Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

SAGE Publications, Review of Educational Research, 2023

DOI: 10.3102/00346543231208720

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

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

Journal article published in 2023 by Meredith P. Franco ORCID, Jessika H. Bottiani ORCID, Catherine P. Bradshaw ORCID
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

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