2 original pages due saturday morning

School of Education and Human Development at the University of Colorado Denver source

CLDE Faculty Publications Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Education

(CLDE) Faculty Scholarship

2011

Mindful Reflection as a Process for Developing Culturally Responsive Practices Barbara Dray University of Colorado Denver, [email protected]

Debora Basler Wisneski

Follow this and additional works at: http://source.ucdenver.edu/clde_publications

Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Education (CLDE) Faculty Scholarship at source. It has been accepted for inclusion in CLDE Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of source. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Recommended Citation Dray, B. J. & Wisneski, D. B. (2011). Mindful Reflection as a Process for Developing Culturally Responsive Practices. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 44(1), 28-36.

Becoming a culturally responsive edu- cator has been at the forefront of the movement to reduce inappropriate referrals to special education and dis- proportionate representation of stu- dents of color within special education (Fiedler, Chiang, Van Haren, Jorgensen, Halberg, & Boreson, 2008; National Center for Culturally Responsive Edu- cational Systems, 2005). However, for many educators, working with a diverse student population can be more difficult when the student comes from a background that is unfamiliar to the teacher (Harry & Klingner, 2006). As teacher educators who prepare educa- tors for inclusionary settings in diverse urban areas, we have noticed that issues often arise when a teacher or teacher candidate attempts to make meaning of behavior in the classroom, particularly a behavior that concerns student engagement, classroom man- agement, or discipline of students with whom the teacher has a cultural dis- connect. Teachers are not often aware of how diversity affects the way that they interpret students’ actions and the ways that they interact with their stu-

dents. Teachers may misinterpret a cul- tural difference as a potential disability.

• How does diversity influence teachers’ perceptions of behavior?

• Is there a way to use a process of mindful reflection and communica- tion (Langer, 1989; Langer & Moldo- veanu, 2000a) to help support the development of culturally respon- sive practices?

What Does Diversity Mean to Teachers?

Cultural diversity is a dynamic and relational reality that exists between persons rather than within any single person. For this reason, its challenge lies not so much in different behaviors as in the diverse meanings attributed to those behaviors. (Barrera & Corso, 2003, p. 3)

We agree with Barrera and Corso (2003) that diversity is never problem- atic in and of itself but “it is the response of individuals and institutions to diversity that can be problematic” (p. 8). A teacher can understand or

misunderstand his or her diverse social world in many ways. These under- standings and misunderstandings are attributable to differences in gender, race, class, geographic location, lan- guage, religion, family structures, abili- ties, and family and personal history. These myriad differences make diversi- ty a way of life rather than a problem to be solved or fixed by casting the other as deficient. Instead, a teacher should view diversity as an opportuni- ty to expand his or her understanding of himself or herself and the world. Before a teacher can accept and

embrace diversity in the classroom, he or she must reflect on the challenges that can interfere with acceptance. For example, educators overidentify stu- dents of color, particularly African Americans, in the category of emo- tional and behavioral disorder (EBD), although these students are underrep- resented in the category of learning disabilities (LD; Harry & Klingner, 2006; Neal, McCray, & Webb-Johnson, 2003). Students of color also continue to experience higher rates of discipline referrals, as well as lower academic achievement (Drakeford, 2006; King,TE

A C H IN G E xc ep ti on a l C h il d re n , V o l. 44 , N o . 1, p p . 28 -3 6. C o p yr ig h t 20 11 C E C .

Mindful Reflection as a Process for

Developing Culturally Responsive Practices

Barbara J. Dray and Debora Basler Wisneski

28 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Behavior Interventions

Harris-Murri, & Artiles, 2006). Some have argued that these outcomes occur partially because of the potential cul- tural, racial, and economic mismatch with the primarily White middle-class teaching force (Cartledge, Singh, &

Gibson, 2008; Garcia & Ortiz, 2006). This argument suggests that without direct attention to cultural and individ- ual differences in the classroom, some students, including those labeled LD or EBD, have limited opportunities to suc- ceed. One recommendation that is cen- tral to the process discussed in this article is to assist teachers in develop-

ing reflective practices to gain a deeper understanding of institutions, personal assumptions, and common communi- cation patterns that create tensions and misunderstandings between teachers and their students (e.g., Barrera &

Corso, 2003; Garcia & Guerra, 2004; Kalyanpur & Harry, 1999).

Teacher Reflections: Confronting Bias in Classroom Interactions

In special education, scholars and edu- cators have recognized the need for teachers to be sensitive to diversity in

the classroom; this sensitivity requires that teachers look inward and reflect on their personal assumptions and biases (e.g., Fiedler et al., 2008; King et al., 2006; Wisneski & Dray, 2009). Kendall (1996) calls for teachers to take the “emotional risk” to examine their deeply held beliefs that can affect how they treat students. She suggests that this inward reflection requires being willing to listen and change to respond to the student who may be different in some way. Jacobson (2003) asks teachers to confront their discom- fort through self-reflection and become aware of the prejudices and biases that everyone may have. Ramsey (2004) states, “we need to know ourselves—to honestly see our reactions to other individuals and the larger world and to analyze our underlying assumptions” (p. 20). In each case, there is the

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN � SEPT/OCT 2011 29

Teachers are not often aware of how diversity affects the way that they interpret students’ actions and the ways that they interact with their students on a daily basis.

understanding that assumptions about various types of diversity in society are heavily value-laden and potentially harmful to students. One example of negative attitudes

toward some students and families is the deficit thinking model (Valencia, 1997; see box, “What Is the Deficit Thinking Model?”). Deficit thinking is an outcome of inaccurate and often negative attributions about students or their families. It is an unexamined prejudice often directed at students of color or from low socioeconomic back- grounds, even by teachers who may consider themselves supportive advo- cates of such students. Therefore, teachers need to self-reflect to unpack attributions that are potentially linked to racism, power, or privilege so that they can work more effectively and fairly with diversity in the classroom.

Reconsidering Communication in the Classroom

In addition to reflecting on personal beliefs, teachers may need to reconsid- er how they communicate with stu- dents in the classroom. According to Ramsey (2004, p. 56), “effective com- munication requires paying close attention to what others are saying both verbally and nonverbally and genuinely trying to see and understand their perspectives, as we are making oneself understood.” Effective commu- nication requires teachers to analyze not only students’ behaviors but also their own behaviors and ways of communicating.

In intercultural communication the- ories, mindfulness is a core concept used to help individuals reframe and reinterpret unfamiliar behavior or ways of communicating to understand rather than to judge others (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003). According to the work of Langer (1989), mindfulness is the ability to be conscious about commu- nication with others. It is the process of purposefully responding to others by moving away from automatic-pilot or mindless responses that are based on a person’s own cultural frames of reference. Automatic pilot is the process in which a person is not con- scious or aware of her or his responses to others. Automatic pilot, or scripted behavior, serves well in familiar situa- tions but not in intercultural communi- cation. “The problem of misinterpret- ing strangers’ behavior is compounded when we communicate with strangers because we tend to interpret strangers’ behavior on the basis of our own frames of reference” (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003, p. 283). Attributions are the explanations

that people may give to a behavior (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003). They are the way that a person attributes or gives meaning to why people behave the way that they do, and attributions guide how a person responds to the behavior of others. A person who is aware of his or her attributions and takes time to reflect on them can mini- mize misattribution or misinterpreta- tion of why someone behaves the way that he or she does.

Additionally, a person’s cultural frame of reference or cultural back- ground, as well as life experiences, guides how a person responds to oth- ers. When a person’s cultural back- ground and/or life experiences are vastly different from those of people with whom he or she is interacting, there is a risk for a culture clash or misunderstanding of cultures that can lead to conflict or misattribution (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003). Therefore, teachers within diverse communities should become highly aware of their personal cultural background and lens for understanding behavior, as well as cultural norms or tendencies of others, so that they can reduce attributions that lead to prejudice, deficit thinking, and overgeneralizations. Gudykunst and Kim (2003) suggest

that there are three cognitive processes, or types of attributions involved in the perception of communicating with oth- ers: description, interpretation, and evaluation.

1. Description is an account of what a person observed or experienced that does not attribute social signifi- cance to the behavior. It includes what the person heard and saw. People typically gather descriptions by observational data, counting, or anecdotal records. For example, “Enrique raised his hand 10 times during the story read-aloud” is a description of what occurred in the classroom.

2. Interpretation is the process of infer- ring what the behavior meant, thus attributing social significance to the behavior. Educators must remember that behaviors can have multiple interpretations. For example, at least three separate interpretative state- ments are possible for the descrip- tive example “Enrique raised his hand 10 times during story read- aloud”: (a) Enrique was disruptive during story read-aloud; (b) Enrique enjoyed the story; or (c) Enrique wanted attention.

3. Evaluation is the process of attri- buting positive or negative social significance to a behavior. For example, the interpretive statement

30 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

What Is the Deficit Thinking Model?

In the deficit thinking model, teachers believe that students fail in school because of the student’s own deficiencies, not because of unfair school poli- cies or differential treatment from teachers. A deficit perspective situates school failure within the student and suggests that deficiencies exist within the student or his or her home life and that these deficiencies are the cause of academic failure. Another common deficit perspective attributes student failure to parents and families who do not value education. As a result, teachers’ attributions that are rooted in a deficit perspective guide an often ill-informed understanding that a student’s failures are attributable to the student’s perceived lack of ability, linguistic inferiority, or family dysfunction (Garcia & Guerra, 2004; Valencia, 1997).

“Enrique wants attention” as an evaluative statement could vary from “I don’t like that; Enrique needs to learn better turn-taking skills” to “I like that Enrique takes initiative to participate during read- alouds.” It is important to recog- nize that attributions can be nega- tive or positive and may lead to overgeneralizations and prejudice, which classroom teachers should minimize.

Process for Mindful Reflection and Communication

Reacting to students’ behavior on auto- matic pilot by jumping to conclusions or making assumptions about students’ behaviors is very easy to do in the con- text of a busy school day. When teach- ers have difficulty interacting with stu- dents in the classroom, emotions and assumptions can cloud perceptions; likewise, teachers are more likely to give a student the benefit of the doubt when clashes occur if the student behaves in a way that the teacher desires. Therefore, just as teachers of students with disabilities often take anecdotal notes or keep running records of students’ academic perform- ance for assessment purposes, these same skills are necessary when reflect-

ing on attributions about students in the classroom. Similar to the process of operationalizing behavior (that is, describing behavior so that it is observ- able and measurable) during a func- tional behavior analysis, we invite teachers to think about how they can understand the deeper meaning of behavior in daily classroom interac- tions of students who may or may not be labeled with a disability but who present behavior challenges in the classroom.

The following example of a teacher who used the process of mindful reflection and communication to unpack attributions of a student whom she perceived as having troubling behavior draws on the work of Carol Archer, who frames the prevention of culture clashes as the culture bump process (see Archer, 1990, 2003); and Ellen Langer, who has researched the importance of mindfulness as a tool for prejudice reduction (see Langer, 1989; Langer & Moldoveanu, 2000b). We developed this process and the vignette as a result of our collective experiences working with teachers to help them rethink troubling behavior in the classroom and learn to respond differently. Teachers often have deep concern for students who are easily distracted or disruptive during class- room activities, yet they often interpret students’ perceived troubling behavior as a dysfunction of the student instead of examining alternative explanations for the behavior (e.g., lack of eye con- tact in one culture might indicate high respect; whereas in another, it might indicate lack of respect). We use this common concern to walk through the process of understanding the deeper meaning of behavior in the classroom by introducing and applying a process

for mindful reflection and commu- nication. The following case study describes and illustrates each step of the process by using a situation in which Ms. Marten (the classroom teacher) is reflecting with a mentor teacher on her attributions about a student.

Step 1: Explain the Attributions That You Have About the Student

When unpacking attributions about students in the classroom, we recom-

mend taking a moment to ask yourself the following questions:

• Have I already interpreted the behavior?

• Am I making assumptions about why the student behaves the way that he or she does?

• Have I already passed judgment on whether the behavior was good or bad? Stop and describe what you and the student said and did and in what order.

• What leads you to believe that the behavior was wrong or desirable?

• What about the behavior leads to your interpretation?

Isolated incidents rarely paint the clearest picture of the situation, so teachers should collect notes on at least three incidents of student behav- ior over an extended period of time (at least over a 2–4 week period) and at different times of the day (e.g., across content areas and different instruction- al settings). The educator must not blame or label the student or the behavior. The emphasis is on listening, observing to understand, and being willing to learn something new and dif- ferent. The following description of Ms. Marten’s experience demonstrates this process:

Ms. Marten first mentioned to her mentor teacher that Antwan was disruptive during small- group guided reading. When Ms. Marten’s mentor asked her to describe exactly how Antwan was disruptive, Ms. Marten restated that Antwan read along while she conducted guided reading and then began to tell a story about what he had done on the weekend.

Step 2: Write Out and Reflect on Your Feelings and Thoughts When Working With the Student

Take into account potential issues of deficit thinking, prejudice, and over- generalizations. After a teacher has recalled the interaction, she or he may also reflect on her or his attitudes and feelings toward the student during the interaction. As Jacobson (2003)

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN � SEPT/OCT 2011 31

Just as teachers of students with disabilities often take anecdotal notes or keep running records of students’ academic performance

for assessment purposes, these same skills are necessary when reflecting on attributions about students in the classroom.

suggests, educators must constantly engage in self-reflection about their assumptions and attitudes toward stu- dents. If they are to imagine alternative possibilities to relating to others, they must acknowledge the depths of their perspectives. Teachers can ask them- selves the following questions:

• What attributes am I assigning to the student?

• Have I evaluated, interpreted, or described the behavior?

• How does this student make me feel?

• What are my worries or fears?

• What are my assumptions—why do I find the student’s behavior problematic?

At this point, the teacher has acknowledged his or her prejudices or deficit thinking, despite the difficulty and uncomfortable feelings that this reflection may reveal. The teacher reflects on and rewrites interpretive or evaluative statements in descriptive terms and begins to rethink why she or he responded to the student in a partic- ular way.

Ms. Marten asked herself, “Have I already interpreted the stu- dent’s behavior? What leads me to believe that Antwan did not follow directions?” She then real- ized that she was not describing the behavior but instead had already interpreted Antwan’s behavior or his actions, so she started to rethink and describe:

“He was mimicking—no wait, he was reading along while I read to the group, and then he began to tell a story about what he did on the weekend. Why do I perceive his behavior in a negative light? Mimic versus read-along? Why do I find his story inappropriate? Antwan is classified with a dis- ability and he is African Ameri- can: Am I making assumptions about his behavior? Do other stu- dents behave in a similar man- ner? How do I respond to other students in the class?”

Step 3: Consider Alternative Explanations by Reviewing Your Documentation and Reflections

This next part of the process more deeply examines the ways in which the teacher communicates and perceives the student and situation and reconsid- ers the initial interpretations. Review the explanations, and reflect on the reasons that the student may be doing what he or she does. Consider how this student’s behavior is similar to or different from other behavior in the classroom. Teachers can ask them- selves the following questions:

• What are my expectations for the situation?

• How is the student not meeting my expectations?

• In what way is the behavior inter- fering with learning?

Here Ms. Marten recognized that she was on automatic pilot when she became frustrated with the guided reading lesson because Antwan was not follow- ing the expected script of com- munication: the question- response-evaluation or teacher- student-teacher interaction in which the teacher asks a ques- tion, the student responds, and then the teacher responds with an evaluative statement relating to the student’s response. For example, the teacher asks, “What was the character doing?” The student answers, “He was eat- ing.” The teacher then responds, “Good job, he was eating an apple” or “Almost, he was preparing food.”

Ms. Marten could reinterpret Antwan’s reading along with her while she read the story for guid- ed reading as a clear attempt to show involvement and demon- strate his reading skills to indi- cate to his peers and to her that he could read too. Even though the process of guided reading includes the teacher reading alone rather than choral reading, Antwan could have been apply- ing the rules from a previous les- son that involved choral reading. His storytelling after the read-

aloud, on deeper reflection, showed connection with an inci- dent in the story about spending time with family on the week- ends. Antwan could have been making connections with the content of the story by adding how the story connected with his personal life.

Ms. Marten began to recognize that she was viewing Antwan’s behavior only in negative terms at first, but she wanted to be more positive when responding to his actions. Ms. Marten remembered that when Sarah had read along during guided reading in another group, she welcomed that behavior because she saw it as an additional opportunity for Sarah to practice her reading; however, she thought that Antwan’s behavior was disruptive. Why? Was it his tone, dialect, fluency, racial back- ground, gender, or some other factor? When Ms. Marten reflect- ed further, she realized that his classification as EBD made her more suspicious of his behavior, and the fact that he was African American had positioned him (in her mind) as more likely to mis- behave.

Step 4: Check Your Assumptions

Ask yourself the following questions:

• Does the student’s family notice the same behavior at home?

• How do family members interact with the student at home?

• Have there been any major changes or upsets in the home?

Share your reflections with a col- league, parents, and/or community members. Meet with parents to learn more about expected and observed behaviors in the home. After you have reflected on the

behavior and developed alternative explanations as well as possible biases, check your assumptions with individu- als with specialized training on work- ing with diversity, staff members who are familiar with or from the local community/culture, parents, and com- munity members who are familiar with

32 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

cultural norms of behavior. Consider talking with other professional person- nel who specialize in multiculturalism, English as a second language (ESL), or bilingual education. Be wary of col- leagues or informants who blame the student, community, or home life for the student’s behavior; instead you want someone who understands the deeper meaning of behavior and can offer alternative explanations (e.g., cul- tural, linguistic, interactional) that can help you unpack attributions and reframe them in a way that leads to productive solutions and positive out- comes for students.

Ms. Marten reviewed her reflec- tions with her mentor teacher, who had studied multicultural perspectives in education and who had strong ties to the neigh- borhood community. She dis- cussed her discomfort with some of the insights that she had uncovered related to Antwan’s disability and racial background that may have clouded her understanding of his behavior in the classroom. Her mentor com- mended Ms. Marten for taking the risk and examining her bias- es and reminded Ms. Marten that she also needed to meet with Antwan’s parents to ensure that she was interpreting the behavior appropriately.

Next, reach out to parents and fami- lies to learn more about their percep- tions and ideas. Share your interpreta- tions in a spirit of collaboration to learn from family members about their expectations and norms for behavior. Ask yourself the following questions:

• Am I operating from a different set of values or norms?

• How can I reach a middle ground?

• What are some alternative explana- tions or interpretations of the stu- dent’s behavior?

When Ms. Marten met with Antwan’s parents, they shared that they have a tight-knit family and that they attend a Baptist church regularly. On the week- ends, the minister encourages the congregation to participate

through call-and-response ser- mons. Antwan’s mother was a teacher’s aide for students who struggle with reading, so she did many interactive literacy activi- ties with Antwan because she found that he did better and was more motivated when he could actively participate. She had noticed that Antwan preferred to be interactive rather than remain quiet during activities. However, the mother also indicated that she was trying to teach him dif- ferent routines and behavioral expectations.

Step 5: Make a Plan

Ask yourself the following questions:

• How can you change or respond dif- ferently?

• What additional resources do you need to implement the plan effec- tively?

After teachers have considered alter- native explanations and developed a different interpretation of a situation, they are able to change their behavior. Teachers can experiment with respond- ing differently, noting what happens and reflecting on their reactions and feelings, as well as on the student’s response. The teacher should develop and implement a plan to change the classroom environment or his or her actions, and he or she should reexam- ine expectations for the student.

Ms. Marten decided to be proac- tive by giving explicit directions about class routines to Antwan before he asked. Ms. Marten decided to listen to Antwan’s statements in class for content and focus on understanding what he was trying to communi- cate, rather than whether his immediate expression followed the typical teacher-student-

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN � SEPT/OCT 2011 33

teacher response pattern. For example, instead of rejecting Antwan’s comments if he did not raise his hand, Ms. Marten decided to respond to the mean- ing of his comment before reminding him to raise his hand, thereby recognizing and accept- ing his desire and attempts to participate in class discussions and lessons. At times she would pair a statement such as “I want to hear what you have to say, Antwan,” with a statement such as, “Will you please raise your hand so that I can call on you?” Ms. Marten’s intent in these statements was to help Antwan begin to learn the norms of the classroom.

Ms. Marten recognized that most of the classroom interactions were formal and focused primari- ly on the prescribed curriculum, so she structured group time and participation to include making personal connections and sharing opinions about material. As a result of talking to Antwan’s mother, Ms. Marten incorporated more movement into her lessons. For example, during think-pair- share, she asked each student to first put an index finger on his or her temple during the individual think, then face a peer with knees touching and discuss a concept during pair, and sit side- by-side next to the peer with the palms of their hands together during share.

Step 6: Continuously Revisit This Process to Reassess Your Attributions and Your Progress With the Student

Dealing with attributions in the class- room can be a complex and layered— and often uncomfortable—process, and educators should view dealing with attributions as an opportunity to learn more about others and about them- selves. Therefore, educators must con- tinuously review their relationship with the student and evaluate how their instruction and communication support the student’s success in class. Educa- tors should view this process as contin- uous and ongoing by revisiting each step as needed to ensure that all stu-

dents are experiencing success in the classroom.

After a few weeks of reflecting on her attributions about Antwan’s behaviors, mindfully exploring alternative explana- tions, and interacting with him in more responsive ways, Ms. Marten noticed positive changes in his performance. Antwan entered the classroom with a smile. He talked more with her about his likes and dislikes. He participated in large-group activi- ties, and he was more attentive and engaged when he worked with other students.

Ms. Marten also noticed a change in herself. She noticed that she was more aware when she began to overgeneralize or have prejudices about certain students, and she began to con- sider alternative views. She found herself often asking such questions as, “How can I under- stand this student better? What assumptions or values are guid- ing my interpretations?” instead of asking “Why won’t this stu- dent behave?” or “Why can’t she be more like the other students?”

Final Thoughts

Although we have described this process of mindful communication and reflection within a special education context, we believe that the process can be applied across settings to help teachers develop a deeper understand- ing of students’ behavior by reflecting on the environment, cultural underpin- nings, and biases that may be interact- ing to create a mismatch in the class- room. The intention is to support teachers in a process of deep reflection that transforms historically deficit views and responses to students with disabilities or from culturally and lin- guistically diverse backgrounds, in addition to developing practices that are culturally responsive and ensure that all students are well supported and successful in the classroom. In particular, the process of mindful

reflection and communication can help teachers do the following:

• Evaluate their own assumptions, prejudices, and biases about race, culture, and disability and consider how they affect the teacher’s inter- actions with and expectations for their students.

• Objectively describe behaviors with- out interpretation to consider appro- priate and consistent ways of responding.

• Interpret behaviors to support rather than inhibit learning.

• Consider the many different ways that children demonstrate engage- ment and attentiveness, how these ways closely tie with culture, and how culture influences students’ many ways of responding and inter- acting with others in the classroom.

• Recognize that children are children first and foremost and that their behaviors do not define them, and consider whether or why you have different behavioral expectations for different children.

The end goal of this process is to accomplish the following:

• Develop mindful relationships with children and their families to sup- port learning through building on the students’ strengths and assets instead of focusing on their delays or need.

• Recognize and teach in develop- mentally, contextually, and cultural- ly appropriate ways of responding to the behavior of all children.

• Create a culturally and linguistically responsive and supportive learning community that recognizes and cel- ebrates differences.

We hope that this process enables teachers to become aware of and rec- ognize their own biases when inter- preting behavior in the classroom so that they may use culturally and lin- guistically responsive practices. The concern is that when teachers act on automatic pilot or do not take the time to reflect, they may risk misinterpret- ing culture and language ability as dis- ability. Figure 1 furnishes a summary of the steps for mindful reflection and

34 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Figure 1. Steps for Mindful Reflection and Communication

Step 1: Explain the attributions that you have about the student.

a. Describe what you and the student said and did.

b. How did the student react to your actions or comments?

c. Collect notes on multiple days and at different times of the day.

Step 2: Write out or reflect on your feelings and thoughts when working with the student. Take into account the potential for misinterpretations resulting from deficit thinking, prejudice, and overgeneralizations.

a. How does this student make you feel? What are your worries or fears?

b. What are your assumptions? Why do you find the student problematic?

c. Have you evaluated, interpreted, or described the behavior?

d. Try to rewrite the examples in descriptive terms.

Step 3: Consider alternative explanations by reviewing your documentation and reflections.

a. Review the explanations and reflect on why the student may be doing what he or she does. Look for patterns in your behavior and the student’s behavior.

b. What are your expectations for the situation? How is the student not meeting your expectations? In what way is the behavior interfering with learning?

c. List alternative explanations or interpretations of the student’s behavior.

d. What external factors and/or personal factors could be influencing the student’s behavior? What recent changes have occurred in the student’s life, disability, acculturation, and so forth?

Step 4: Check your assumptions. Share your reflections with a colleague, parents, and/or community members. Meet with parents to learn more about expected and observed behaviors in the home.

a. Share your list of alternative explanations or interpretations of the student’s behavior with a colleague, parents, and/or community members.

b. Meet with the family to learn more about their perspective in understanding the behavior. Do they notice the same behavior at home? Do they find it problematic? How do they interact with the student at home? Have there been any major changes or upsets in the home?

c. Be open and responsive to the family’s ideas and perspectives. Seek to understand rather than to judge.

Step 5: Make a plan.

a. How will you change or respond differently?

b. Brainstorm ideas on how to change the environment, your actions, and/or expectations for this student.

c. Experiment with responding differently. Note what happens. Reflect on your feelings as well as the student’s response.

d. Frequently communicate with the family. Ask whether family members have noticed a difference. What have they been trying that works?

e. Consult with colleagues, parents, and/or community members while you experiment to check your assumptions and interpretations.

Step 6: Continuously revisit this process to reassess your attributions and your progress with the student.

a. Notice when you are overgeneralizing, attributing behavior within a deficit perspective, or behaving in prejudiced ways toward certain students.

b. Remember that this process is a continuous one, so revisit the steps periodically to continue your growth and understanding of students.

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN � SEPT/OCT 2011 35

communication. We hope that this process assists teachers in understand- ing the role of their own cultural lens in examining student behavior to reduce the potential for them to inter- pret culture and language ability as disability.

References Archer, C. (1990). Living with strangers in the U.S.A.: Communicating beyond cul- ture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Prentice Hall.

Archer, C. M. (2003). The toolkit for culture and communication. Houston, TX: Uni- versity of Houston, Department of Intellectual Property.

Barrera, I., & Corso, R. M. (2003). Skilled dialogue: Strategies for responding to cultural diversity in early studenthood. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Cartledge, G., Singh, A., & Gibson, L. (2008). Practical behavior-management techniques to close the accessibility gap for students who are culturally and lin- guistically diverse. Preventing School Failure, 52(3), 29–38.

Drakeford, W. (2006). Racial disproportion- ality in school disciplinary practices. National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems. Retrieved from http://www.nccrest.org/publications /briefs.html

Fiedler, C. R., Chiang, B., Van Haren, B., Jorgensen, J., Halberg, S., & Boreson, L. (2008). Culturally responsive practices in schools: A checklist to address dispropor- tionality in special education. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 40(5), 52–59.

Garcia, S. B., & Guerra, P. L. (2004). Decon- structing deficit thinking: Working with educators to create more equitable learn- ing environments. Education and Urban Society, 36, 150–167.

Garcia, S. B., & Ortiz, A. A. (2006). Prevent- ing disproportionate representation: Cul- turally and linguistically responsive pre- referral interventions. National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCREST). Retrieved from http://www.nccrest.org/

Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (2003). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication (4th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Harry, B., & Klingner, J. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special educa- tion? Understanding race and disability in schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Jacobson, T. (2003). Confronting our dis- comfort: Clearing the way for anti-bias in early studenthood. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (1999). Cultural underpinnings of special education. In Culture in special education: Building reciprocal family-professional relation-

ships (pp. 1–14). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Kendall, F. E. (1996). Diversity in the class- room: New approaches to the education of young children. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

King, K. A., Harris-Murri, N. J., & Artiles, A. J. (2006). Proactive culturally responsive discipline. National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCREST). Retrieved from http:// nccrest.org/Exemplars/exemplar _culturally_responsive_discipline .pdf?v_document_name=culturally %20responsive%20discipline

Langer, E. J. (1989). Mindfulness. Cam- bridge, MA: Da Capo Press.

Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000a). The construct of mindfulness. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 1–9.

Langer, E. J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2000b). Mindfulness research and the future. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 129–139.

National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems. (NCCREST). (2005). Cultural considerations and chal- lenges to response to intervention models: An NCCREST position statement. Author. Retrieved from http://www.nccrest.org /publications/position_statements.html

Neal, L. I., McCray, A. D., & Webb-Johnson, G. (2003). The effects of African Ameri- can movement styles on teachers’ per- ceptions and reactions. Journal of Special Education, 37(1), 49–57.

Ramsey, P. G. (2004). Teaching and learning in a diverse world. New York, NY: Tea- chers College Press.

Valencia, R. (1997). Conceptualizing the notion of deficit thinking. In R. Valencia (Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking (pp.1–12). London, England: Falmer Press.

Wisneski, D. B., & Dray, B. J. (2009). Examining diversity through mindful reflection and communication. Focus on Teacher Education, 9(3), 2–4, 8.

Barbara J. Dray (Colorado CEC), Assistant Professor, Special Education and Linguis- tically Diverse Education, University of Colorado–Denver. Debora Basler Wisneski, Associate Professor, Early Childhood Educa- tion, School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Barbara J. Dray, School of Education and Human Develop- ment, University of Colorado, 1201 5th St., Campus Box 106, Denver, CO 80204 (e-mail: [email protected]).

TEACHING Exceptional Children, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 28–36.

Copyright 2011 CEC.

36 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

TEC1109

GET YOUR EDITION OF THE NASCO SPECIAL EDUCATION CATALOG.

Ad Index

Attainment, cover 2, 1

CEC, 38, 46, 57, 58, 59, 67, 68, cover 3

Conover, 4, 5

Crisis Prevention Institute, 39

Landscape Structures, 27

Messiah College, 26

NASCO, 36

Walden University, cover 4

West Chester University, 7