverse students. Foundational scholarship describes how effective

culturally responsive instruction acknowledges students’ cultural knowledge, experiences,

identities, and linguistic resources as assets for learning (Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Research has linked the use of culturally responsive practices to students’ participation,

belonging, relationships, and engagement (Franco et al., 2024; Ladson-Billings, 2021). However,

the literature highlights important questions about CRT practice within authentic classroom

47

environments, including how teachers adapt culturally responsive practices in response to

students and how those practices link to student engagement.

An important limitation concerns the distinction between teachers’ perceptions and actual

classroom practice of CRT. Research examining culturally responsive practices has often relied

on teacher self-report, student report, or other perception-based measures to determine the

presence or use of culturally responsive practices (Franco et al., 2024). While such evidence is

important for understanding how educators and students view CRT, self-reported beliefs do not

necessarily demonstrate actual implementation of practices during classroom interactions (Chang

& Viesca, 2022). Research on culturally responsive professional learning similarly suggests that

educators may express culturally responsive principles but have difficulties translating these

principles into consistent instructional practice (Bottiani et al., 2018; Chang & Viesca, 2022). An

important gap concerns the relationship between teachers’ beliefs or commitments to CRT and

the instruction decisions they make during actual classroom practice.

This distinction is particularly important since culturally responsive teaching is not a set

of fixed instructional techniques. Rather, effective CRT requires teachers to interpret students’

cultural and linguistic backgrounds, establish relationships, respond to interactions, and adapt

instruction to contextual circumstances (Gay, 2018; Hammond, 2014). Recent scholarship also

highlights that culturally responsive classroom practice is difficult to capture via a single

measure since implementation is multidimensional and can be interpreted differently by teachers

and students (Franco et al., 2024). Thus, the existing literature provides useful information about

perceptions and patterns but does not explain how teachers develop, enact, reflect upon, and

adapt CRT practices in everyday classrooms.

48

A second limitation concerns the specificity of the educational setting. Existing research

often examines CRT across K–12 populations or combines elementary, middle, and high school

contexts, making it difficult to determine findings specifically applicable for middle school

learners (Franco et al., 2024). Middle school represents a distinct developmental context since

early adolescence brings changes in identity, peer relationships, motivation, belonging, and

students’ perceptions of relationships with teachers and school (Eccles & Roeser, 2023; Wang et

al., 2020). Such characteristics can impact how students respond to instructional practices and

classroom relationships. While recent studies have examined CRT among middle school

teachers, the evidence is comparatively limited and does not yet provide sufficient understanding

of how culturally responsive instruction develops within authentic middle school classrooms

over time (Franco et al., 2024). For instance, recent middle-school research has examined teacher

perceptions and development of culturally responsive practices but demonstrate the complexity

of translating principles into context-dependent practice (Sellers & MacKenzie, 2024).

A third gap concerns the methodological emphasis of the existing literature. Quantitative

and perception-based research is valuable in that it can identify patterns, relationships, and

differences associated with CRT practices (Franco et al., 2024). The purpose of the proposed

study, however, is not to argue that quantitative evidence is unnecessary or inadequate. Rather,

the existing quantitative evidence creates a foundational basis which can be supplemented with

qualitative inquiry. What remains insufficiently understood is how CRT is implemented as an

ongoing process and how teachers respond to students’ behaviors, perspectives, and engagement

while implementation is taking place (Bottiani et al., 2018; Chang & Viesca, 2022). A systematic

review of culturally responsive classroom measurement identified limitations in available

evidence on classroom-based measures and their usefulness for evaluating interventions and

49

professional development (Franco et al., 2024). These limitations create the need for research

which moves beyond determining whether CRT is associated with positive outcomes but instead

examines how implementation takes place.

Qualitative action research is particularly appropriate in addressing this gap since it

combines systematic inquiry with reflection and instructional improvement within an authentic

educational setting (Mertler, 2024; Stringer & Aragón, 2020). Action research positions

educators as active participants in examining a problem of practice, collecting evidence,

reflecting on findings, modifying practice, and evaluating subsequent changes (Mertler, 2024;

Stringer & Aragón, 2020). This iterative process is relevant to CRT since culturally responsive

teaching requires contextual judgment rather than mechanical application of strategies. Teachers

may need to adapt instructional approaches as they learn more about students’ cultural

backgrounds, interests, identities, responses, and learning needs (Gay, 2018; Hammond, 2014).

Action research has the potential to support teachers in developing CRT practices via

experimentation, reflection, and attention to actual classroom interactions rather than simply

implementing strategies (Franco et al., 2024).

The literature also demonstrates a need to examine teachers’ instructional practices and

students’ engagement as interconnected processes. Student engagement is multidimensional and

includes behavioral, emotional, and cognitive dimensions which develop through interactions

among students, teachers, peers, and learning environments (Fredricks et al., 2016; Wang et al.,

2020). Culturally responsive teaching may influence these dimensions by increasing the

relevance of instruction, affirming students’ identities and strengthening classroom relationships,

and providing opportunities for students to participate meaningfully (Gay, 2018; Hammond,

2014). However, much of the literature examines either teachers’ beliefs and practices or student

50

outcomes without documenting the interaction between teacher and student as it takes place

within classrooms. Research which examines classroom-based culturally responsive practices

increasingly recognizes the importance of multiple perspectives, including teacher, student, and

observer evidence, but the field continues to face challenges in determining how these

perspectives can be integrated to understand implementation (Franco et al., 2024; Mertler, 2024).

A related gap concerns the three dimensions of student engagement. The literature

generally recognizes behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement as interconnected

dimensions but fewer studies examine how CRT may impact these dimensions simultaneously

within authentic middle school classrooms (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). A student may demonstrate

behavioral participation without feeling emotionally connected while another student may feel

connected but disengaged from academic tasks (Eccles & Roeser, 2023; Wang et al., 2020).

Understanding differences requires attention to students’ experiences and classroom interactions

rather than simply relying on aggregate measures of academic performance or attendance

(Franco et al., 2024). Qualitative inquiry can therefore complement existing quantitative

evidence by examining how students describe, experience, and respond to CRT practices during

the learning process.

The literature further suggests that implementation is influenced by contextual

conditions, including teacher preparation, professional learning, school culture, leadership,

collaboration, curriculum demands, and available resources (Bottiani et al., 2018; Chang &

Viesca, 2022; Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). These factors make it difficult to assume that the

same strategy will yield identical outcomes across classrooms. Rather, implementation is situated

within particular organizational and relational contexts. Teachers’ development and enactment of

CRT practices can change over time as educators reflect on their understandings and respond to

51

their teaching environments (Bottiani et al., 2018). Further research is needed which examines

not merely whether CRT is implemented but how teachers negotiate implementation within the

actual conditions of middle school classrooms.

Taken together, the literature does not indicate a need to choose between quantitative and

qualitative approaches. Rather, existing quantitative, survey, and perception-based research

provides evidence of the importance of CRT while leaving an important process-oriented

question under-addressed. The remaining gap concerns how teachers carry out, reflect upon, and

adapt CRT practices in authentic middle school classrooms and how students’ behavioral,

emotional, and cognitive engagement responds during this process (Franco et al., 2024). While

emerging studies have begun to examine implementation and middle-school contexts, the

literature remains insufficiently focused on the simultaneous relationship among teacher practice,

student engagement, classroom context, and reflective instruction adaptation over time literature

(Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Therefore, the proposed qualitative action research study is designed to address a specific

practice-based gap rather than to establish whether CRT is theoretically valuable. That broader

question has received substantial attention in the literature (Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 2021).

Rather, the proposed study will examine how CRT is enacted and refined within an authentic

middle school classroom and how these instructional changes are experienced through students’

behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. A qualitative action research design is

appropriate for this study since it allows for systematic examination of classroom experiences

while supporting an iterative process of reflection, adaptation, and evaluation (Mertler, 2024;

Stringer & Aragón, 2020). This study therefore extends the extant scholarship by providing a

closer examination of CRT implementation as a situated and evolving classroom process.

52

Action Research in Educational Settings

Action research is distinguished from other pedagogically-oriented methods by its

simultaneous focus on generating and applying knowledge relevant to professional practice

(Mertler, 2024). Unlike research designed to understand education in isolation from practice,

action research is inherently improvement-focused and grounded in the real-world educational

contexts in which problems arise (Parkhouse et al., 2021; Stringer & Aragón, 2020). Action

research traces its roots to Lewin’s (1946) conception of research as a cyclical process that

includes planning, action, observation, and feedback. Action research has since undergone

considerable evolution while retaining its emphasis on professional practice and improvement

(Mertler, 2024; Stringer & Aragón, 2020). These characteristics render action research

particularly relevant to the improvement-oriented educational concerns related to classroom

practice and students’ experiences of learning and teaching.

A key characteristic of action research is its emphasis on teachers as knowers and

contributors to professional knowledge (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2015). While traditional

research approaches tend to adopt an academic gaze on teachers as objects of study, action

research productively conceptualizes educators as contributors of knowledge pertaining to their

practice (Mertler, 2024). In particular, action research highlights the importance of practitioner

knowledge for tackling educational problems that emerge in specific contexts. Similarly, Dana

and Yendol-Hoppey (2009) note that teacher inquiry is critical for achieving reflective,

evidence-based professional practice. This orientation connects teacher inquiry to culturally

responsive teaching (CRT) by underscoring the importance of context when investigating

practice. CRT acknowledges that students are multi-faceted individuals who bring a range of

cultural backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences to the classroom; therefore, responsive

53

practice requires understanding students beyond generic conceptions of learning and instruction

(Canaras, 2022; Gay, 2021). Accordingly, both action research and CRT emphasize the

importance of context in professional practice.

Another similarity between action research and CRT is the role of reflection. Reflection is

a critical mechanism by which professionals can interrogate their assumptions, actions, and

perspectives and evaluate their impact on practice (Schön, 2017). In the context of teaching

practice, reflection facilitates teachers’ awareness of their challenges and opportunities for

growth while acknowledging the complexity of the contexts in which they operate

(Darling-Hammond et al., 2020). Similarly, reflection is a core mechanism of CRT, as it

facilitates educators’ interrogation of their assumptions and biases related to students’ cultural

backgrounds (Gay, 2021). At the level of practice, reflective practice goes beyond considerations

of general pedagogy to examine issues of fit, belonging, equity, and inclusiveness in the

classroom. By extension, reflection can enable teachers to become more aware of the ways in

which their perspectives and actions might hinder or facilitate students’ cultural identities and

engagement in learning. From this perspective, Darling-Hammond et al. (2020) and Gay (2021)

provide robust theoretical grounding for action research as a means of advancing CRT. In

particular, the iterative nature of inquiry and reflective practice highlighted by Mertler (2024) is

conducive to the complex, evolving concerns of CRT.

A final characteristic of action research that connects to CRT is collaboration.

Collaboration is a key mechanism by which action research operationalizes its commitment to

improvement, as collaborative inquiry fosters educators’ collective understanding of their

professional contexts (Parkhouse et al., 2021; Stringer & Aragón, 2020). In particular,

collaborative approaches to inquiry can facilitate richer discussions of educational problems than

54

those that might emerge from individual investigation. This is critical to the concerns of CRT, as

issues of culture and identity seldom arise in isolation or have simple answers applicable to all

contexts (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Gay, 2021). In addition, collaborative inquiry can

promote reflective practice, as teachers engage in collective deliberation about their practices,

perspectives, and experiences (Mertler, 2024). These dynamics facilitate CRT by enhancing

educators’ understanding of their contexts and reflecting on their practice in ways that promote

inclusive, equitable instruction. Overall, the collaborative nature of inquiry supports the

improvement-oriented objectives of action research while advancing educators’ reflective

practices.

The aforementioned characteristics of action research highlight its relevance to CRT, but

the practical application of inquiry in educational settings is frequently limited by the constraints

of teachers’ practice (Cantrell & Powell, 2021; Mertler, 2024; Parkhouse et al., 2021). First and

foremost, teachers typically have limited time to devote to inquiry, as the competing demands of

their practice leave them with fewer opportunities to engage in processes of reflection and

collaborative practice (Mertler, 2024). In addition, teachers often require substantial levels of

support to develop the skills necessary for engaging in inquiry (Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2009).

Finally, many school systems prioritize rapid instructional progress over reflective practice,

which renders the conditions for inquiry incompatible with the requirements of many educators

(Fullan, 2007). Accordingly, the literature indicates that action research is most productive under

certain conditions, namely the presence of administrative support and opportunities for

professional learning and collaboration (Cantrell & Powell, 2021; Mertler, 2024; Parkhouse et

al., 2021).

55

The aforementioned discussion highlights the ways in which action research can facilitate

educational improvement by building upon the strengths of professional practice. In particular,

action research offers a pathway for advancing reflective, collaborative, improvement-oriented

practice that integrates theory and practice while responding to the demands of the context

(Cantrell & Powell, 2021; Mertler, 2024; Parkhouse et al., 2021). This perspective is particularly

relevant to the concerns of CRT, as both share similar commitments to contextual responsiveness

rooted in inquiry and reflection. In particular, the literature suggests that inquiry is critical for

achieving meaningful improvements in culturally responsive practice. Parkhouse et al. (2021)

note that recent trends in CRT scholarship highlight the inadequacy of conceptualizing

responsiveness as a set of stand-alone skills or techniques. Instead, researchers argue that

scholars must acknowledge the importance of context in influencing the ways in which educators

can implement responsive strategies.

The relevance of context is further supported by the literature on professional practice,

which highlights the limitations that schools’ structures and practices can impose on reflective,

collaborative practice (Cantrell & Powell, 2021; Parkhouse et al., 2021). In particular,

administrative support, opportunities for professional learning, and collaborative relationships

are critical determinants of whether educators can engage in reflective practice (Cantrell &

Powell, 2021; Parkhouse et al., 2021). Accordingly, inquiry-oriented approaches such as action

research are critical for advancing reflective, improvement-focused practice. In turn, such

practices are essential for implementing CRT, as they acknowledge the complexity of contexts

and the need to reflect on one’s assumptions and practices when working with diverse students

(Ladson-Billings, 2021). Overall, the literature offers robust theoretical grounding for action

56

research as a means of advancing reflective, collaborative practice that is conducive to the

complex concerns of CRT.

Another critical issue related to the intersection between action research and CRT is the

perspectives of students. While several of the works cited emphasize the importance of listening

to the voices of those served by the educational system, many of these pieces focus on the role of

educators in interrogating their practices and assumptions (Ladson-Billings, 2021). One piece of

literature that productively centers students’ voices is Aguayo et al. (2024); that work highlights

the need to adopt a student-centered perspective when investigating the role of CRT. In

particular, Aguayo et al. note that students’ voices can offer insight into meaningful engagement,

feelings of belonging, and general educational experiences. This perspective is particularly

relevant to CRT, as that approach conceptualizes students as holistic persons who bring their

cultural viewpoints to the educational setting (Ladson-Billings, 2021). Therefore, students’

voices are critical to exploring culturally responsive engagement as an evolving, multifaceted

concept (Gay, 2021). In particular, the relevance of students’ voices relates most directly to their

perspectives on engagement as a broad construct that reflects their lived experiences within a

classroom.

The aforementioned discussion highlights the ways in which action research can

productively apply to the concerns of CRT by emphasizing reflection, collaboration, and context.

These characteristics of inquiry are critical to advancing understanding of culturally responsive

practice because they acknowledge the complexity of the contexts in which educators operate

while facilitating reflective, improvement-oriented practice (Gay, 2021). However, the discussion

has revealed that much of the literature on both topics lacks a focus on the unique concerns of

middle school students. The few pieces that focus on students’ voices highlight their perspectives

57

on engagement in general (Aguayo et al., 2024) and CRT specifically (Franco et al., 2024). As a

transitional period during which students navigate numerous social, physical, and emotional

changes, middle school highlights the importance of engagement and belonging to students’

educational experiences (Eccles & Roeser, 2023). The intersection between practitioner inquiry

and students’ voices within a middle school setting is a critical area of investigation that the

literature does not sufficiently explore. Overall, the literature offers a robust grounding for action

research as a means of advancing reflective, collaborative practice, but there are areas for further

exploration within the context of middle school education and students’ perspectives.

Overall, the literature provides a thorough grounding for the connections between action

research and CRT. The former methodology aligns with the tenets of the latter approach by

emphasizing practitioners’ contextual awareness, encouraging reflective practice, and

acknowledging the importance of collaboration for improvement (Mertler, 2024; Parkhouse et

al., 2021). However, the literature contains several gaps that limit understanding of these

connections in several critical areas (Franco et al., 2024). Specifically, existing research offers

limited insights into the intersection between action research and CRT within the context of

middle school education. Furthermore, the concerns of students navigating this developmental

stage are inadequately addressed within bodies of work, despite their relevance to the themes of

engagement and belonging (Gay, 2021). The literature’s limitations provide a rationale for

investigating action research as a means of understanding CRT within the specific context of

middle school while leaving the specifics of methodology, participants, and data collection to

future work.

58

Summary

This chapter reviewed the literature on culturally responsive teaching, student

engagement, and middle school education to provide the background for the proposed study. The

reviewed articles revealed that culturally responsive pedagogy has emerged from multicultural

education through various forms, including culturally relevant pedagogy and sustaining

pedagogy, to demand a more inclusive approach to instruction that promotes identity affirmation

and academic excellence (Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 2021; Paris & Alim, 2017). The literature

also demonstrated that student engagement is a multidimensional construct that emerges from

behavioral, emotional, and cognitive processes that take place in classrooms through

student-climate interactions, relationships, psychological safety, and belonging (Fredricks et al.,

2019; Osher et al., 2020). Therefore, the reviewed literature highlighted the need to promote

culturally responsive practices in classrooms to ensure that students feel included and engaged.

Furthermore, the chapter provided the theoretical and conceptual foundations of the

proposed study. Culturally Relevant Pedagogy and Sociocultural Learning Theory were reviewed

to reveal how they inform the research question. The two frameworks are foundational to the

study because they postulate that learning is a socially and culturally mediated process that takes

place in classrooms through teachers’ engagement with students’ cultural knowledge and lived

experiences (Ladson-Billings, 2021; Vygotsky, 1978). The chapter also identified various

research gaps related to the research question, including the tendency of the existing literature to

emphasize teachers’ perceptions of culturally responsive teaching practices rather than the

processes themselves. There was also a need to focus on middle school education, which was not

the case with previous studies on culturally responsive pedagogy, and utilize a qualitative

approach to examine the construct in depth (Darling-Hammond et al., 2020; Franco et al., 2024;

59

Mertler, 2024). Therefore, the need for this study became evident from the body of knowledge

presented in the chapter, which created a solid foundation for proposing the qualitative action

research study examined in this paper. The next section of this paper will present the methods

that will be used in the proposed action research study, including the research design, setting,

participants, procedure, data analysis plan, and ethical considerations.

60

References

Aguayo, D., Good, M. W., Diem, S., Herman, K. C., Burke, J., Davis, T., Hall, K., London, C., &

Reinke, W. M. (2023). Promoting district-level culturally responsive practices.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(3), 471–506.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X231161041

Aguayo, D., Herman, K. C., Debnam, K. J., McCree, N., Smith, L. H., & Reinke, W. M. (2024).

Centering students’ voices in the exploration of in-classroom culturally responsive

practices. Journal of School Psychology, 105, Article 101317.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101317

Alkhudiry, R. (2022). The contribution of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory in mediating L2

knowledge co-construction. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 12(10).

https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1210.19

Allen, K. A., Kern, M. L., Rozek, C. S., McInerney, D. M., & Slavich, G. M. (2021). Belonging:

A review of conceptual issues, an integrative framework, and directions for future

research. Australian Journal of Psychology, 73(1), 87–102.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2021.1883409

Andrews, P. G., & Wright, A. L. (2024). Middle-level teacher development and identity: A

review of the literature. Education Sciences, 14(11), Article 1207.

https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111207

Anyichie, A. C., Butler, D. L., & Nashon, S. M. (2023). Exploring teacher practices for

enhancing student engagement in culturally diverse classrooms. Journal of Pedagogical

Research, 7(5), 183–207. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1411779

61

Anyichie, A. C., Butler, D. L., Perry, N. E., & Nashon, S. M. (2023). Examining classroom

contexts in support of culturally diverse learners’ engagement: An integration of

self-regulated learning and culturally responsive pedagogical practices. Frontline

Learning Research, 11(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v11i1.1115

Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school:

Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the

Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303

Aronson, B., & Laughter, J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A

synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1),

163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066

Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., den Brok, P., Biemans, H. J., & Kerman, N. T. (2023).

Modeling teachers’ and students’ attitudes, emotions, and perceptions in blended

education: Towards post-pandemic education. The International Journal of Management

Education, 21(2), Article 100803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100803

Banks, J. A. (2008). An introduction to multicultural education. University of Washington.

https://lccn.loc.gov/2017048635

Barksdale, C., Peters, M. L., & Corrales, A. (2021). Middle school students’ perceptions of

classroom climate and its relationship to achievement. Educational Studies, 47(1),

84–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1664411

Boat, A. A., Holquist, S. E., & Redmond, N. M. (2025). Student-teacher developmental

relationships: A mechanism through which culturally responsive school environments

promote positive outcomes for students of color. Psychology in the Schools, 62(2),

584–606. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23340

62

Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2021). Systematic approaches to a successful

literature review (3rd ed.). SAGE.

Buttimer, C. J., Colwell, R., Coleman, D., Faruqi, F., Larke, L., & Reich, J. (2022). What’s lost,

what’s left, what’s next: Lessons learned from the lived experiences of teachers during

the pandemic. Berkeley Review of Education, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.5070/B811251975

Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell

Sage Foundation.

Byrd, C. M. (2017). The complexity of school racial climate: Reliability and validity of a new

measure for secondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(4),

700–721. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12179

Byrd, C. M. (2019). A measure of school racial socialization and quality of intergroup

interactions. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(2), 137–151.

https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000202

Caingcoy, M. (2023). Culturally responsive pedagogy: A systematic overview. SSRN Electronic

Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4842773

Camiring-Picpican, H., Flores, K., Caban, R., Mohadali, S., Galdonez, D., & Alih, C. (2025).

Pedagogical innovations based on Philippine cultural practices: A framework for

culturally responsive teaching in higher education. International Journal on Culture,

History, and Religion, 7(SI2), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.63931/ijchr.v7iSI2.168

Canaras, A. (2022). Cultivating genius: An equity framework for culturally and historically

responsive literacy [Book review]. Studies in Social Justice, 16(1), 291–293.

63

Cantrell, S. C., & Powell, R. (2021). A framework for culturally responsive practices:

Implementing the culturally responsive instruction observation protocol (CRIOP) in K–8

classrooms. https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/5671145#

Carey, R. L., Farinde-Wu, A., Milner, H. R., IV, & Delale-O’Connor, L. (2018). The culture and

teaching gap: What is it, and how can teacher educators help to close it? In The Wiley

handbook of teaching and learning (pp. 59–78). Wiley.

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118955901.ch3

Chang, W. C., & Viesca, K. M. (2022). Preparing teachers for culturally responsive/relevant

pedagogy (CRP): A critical review of research. Teachers College Record, 124(2),

197–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681221086676

Ciampa, K., & Reisboard, D. (2024). Empowering teacher educators: Advancing culturally

responsive practices through professional development. Action in Teacher Education,

46(4), 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2024.2357088

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2015). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next

generation. Teachers College Press.

Cook-Sather, A. (2020). Student voice across contexts: Fostering student agency in today’s

schools. Theory Into Practice, 59(2), 182–191.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1705091

Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2009). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research:

Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry. Corwin Press.

Daniel, J., Quartz, K. H., & Oakes, J. (2019). Teaching in community schools: Creating

conditions for deeper learning. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 453–480.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821126

64

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications

for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied

Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

Debnam, K. J., Kaihoi, C. A., Pas, E. T., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2024). A school-wide approach to

cultural responsivity and student engagement: A randomized trial of Double Check in

middle schools. Journal of School Psychology, 107, Article 101362.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2024.101362

Dee, T. S., & Penner, E. K. (2017). The causal effects of cultural relevance: Evidence from an

ethnic studies curriculum. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 127–166.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216677002

DuFour, R., & DuFour, R. (2013). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning

communities at work. Solution Tree Press.

Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2023). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. In

Handbook of adolescent psychology (4th ed.). Wiley.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00725.x

Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the

workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Wiley.

https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12509

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton.

Evans, L. M., Turner, C. R., & Allen, K. R. (2020). “Good teachers” with “good intentions”:

Misappropriations of culturally responsive pedagogy. Journal of Urban Learning,

Teaching, and Research, 15(1), 51–73. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1283416

65

Franco, M. P., Bottiani, J. H., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2024). Assessing teachers’ culturally

responsive classroom practice in PK–12 schools: A systematic review of teacher-,

student-, and observer-report measures. Review of Educational Research, 94(5), 743–798.

https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231208720

Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and

adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning

and Instruction, 43, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002

Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.

Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3rd ed.).

Teachers College Press. press. https://doi.org/10.65528/9780807776704

Gay, G. (2021). Culturally responsive teaching: Ideas, actions, and effects. In Handbook of urban

education (pp. 212–233). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429331435-16

Geesa, R. L., Rose, M. A., Stith, K. M., Lowery, K., & Caniglia, J. (2021). Equity, diversity, and

inclusion within integrative STEM education. In Leadership in integrative STEM

education: Collaborative strategies for facilitating an experiential and student-centered

culture (pp. 51–66).

Hammerstein, S., König, C., Dreisörner, T., & Frey, A. (2021). Effects of COVID-19-related

school closures on student achievement—A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology,

12, Article 746289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289

Hammond, Z. (2014). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain: Promoting authentic

engagement and rigor among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Corwin Press.

https://www.academia.edu/download/107169645/culturally-responsive-teaching-and-the-

66

brain-promoting-authentic-engagement-and-rigor-among-culturally-and-linguistically-div

erse-studen.pdf

Hammond, Z. (2021). Liberatory education: Integrating the science of learning and culturally

responsive practice. American Educator, 45(2), 4–9. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1305167

Hernández, M. M., Kornienko, O., Figueroa, J. M., Coker, M., Paredes, K., Toth, C., ... Ha, T.

(2025). Identifying culturally relevant school support profiles and links to academic

functioning in adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 54(3), 785–806.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-024-02098-0

Herrera, S. G. (2022). Biography-driven culturally responsive teaching: Honoring race,

ethnicity, and personal history. Teachers College Press.

Hernandez, A. (2022). Closing the achievement gap in the classroom through culturally relevant

pedagogy. Journal of Education and Learning, 11(2), 1–21.

https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v11n2p1

Hine, G. S. (2013). The importance of action research in teacher education programs. Issues in

Educational Research, 23(2), 151–163.

https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.354483461821862

Idrus, F., & Sohid, M. (2023). Teachers’ expectations and challenges in using culturally

responsive teaching (CRT) strategies in the ESL classroom. Journal of Language

Teaching and Research, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1403.10

Ishimaru, A. M. (2019). Just schools: Building equitable collaborations with families and

communities. Teachers College Press. https://doi.org/10.65528/9780807778159

Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Williams, B. (2025). Transformative social and emotional

learning (SEL): Toward SEL in service of educational equity and excellence. In Social

67

and emotional learning (pp. 39–62). Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2019.1623032

Jagers, R. J., Rivas-Drake, D., & Borowski, T. (2018). Equity & social and emotional learning: A

cultural analysis. CASEL Assessment Work Group Brief Series.

https://casel.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/CASEL-Resources-Measuring-SEL.pdf

Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher

Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505

Khalifa, M. (2020). Culturally responsive school leadership. Harvard Education Press.

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED589989

Kihwele, J. E. (2026). Addressing pedagogical challenges in socially and culturally diverse

classrooms through action research. Journal for Multicultural Education, 20(1), 42–54.

https://doi.org/10.1108/JME-04-2025-0067

Kilag, O. K. T., Maghanoy, D. A. F., Calzada-Seraña, K. R. D. D., & Ponte, R. B. (2024).

Integrating Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory into online instruction: A case study.

http://e-science.net/index.php/EJLHSS

Kondo, C. S. (2022). Walking the talk: Employing culturally relevant pedagogy in teacher

education. Teachers College Record, 124(4), 65–94.

https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681221096797

Ladson-Billings, G. (2021a). I’m here for the hard re-set: Post pandemic pedagogy to preserve

our culture. Equity & Excellence in Education, 54(1), 68–78.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2020.1863883

Ladson-Billings, G. (2021b). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Asking a different question. Teachers

College Press. https://doi.org/10.65528/9780807779859

68

Ladson-Billings, G. (2024). How pedagogy makes the difference in U.S. schools. Daedalus,

153(4), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_02106

Lawson, H. A., & Lawson, M. A. (2020). Student engagement and disengagement as a collective

action problem. Education Sciences, 10(8), Article 212.

https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10080212

Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46.

Lindsey, D. B., Martinez, R. S., Lindsey, R. B., & Myatt, K. T. (2019). Culturally proficient

coaching: Supporting educators to create equitable schools. Corwin Press.

https://doi.org/10.4135/9781544356501

Lozano Castillo, R. (2024). Teachers’ perspectives, challenges and opportunities of cultural

diversity in the framework of culturally responsive teaching.

https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2024050325474

Lundgren, H., Carter, A. D., & Klein, E. (2025). Cultural competence in leadership coaching

education: What can we learn from the mentoring literature? Human Resource

Development Review. Advance online publication.

https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843251400974

Mahoney, J. L., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2018). An update on social and emotional

learning outcome research. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(4), 18–23.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721718815668

Martin, A. D., & Spencer, T. (2020). Children’s literature, culturally responsive teaching, and

teacher identity: An action research inquiry in teacher education. Action in Teacher

Education, 42(4), 387–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1710728

69

Mertler, C. A. (2024). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators. SAGE.

https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/ajer/article/download/56076/pdf/0

Milner, H. R. (2021). Start where you are, but don’t stay there: Understanding diversity,

opportunity gaps, and teaching in today’s classrooms. Harvard Education Press.

https://tesl-ej.org/pdf/ej65/r5.pdf

Monteiro, V., Carvalho, C., & Santos, N. N. (2021). Creating a supportive classroom

environment through effective feedback: Effects on students’ school identification and

behavioral engagement. Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 661736.

https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.661736

Muñiz, J. (2020). Culturally responsive teaching: A reflection guide. New America.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED609136.pdf

Nelemans, S. A., Hale, W. W., III, Branje, S. J., Meeus, W. H., & Rudolph, K. D. (2018).

Individual differences in anxiety trajectories from Grades 2 to 8: Impact of the middle

school transition. Development and Psychopathology, 30(4), 1487–1501.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579417001584

Nganga, L., & Kambutu, J. (2024). Culturally responsive professional development programs for

teacher educators using community-based collaborative learning: Lessons learned from a

Native American community. Education Sciences, 14(7), Article 787.

https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070787

Nortvedt, G. A., Wiese, E., Brown, M., Burns, D., McNamara, G., O’Hara, J., ... Taneri, P. O.

(2020). Aiding culturally responsive assessment in schools in a globalising world.

Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 32(1), 5–27.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09316-w

70

Osher, D., Cantor, P., Berg, J., Steyer, L., & Rose, T. (2020). Drivers of human development:

How relationships and context shape learning and development. Applied Developmental

Science, 24(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2017.1398650

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (Eds.). (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning

for justice in a changing world. Teachers College Press.

Parkhouse, H., Gorlewski, J., Senechal, J., & Lu, C. Y. (2021). Ripple effects: How teacher

action research on culturally relevant education can promote systemic change. Action in

Teacher Education, 43(4), 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2021.1896395

Pathak, P., Sharma, A. V. N. S., Mukherjee, R., Sharma, A., & Garg, R. (2024). Culturally

responsive teaching: Strategies for fostering inclusive classrooms. Decision Making:

Applications in Management and Engineering, 7(1), 203–215.

https://dmame-journals.org/index.php/dmame/article/view/22/20

Portes, P. R., González Canché, M. S., Boada, D., & Whatley, M. E. (2018). Early evaluation

findings from the instructional conversation study: Culturally responsive teaching

outcomes for diverse learners in elementary school. American Educational Research

Journal, 55(3), 488–531. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217741089

Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective

teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A

meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529.

https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination

theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary

71

Educational Psychology, 61, Article 101860.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860

Schanding, G. T., Jr., Strait, G. G., Morgan, V. R., Short, R. J., Enderwitz, M., Babu, J., &

Templeton, M. A. (2023). Who’s included? Diversity, equity, and inclusion of students in

school psychology literature over the last decade. School Psychology Review, 52(4),

408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2021.1927831

Schön, D. A. (2017). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Routledge.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473

Sellers, K. M., & MacKenzie, A. H. (2024). Looking back to move forward: Exploring urban

secondary education teacher perceptions of culturally relevant pedagogy. Education and

Urban Society, 56(3), 263–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245221121668

Singha, R., Singha, S., Natal, M. S., Haokip, A. D., Thomas, J., & Riba, M. (2025). Cultural

competence, social-emotional learning. In Frameworks for multi-tiered systems of

support for trauma-informed educational settings (pp. 99–124). IGI Global Scientific

Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9020-7.ch005

Siwatu, K. O. (2007). Preservice teachers’ culturally responsive teaching self-efficacy and

outcome expectancy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1086–1101.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.07.011

Sleeter, C. (2018). Multicultural education past, present, and future: Struggles for dialog and

power-sharing. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 20(1), 5–20.

https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v20i1.1663

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on

engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral

72

and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233

Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping,

and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.),

Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_2

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines.

Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Stringer, E. T., & Aragón, A. O. (2020). Action research (5th ed.). SAGE.

UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education.

https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/reimagining-our-futures-together-new-social-contract-

education

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Harvard University Press.

Walker, M. E., Olivera-Aguilar, M., Lehman, B., Laitusis, C., Guzman-Orth, D., & Gholson, M.

(2023). Culturally responsive assessment: Provisional principles. ETS Research Report

Series, 2023(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12374

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic

engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional

perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12–23.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002

73

Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate: A review of the construct, measurement,

and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 315–352.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1

Wang, M.-T., Degol, J. L., & Henry, D. A. (2020). An integrative

development-in-sociocultural-context model for children’s engagement in learning.

American Psychologist, 75(9), 1086–1102. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000522

Wang, M. T., & Hofkens, T. L. (2020). Beyond classroom academics: A school-wide and

multi-contextual perspective on student engagement in school. Adolescent Research

Review, 5(4), 419–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-019-00115-z

Wentzel, K. R. (2017). Peer relationships, motivation, and academic performance at school. In A.

J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation:

Theory and application (2nd ed., pp. 586–603). Guilford Press.

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-17591-031

Yang, C., Bear, G. G., & May, H. (2018). Multilevel associations between school-wide

social–emotional learning approach and student engagement across elementary, middle,

and high schools. School Psychology Review, 47(1), 45–61.

https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR-2017-0003.V47-1

Yelder-Stovall, S. (2026). Implementing Culturally Responsive Teaching: A Qualitative Content

Analysis of Emerging Themes. Doctor of Education (EdD). 274.

https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/edd/274