Educ Stud Math (2014) 86:377–399

DOI 10.1007/s10649-014-9533-7

Investigating practices of highly successful

mathematics teachers of traditionally underserved students

Emily P. Bonner

Published online: 1 February 2014

# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract This article presents findings from an ongoing study focused on deconstructing
pedagogical practices of successful mathematics teachers in classrooms with high populations
of traditionally underserved students. Using grounded theory, the manuscript reports on
general themes and specific practices of culturally responsive mathematics teaching (CRMT)
that have been “unearthed” from data collected over several years in three diverse mathematics
classrooms. The findings indicate that, regardless of cultural setting, relationships and trust are
central to CRMT, while communication patterns and various forms of knowledge mediate
these relationships. Ultimately, CRMT provides student access, which is mediated by culture
and identity, to complex mathematical ideas. Common concrete practices, such as warm
demander pedagogy and reflection, are discussed. These results speak to the complexity of
the culturally responsive mathematics classroom and provide suggestions to educators, ad-
ministrators, and teacher educators who aim to become more culturally responsive.

Keywords Culturally responsive teaching . Classroom equity . Teacher practice . Teacher

knowledge . Student access

1 Introduction

For many years, international research has shown that significant achievement gaps exist in
mathematics classrooms between various racial groups and between students living in poverty
and their more affluent counterparts (Lee, 2006). According to the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES, 2009), there has been little progress in closing the persistent
mathematics achievement gaps between certain groups of students in the USA since 2007, and
in many cases since 1990. These statistics also show that the further students progress in
school, the wider these gaps in mathematics become. These patterns of higher achievement
among students with access to more resources and more highly qualified teachers are also
evident across the globe. Research studies from across the world show that socioeconomic
factors often mediate student performance (Ismail, 2009; Lamb, Hogan & Johnson, 2001; Lee,
Zuze, & Ross, 2005; Marks, 2005), with students in richer or more democratic countries

E. P. Bonner (*)
College of Education and Human Development, Department of Interdisciplinary Learning and Teaching,
University of Texas at San Antonio, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
378 E.P. Bonner

performing better in mathematics (Chiu & Xihua, 2008). These studies imply that achievement
gaps in mathematics are a global issue.
These gaps may be attributed to a multitude of comprehensive factors, including recurring
failure among underserved groups that contributes to a negative mathematical identity that is
reinforced over time. This is significant as a more positive outlook on school and mathematical
ability and higher self-esteem in relation to mathematics have been shown to improve the
achievement of minority students (Borman & Overman, 2004). Moreover, it has been shown
that teachers often mediate student perceptions and achievement in mathematics (Schoen,
Cebulla, Finn, & Fi, 2003). Continued research is needed in this area, especially as it relates to
closing the achievement gaps in mathematics through innovative and effective teaching
strategies. The purpose of the study presented here was to address inequities in mathematics
education by studying the practices of successful teachers of traditionally underserved1
students.
There is literature that indicates that focusing simply on high-stakes data relating to
achievement gaps (“gap gazing”) presents a narrow picture of inequities in mathematics
education (Gutiérrez & Dixon-Román, 2011) and does not capture the underlying issues and
assumptions that fuel these inequities. Moreover, discourse around gap gazing seems to affirm
that school curricula are sufficient and appropriate for all students, rather than encouraging
discussions about students’ lived experiences that can be mathematized in meaningful ways. In
focusing on comprehensive mathematics education programs that broaden this dialogue,
however, we can progress “from tinkering with the current arrangements of school”
(Gutiérrez & Dixon-Román, 2011, p. 30) to thinking about contexts that provide rich, relevant
spaces for mathematical exploration. In looking at issues of equity in mathematics classrooms,
then, multiple ways of knowing and students’ funds of knowledge should be at the forefront.
Mathematics is not viewed as a neutral subject that should be understood in the same ways by
everyone; rather, mathematics is “taught” as a tool that can be used for understanding contexts
and experiences, including those that lead to and maintain marginalization (Martin, Gholson,
& Leonard, 2010).
Several landmark studies have focused on successful teachers in particular settings and with
certain student populations and tend toward this more comprehensive view of education.
Successful teachers of African American students, for example, have been studied over time
(Ladson-Billings, 1994; Siddle-Walker, 2000) and have provided insights into these cultural
settings. Such studies have shown that these passionate teachers maintain high expectations of
students, fostering not only essential skills and understanding but also critical perspectives and
understandings among students of color. Furthermore, driven by their deep-seated beliefs that
all students can be highly successful, effective teachers of underserved students across
populations are able to foster students’ cultural identities and capitalize on students’ funds of
knowledge, which are often rooted in cultural and community norms and practices (Moll,
Amanti, Neff, & González, 1992). These teachers view knowledge as a social construction
(Ladson-Billings, 1994; Nieto, 2010) that is influenced by student, teacher, and systemic
cultures and recognize language and ways of knowing as mediators of knowledge.
The ideas presented in these studies have been formalized and expanded upon to help
formulate an understanding in the field about culturally responsive teaching (CRT; Gay, 2010)
and have been specialized to inform subject-specific frameworks of culturally responsive
education in mathematics (Greer, Mukhopadhyay, Powell, & Nelson-Barber, 2009). These
works provide insights into the inequities in mathematics education and present particular

1
“traditionally underserved” is defined here as students who are ethnic minorities and/or come from a low
socioeconomic background, and who are educationally disadvantaged based on high-stakes test scores.
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 379

strategies for combating the status quo in classrooms (e.g., Gutstein, 2006) and teacher
education programs (e.g., Gay, 2009). In classrooms, specific lessons framed by current trends
in the housing market and environmental racism (Gutstein & Peterson, 2005), for example,
provide teachers with tools to teach mathematics for social justice. Furthermore, recommen-
dations from this literature provide suggestions for teacher education programs as to how to
combat negative perceptions of students of color among pre-service teachers (Sleeter, 2001)
through the development of truly multicultural programs (Irvine, 2003) that provide pre-
service teachers with long-term opportunities to confront and address these beliefs (Fosnot,
1996; Richardson & Placier, 2001). Furthermore, successful teacher education programs, such
as CULTURES (Irvine, 2003) and Teach for Diversity (Ladson-Billings, 2001), have been
highlighted in the literature, giving teacher educators more concrete ways to formulate ideas
about developing such programs.
These studies and theoretical works have been highly formative in framing a salient
understanding in the field of education about teaching students from diverse backgrounds.
In the field of mathematics education, however, implementation of these frameworks has been
limited as the majority of these works are either specific to one population (Ladson-Billings,
1994), are very broadly focused in terms of content and practice (i.e., non-mathematics-
specific; Gay, 2010), or remain largely theoretical (e.g., Greer et al. 2009). Ladson-Billings’
(1994) landmark study, in particular, focused on framing and explaining the concept of
culturally relevant pedagogy through analyzing the work of successful teachers of African
American students. This work, though inclusive of one mathematics teacher, does not focus
explicitly on mathematics teachers and mathematics classrooms. Furthermore, this work
focuses explicitly on African American populations of students, providing insights into
working within a particular cultural frame and paving the way for this type of work in various
other settings. Thus, though the framework presented in this study is fundamental to the field’s
understanding of culturally relevant pedagogy as a framework and the ways in which
culturally relevant pedagogy may be enacted in mathematics classrooms, a gap in the literature
exists in terms of how culturally responsive teaching is practiced explicitly in the context of
mathematics. Similarly, other studies have focused on struggles of White teachers with diverse
populations (Howard, 2006), but remain theoretical and general in terms of content.
The work presented here aims to begin to fill these gaps in the mathematics education
literature, providing insights into culturally responsive mathematics teaching based in practice
while analyzing practices of highly successful mathematics teachers of traditionally under-
served students. This work aims to provide an analysis of teachers who are working to
capitalize on student funds of knowledge and move toward more comprehensive practice in
mathematics teaching. Thus, this study focuses across cultural settings while looking specif-
ically at culturally responsive teaching in the context of mathematics. More specifically, this
work includes findings from the classrooms of highly successful mathematics teachers who
work with various populations of underserved students. The conclusions, therefore, are based
in classroom practice and are intended to bridge the gaps between theory and practice that exist
in mathematics education literature, creating a space from which mathematics classroom
teachers and mathematics teacher educators can access practical suggestions as to how to
become more culturally efficacious.
The following research questions guided the study:
In classrooms of successful mathematics teachers with high populations of underserved
students:

1. What are the major pedagogical themes that drive mathematics instruction and discipline?
2. In what ways do these pedagogical themes interact?
380 E.P. Bonner

3. How do teachers set up classroom environments that result in student success in

mathematics?

2 Theoretical framework

Research shows that student learning is mediated by culture, language, and other socially
constructed factors (e.g., Boykin & Allen, 2004; Delpit, 1995; Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings,
1994, 2001; Nieto, 2010). In other words, students are best understood in relation to their
environment. In order to capitalize on students’ cultural funds of knowledge, then, teachers
must be aware of these mediating cultural filters through which mathematical knowledge is
sifted (Gay, 2010). Furthermore, teacher interactions with students, which are social and
therefore culturally significant, have great impact on student identity development and per-
ceived ability in mathematics.
These factors indicate that social constructions in the classroom are highly subjective, with
each player acting from a particular cultural framework within which they assign unique
meanings to symbols (people, objects, etc.) with which they coexist and to which they respond.
From a symbolic interactionist (Blumer, 1969) standpoint, we are able to observe and analyze
interactions in the mathematics classrooms not as objective happenings but as a combination of
socially constructed exchanges carried out by individuals who actively construct their reality
based on these interactions. From this perspective, the researcher focuses on observable
exchanges and the ways in which these interactions construct individual realities.
In the mathematics classroom, teacher–student, student–student, and all other interactions
frame individual realities, each of which is constantly shifting based on social necessity and
response to social construction. Constructs of mathematical knowledge and an individual’s
relationship to mathematics are highly interpretive and are influenced greatly by the individ-
ual’s experiences with mathematics, many of which have been framed by teachers. Symbolic
interactionism allows the researcher to focus on interactions between people in a particular
context, in this case a mathematics classroom, while observing and interpreting the ways in
which students and teachers define and assign meaning to themselves, to one another, and to
mathematical knowledge.

3 Methods

This work was largely guided (theoretically and practically) by the work of Ladson-Billings
(1994) and others who have developed foundational ideas of CRT in the literature. These
researchers have called for further investigation in the area of CRT, as we “need to know much
more about the practice of successful teachers for…students who have been poorly served by
our schools” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 163). The main goal of the study was to extend and
refine this body of literature specific to mathematics. It is also important to note that it is not the
researcher’s intention to diminish the teaching characteristics of the individual instructors;
rather, it is to utilize these characteristics to contribute to the discussion of how CRT is
practiced in mathematics classrooms and the ways in which various teachers employ such
strategies.
Grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006) was utilized to collect and analyze data from three
mathematics classrooms in varied settings, each of which was highly populated by tradition-
ally underserved students. As such, the goal of this work was to analyze practice while
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 381

conducting emergent inquiry using a comparative and interactive approach. Three participants
were identified as outlined below, each of whom has a distinct teaching style and approach to
learning. Interpretive individual and cross-analyses of these teachers allowed the researcher to
pay close attention to language, action, and varied realities (of the teachers, students, and
researcher) in these settings while generalizing major themes through systematic comparison
and interactions with the data. This methodology allowed for the construction of a unique and
original theoretical analysis of culturally responsive mathematics teaching (CRMT) while
systematically guiding the researcher to learn from and stay true to the data.

3.1 Participants2

The researcher closely followed Ladson-Billings’ (1994) “community nomination” (term

coined by Foster, 1997) process. Specifically, community connections were used through
researcher participation in neighborhood events such as church, school events, and after
school programs and through discussions with community experts and elders who had
some connection to the schools. Within these organizations, the researcher held meetings
with members, mostly women and mothers of children attending the schools, who were
willing to share their insights about successful teaching. This allowed the community,
rather than the researcher, to “judge people, places, and things within their own settings”
(Ladson-Billings, 1994, p. 181) and to define the characteristics and outcomes of a
successful teacher in a particular neighborhood. This process mediated the effect of biased
and literature-based beliefs and perceptions that often drive participant identification while
allowing the community to serve as experts on which teachers were most responsive to
their students’ needs.
Specifically, at these meetings, community members were asked open-ended questions
such as “which teachers are highly successful with students in this community?” and “how do
you define student success in mathematics for children in your community?” in an effort to
define these constructs and validate the nominations. This was an important part of the
nomination process as (a) “success” could be (and was) defined differently between commu-
nities; (b) perceptions of what makes a teacher effective varied widely depending on what
adults believed made teachers effective with their children; and (c) this greatly informed the
researcher’s notions of community culture, social issues, and educational considerations for the
particular populations.
Aside from identification of the teachers involved in this study, several notable
insights came from these community meetings. The most common finding from these
meetings was that “successful” teachers of mathematics in high-need schools are rare,
but they do exist. Several of these meetings yielded no results in terms of nominations
(though they were still important to the researcher’s understandings of culture and
education), which was alarming. The nominees who did emerge, however, inspired
passion in the community. Furthermore, when parents and community members spoke
passionately about effective mathematics teachers, they focused on the idea that the
teacher would teach their child mathematics while allowing the child to explore and
maintain his or her cultural identity and practices. One mother, for example, said “[the
teacher] teaches them to be confident and knowledgeable in mathematics, but she does it
so they are strong Chicanas.”
Data collected from community members were triangulated with teacher success in prepar-
ing students for the state examination (student test scores) and administrative perceptions when

2
Pseudonyms have been used to protect the identities of the schools, states, and participants.
382 E.P. Bonner

available. A summary of some of these data is provided in Table 1. In this table, the words of
the nominators have been preserved as much as possible to limit interpretive bias. As teachers
were identified, they were contacted for initial observations and interviews to determine
willingness and suitability to participate in the study.
As a result of the nomination process, three female mathematics teachers participated in the
study, each of whom worked in classrooms highly populated by traditionally underserved
students at the time of data collection. Participants, however, practiced in notably dissimilar
school settings, adding a new dimension to this line of research. For example, one teacher
taught in an elementary school largely populated by low-income, African American students
while another taught remedial courses (largely populated by low-income students and students
of color) contained within a largely White and middle school in a wealthy suburb. This
allowed the researcher to look not only at specific practices within each classroom but also
across classrooms for emergent themes common to success with underserved students in all of
these settings. Below is a brief introduction to each teacher and setting. These descriptions
serve also as a way for the reader to see the initial differences in the classroom environments
and variation in terms of general teaching strategies and classroom culture.

3.1.1 Ms. Bradley

A teacher for 30 years, Ms. Bradley is an African American woman who grew up in the
neighborhood in which she teaches. She teaches in a largely African American school in a high-
poverty area. Ms. Bradley’s teaching is largely based in the arts; she relies heavily on chanting,
repetition, dances, songs, and rhythms in her instruction. Student responses to her instruction, in
terms of personal identity and academic achievement, have been so strong that the school
converted an old library into a classroom so that Ms. Bradley could teach up to 50 fifth graders
at one time. In this way, she is able to teach all of the children in the school. Her practices have
consistently resulted in the highest gains and scores on the standardized measure in the state.
Ms. Bradley, though innovative, is demanding and strict in her classroom. Students know
what is expected of them and are required to participate actively in class. Furthermore, she
begins the year with the material “from the back of the book” which includes often trouble-
some fraction concepts. This sets a high standard for her students from the outset of the school
year and builds student confidence in mathematics. Ms. Bradley utilizes many techniques to
encourage mastery; for example, students write mathematical definitions in individual math-
ematics journals and repeat the definitions in unison, often to a particular rhythm. This type of
chanting continues throughout the year, relating to various concepts, and Ms. Bradley is
known to ask for any and all definitions on any given day. Furthermore, mathematical terms
are coupled with examples and other methods, such as completing a mathematical procedure
to music, a practice that Ms. Bradley sees as “empowering and cultural.” For example, on the
first day of class, the students are given the following definitions:

1. “A mixed number is a whole number and a fraction.”

2. “An improper fraction is when the numerator is greater than the denominator.”

These definitions are given to the class orally, and students are asked to repeat them in
unison before writing them in a mathematics journal. Definitions are repeated chorally and
examples are written on the board and in journals.
Students are then asked to change a mixed number to an improper fraction in a specific way.
For instance, Ms. Bradley might put the example 5¾ on the board. Students are taught to chant
in unison, “Five times four equals twenty plus three equals twenty over three, twenty over
Table 1 Sample responses and constructs obtained through nomination process

Community A (Bradley) Community B (Jones) Community C (Allen)

Definitions of student success “Jumping” several grade levels over Visible changes in student confidence Confidence as a girl studying math
in mathematics the course of 1 year
Ability to teach siblings about math content Student willingness to help others Engagement in extracurricular
with content math activities
Interest in continuing in school (particularly Student ability to speak up for him/herself Ability to utilize researching skills
for students who were at risk for dropping to solve problems
out early)
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers

Empowerment through participation in Ability to pass state tests after failing Able to explain complex math
the math club for many years before ideas to others
Characteristics of highly successful Classroom is “like a church”; teacher is able Caring Knowledgeable about content
teachers of mathematics to connect to this aspect of community
Students engaged through their own interests A good listener Pushes students to do better/learn more
(music, art)
Stern and motherly; caring and takes no lip Interest in student lives and language/ Able to connect with students
connections to these
Attention to and preservation of students’ Believes in student ability High expectations
“blackness” High expectations
Other indicators from community members Involvement in community activities Attends student activities Started and organizes student club
Thinks up/organizes activities for students Communicates with parents on Ethnomathematics that travels
(such as a graduation-type ceremony) and teaches about the topic
383
384 E.P. Bonner

three.” Likewise, for the example 7½, students would say, “Seven times two equals fourteen
plus one equals fifteen over two, fifteen over two.” Ms. Bradley goes over many examples in
this manner, at times asking groups or individual students to “perform” the conversion on the
spot, with the whole class chiming in for the last repeated solution. This evolves into an
enthusiastic chant with a definite rhythm and spirit. When the students have reached this stage,
usually by day 2 or 3 of instruction, she puts the procedure to music. With a popular
instrumental playing in the background, the students move quickly through the examples on
the board. Through this process, student responses grow louder, implying increased confidence.
This performance aspect of Ms. Bradley’s teaching also translates to other areas of
mathematics. When students learn geometry, they learn not only definitions but also move-
ments to solidify and refine the meanings of the terms. The term “line”, for example, is
illustrated with the body by putting each arm out to the side with palms open, saying “this
way” while leaning to the right, and then “that way” while leaning to the left. A line segment is
illustrated similarly, but with closed fists and by saying “stop” while leaning in each direction.
Similarly, a ray is demonstrated with a fist on one side while saying “stop”, and an open hand
moving in the other direction while saying “keep going, going.” This type of movement
activity, in addition to the repetition of the definitions, is prominent in Ms. Bradley’s class and,
according to her, is one key to student success. Furthermore, Ms. Bradley sees the use of
movement and music (in addition to the strict and demanding nature of the classroom) as
highly cultural, comparing the environment to that of a “Black church that they go to every
week to find strength,” providing students with ways uniquely to connect with the mathemat-
ical material and with Ms. Bradley.

3.1.2 Ms. Jones

Ms. Jones is a second career White teacher who works with struggling middle school (6th–8th
grade, typically ages 11–14) students within a wealthy school and district. Ms. Jones’
classroom is not representative of the school population, with an overrepresentation of
Hispanic students and students receiving free and reduced lunch (children must be poor
enough to qualify for this program; as such, it is used as a measure of poverty rates in schools
in the USA). Ms. Jones does not have the same cultural background as most of her students.
Students in Ms. Jones’ classes have failed the state standardized test in mathematics at least
once (over 50 % have failed the test more than once) and are considered to be “at risk” for
failing again. They are assigned to her classroom for mathematics enrichment focused on
improving standardized test scores with other students who have also failed the test at least
once. In the spring of 2010, the time during which data were collected in Ms. Jones’s
classroom, 100 % of her students passed the state examination in mathematics.
Consistently setting high expectations for her students, Ms. Jones has a very student-
centered classroom. Often, learners work in thoughtfully constructed groups on particular
problems with which they have struggled or for which they need a review. These groups also
work at task centers within the classroom, which focus on key mathematical topics for their
grade level. During these periods of group work, Ms. Jones circulates between groups, sitting
down with students and asking probing questions to encourage deeper thought about concepts.
Furthermore, she uses this time to praise students’ efforts and achievements publicly and
encourages them to discuss and explain concepts to their peers.
Ms. Jones’ classroom is designed to be “comfortable” and “family-like.” Students often call
out or mention seemingly off-topic things during class. Rather than harshly disciplining
students for this behavior, Ms. Jones listens to what the students are discussing, allowing
them to “get it out of their system.” This, she believes, allows them to talk about what is on
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 385

their mind at the time, builds relationships, and facilitates more on task behavior as the period
progresses. Furthermore, it allows Ms. Jones to learn about and communicate with students
while building their self-esteem, which has often been compromised after years of failure in
mathematics. In observing these types of interactions between students and Ms. Jones, it is
clear that Ms. Jones works to build a positive classroom environment that is maintained
through the building and maintenance of respectful and open relationships. As such, students
are given opportunities to self-regulate while using the class and teacher as a support system.

3.1.3 Ms. Allen

Ms. Allen is a mathematics teacher at an all-girls middle school that opened in 2007. The
school receives funding from a foundation that supports single-sex education, but is located in
a Title I school district.3 Within this district, a combination application/lottery system is used to
determine which girls attend the school. The student population is largely low-income and
Hispanic, and is reflective of the district population aside from gender. Ms. Allen helped to
open the school in 2007 and teaches all levels of middle school mathematics. Her students
have had high passing rates each year on the state standardized test, and many have shown
improvement in mathematics since coming to the school.
Ethnically, Ms. Allen is Mexican and Arab, and she consciously uses her cultural knowl-
edge in her classroom. Additionally, she began an Ethnomathematics club for students wherein
students explore various cultures’ mathematical histories, tools, and advances. Moreover, Ms.
Allen is a proponent of technology in the classroom and frequently has students working on
individual laptops during class. Ms. Allen is warm toward her students, but holds them to high
expectations and is structured in her instruction. She encourages students to find answers to
their questions using research techniques and technology and insists that they only turn in
work when it is of the highest quality. Furthermore, she expects them to demonstrate
knowledge in various ways such as writing, speaking, presenting, explaining, and
demonstrating.
Students sit in pairs and are always encouraged to “talk to their neighbor about it” before
answering or asking a question. At the beginning of class, for example, students come in and
immediately take out their homework. Ms. Allen does not provide them with answers, but instead
asks them to “check with your neighbor and discuss your answers—do you agree on each one?” In
this way, power in the classroom is fluid, often visibly positioned with the students. Given that the
student population largely consists of females of color, this provides a sense of empowerment and
strength that many of the girls have not experienced in a mathematics classroom.
General information about each school and classroom setting is provided in Table 2.

3.2 Data collection and analysis

The researcher strove for immersion in each classroom for extended periods of time. As such,
data consisting mainly of teacher interviews, classroom observations, and teacher-developed
artifacts were collected one classroom at a time for a period of 4–6 weeks each, with the life of
the project (including data analysis) spanning several years. The researcher followed an evenly
distributed four-stage timeline. The first three stages consisted of immersion, data collection

3
Title I was put in place to “improve the academic achievement of the disadvantaged.” These schools receive
“extra” resources and are populated by students living in poverty. As such, “Title I” schools and districts are
understood to be serving economically disadvantaged populations.
 386

Table 2 Participant information overview

Teacher name and ethnicity School type Student population of school Student population in participant’s classroom

Ms. Bradley, African American Elementary school, Title I 87 % Free and reduced lunch, 99 % African American Reflective of school population
Ms. Jones, White Middle school, Traditional 9 % Free and reduced lunch, 78 % White, Overrepresentation of students of color
20 % Hispanic, <2 % Asian, <0.5 % (∼10 % African American; ∼60 %
African American Hispanic, ∼30 % White)
Ms. Allen, Mexican and Arab Middle school, All Girls, Title I District 81 % Free and reduced lunch, 84 % Hispanic, Reflective of school population
8 % African American, 7 % White, <1 %
Asian/Native American

Demographic data for schools obtained from school district web sites; data for classrooms obtained through observation and class roll sheets; teacher ethnic data were self-reported
E.P. Bonner
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 387

and analysis, and final analyses within each setting. The final stage consisted of cross-
classroom analyses, theory development, and member checks.
There were two somewhat distinct levels of analysis within the study. The first stage
consisted of data collection and analysis within each of the three classrooms. In each setting,
grounded theory methodologies were utilized, so data were collected and analyzed simulta-
neously with theoretical sampling driving subsequent collection periods. Coding of interviews
and observations was completed in three stages (open, selective, and theoretical), according to
grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006), with the goal of emerging general themes that represented
the individual data set. Memoing was also used at this stage to record initial ideas about the
emerging theory. Furthermore, codes were sorted at this stage, but not combined. This allowed
the researcher to retain some of the richness that came with each distinct classroom setting in
the final theory development which occurred in stage 2 of the analysis. Some informal cross-
analysis did occur at this stage as constant comparison was also a driving tool in the study. In
utilizing constant comparison, the researcher continuously compared emerging data with older
data, looking for commonalities and divergences in an effort to ensure a true “fit” of the
emerging theory to the data sets. Member checks also played a role informally at this stage.
The second stage of data analysis came after saturation had been reached in each of the
three settings. This cross-classroom analysis sought to extract connections and major themes
across settings and involved looking across classrooms for overarching constructs. In order to
achieve this level of analysis, the researcher grouped the theoretical codes, using notes,
memos, and constant comparison to guide groupings, by theme. Constant comparison across
the themes emerging from each individual analysis was used, and cross-analyses occurred
more formally between each immersion and after all data had been collected. Throughout this
process, common themes emerged and were generalized as to represent overarching themes
while attempting to maintain the integrity of data collected in each unique setting.
The major challenge in completing the second stage of analysis came with interpreting the
theoretical codes while maintaining the uniqueness of each classroom. The final categories that
emerged are representative of each setting, though each theme may be represented or enacted
differently within each setting. The final step included grouping these themes together in a way
that illustrated the dynamic interactions among them, while leaving room for reader
interpretation.

4 Results and discussion

A central objective of grounded theory is to construct a middle-level working theory to explain

a field setting (Charmaz, 2006). As such, the theory presented here is grounded in data
gathered in these classrooms and builds on prior work in this line of research (Bonner,
2011), expanding thereon and providing a more detailed picture of CRMT.
Five foundational categories emerged from the data: relationships/trust, communication,
knowledge, reflection/revision, and pedagogy/discipline. Power was a mediating construct.
These categories are described in detail in the next section. Figure 1 shows the dynamic
interplay within and between these categories. Data showed that relationships and trust in the
classroom not only are a foundational category of CRMT, but also mediate knowledge and
communication in the mathematics classroom, a result that alters prior findings (Bonner,
2011). These relationships include the fundamental connection between student and teacher,
but also go beyond the mathematics classroom to include other players and settings. Teachers
in the study worked first and foremost on making connections with students in an effort to
build these relationships and largely relied on the other cornerstones to facilitate this process.
388 E.P. Bonner

Communication

Power

Pedagogy and
Reflection and Discipline
Revision Relationships/Trust

Power

Knowledge

Fig. 1 Culturally responsive mathematics teaching

For example, teachers focused on gaining knowledge about students and communicating in
culturally connected ways.
In utilizing these other cornerstones, relationships developed and contributed to an even
greater knowledge base about students, effective ways of communicating (mathematics and
other information), and culturally connected mathematics instruction in general. As such, the
cornerstones of knowledge and communication serve as “entry points” (as indicated by the
black dots in Fig. 1) for teachers to build these relationships. This implies that real and
sustaining relationships and trust cannot be built in the mathematics classroom without first
focusing on knowledge (about students, mathematics, culturally connected mathematics, and
content) or communication (communicating in culturally connected ways, making mathemat-
ics accessible to students, communicating care to students, and allowing students to commu-
nicate in comfortable ways).
Furthermore, each of these cornerstones feeds into the others. For example, if a teacher
begins the school year by speaking to families and students in an effort to gain knowledge
about the community and individuals therein, this will begin the process of relationship
building, which in turn opens the lines of communication and allows the teacher to gain
valuable information about the ways in which to communicate most effectively with students.
Over time, the teacher will gain more knowledge because he or she is communicating more
effectively. This leads to a greater sense of trust in the community and constantly feeds the
relationships with students. This fluidity and interconnectivity blurs the lines between the
cornerstones, but results most often in a strong relationship between teachers, students, and the
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 389

community. In turn, more meaningful mathematics teaching and learning occurs as students
and community members recognize that the teacher is incorporating cultural aspects of the
neighborhood into mathematics lessons, making the material more accessible to students,
many of whom have not experienced prior success in the mathematics classroom.
It is important to note that the cornerstones also illustrate the ways in which negativity can
build in a classroom when there is a lack of attention to relationship building. For example, if a
teacher is not acquiring knowledge about students and is not communicating in culturally
connected ways, relationships are hindered and trust is not built. In many cases, a lack of trust
develops between the teacher and the student (this distrust goes both ways) and the entry
points begin to close. As a result, relationships and trust do not build, and there is a disconnect
between student and teacher. Moreover, this implies that cultural connections are not made in
the mathematics classroom, and particular students may not be able to access mathematical
knowledge. This may further develop into student resistance, whereby students become
uninterested and do not engage with the mathematics.
In this study, each teacher used knowledge and communication to build relationships, but
relationships manifested differently in each classroom as each group of students is culturally
unique. For example, in Ms. Bradley’s classroom, students responded to a highly structured,
mathematically focused classroom. Within this structure, Ms. Bradley used culturally connect-
ed techniques such as chanting, storytelling, singing, and movement to help students access the
mathematics. Ms. Jones found, through interactions and discussions, that her students “will not
value a teacher’s opinion or the material if they do not value that person [who is presenting the
material].” As such, students responded most readily to an open, non-threatening environment
wherein they could discuss and reason through problems verbally and in their home language
of Spanish. Ms. Jones sets up task centers and learning environments where students could
engage with manipulatives, other students, resources, and the teacher to reason through
mathematical concepts. For example, in discussions with students, Ms. Jones noticed that
the boys in her class were interested in cars. She spent several days with them taking apart and
rebuilding a variety of car parts, connecting the process to problem solving, geometry, and
algebra. Finally, students in Ms. Allen’s classroom performed best when given some structure
and time to struggle with problems. As such, she would often seat them in pairs and facilitate
class-wide discussions in which students answered each other’s questions. She would encour-
age students to discuss a solution with a partner before presenting it as an answer to the
question, a technique which seemed to build confidence in the mathematics material.
Though each classroom was quite different in terms of structure, mathematics teaching
methods, and environment, each utilized the cornerstones of knowledge, communication, and
relationships to facilitate mathematics learning. Furthermore, each teacher acknowledged that
the process of building relationships takes a large amount of time and effort on the part of the
teacher and the student. As Ms. Jones said, “When you care about them, they’ll talk about
anything else that they’re doing outside of this classroom…and that does take a while. But
now…they see that and they will work with me. They value you a little bit more.”

4.1 Categories

The categories that emerged from the data (represented in Fig. 1) were not new to the literature
base on CRT, but do provide new insights into the ways in which these categories manifest in
mathematics classrooms. This data set gives a more salient voice to these categories which
have been theorized about for some time. Furthermore, these data add to the existing literature
base by exploring the ways in which the categories interact in a culturally responsive
classroom. Below, these categories are explained in more detail.
390 E.P. Bonner

To support the findings, raw data, which were coded into particular categories, are
presented in text boxes. The purposes of including these “boxed” data are (a) to give the
reader examples of the types of classroom happenings and utterances that led to these
categories and (b) to give examples of raw data that were coded into particular categories to
explain the categorization process. Within the text boxes, italicized phrases represent data
transcribed from classroom observations, while italicized phrases in quotation marks are
utterances from the classroom made by the teacher (T), student (S), or parent (P). Phrases in
regular font and in quotation marks are taken from teacher interviews.

4.1.1 Relationships and trust

Relationship building was foundational to each teacher’s practice. Teachers focused on

building relationships with students through gaining knowledge about student cultures and
lives and using that knowledge to communicate with students effectively. Moreover, teachers
worked closely with parents, administrators, and others for the ultimate purpose of providing
access to mathematical content and “using every avenue to get them involved in their learning”
(Ms. Allen). This commitment to students led to a deep sense of trust. Most notably, the
students, who had largely not been successful before encountering these teachers, trusted the
teachers’ methods “even though [the teacher] could be tough…[students] knew their stuff”
(student of Ms. Jones). Furthermore, parents who were accustomed only to hearing from the
teacher when their child had done something “bad” indicated a strong, trusting bond with the
teachers. It was evident to caregivers that “[she] cared about the students and used their
interests and made them into something positive for the kids, and used that to teach mathe-
matics” (parent of Ms. Bradley). Teachers were referred to as “an inspiration” (Ms. Allen),
“committed to teaching math to kids in this community” (Ms. Bradley), and “truly dedicated to
making [my child] successful in understanding math” (Ms. Jones).

Teacher calls a student to the back of the class (out of sight) during the warm-up. Without a word, she hands the
child paper, pencil, and a granola bar. The student returns to her desk.
T: “Bobby, you talkin’? Get up and go in the hallway and call your mama. Tell her I said you are misbehaving
and we need to have a conversation”. The boy gets up and goes to the office to call his mom. Later
note—Bobby and his mom come in after school; mom and teacher discuss Bobby as if they are old friends.
Bobby respectfully apologizes and shakes teacher’s hand on the way out (smiling).
“I love you guys, now get out and make me proud!” (T, at the end of class)
P: “We just know [the teacher] is doing right by us and by our kids. She steers them right.”

4.1.2 Knowledge

The knowledge category emerged in various ways throughout the data and encompasses many
types and ways of knowing. Because these various types of knowledge so readily overlapped
and informed practice as a whole, the larger category of “knowledge” is the best representation
of the data. Teachers exhibited strong content knowledge, what Gutstein (2006) calls “classical
knowledge,” in instruction. Most frequently, however, codes showed that teachers had a great
deal of “cultural knowledge” (Gutstein, 2006). The data indicated that teachers constantly seek
out information about their students and community. Specifically, teachers communicate with
students (this is one of the ways that these categories connect) to learn about their home lives,
language, culture, values, beliefs, and funds of knowledge. Teachers then used this knowledge
in conjunction with classical and, at times, critical knowledge in instruction.
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 391

“A lot of my kids are acting as parents themselves—they may have siblings at home that they have to care for. I
try to talk to them about it and find out these things—it impacts their lives and when you have…essentially
KIDS at home, who cares about math homework?”
“My kids need to know that I believe in them. They are told over and over that they not good enough, so I tell
them even though THEY say you are from over here, you know, so you can’t, they can.”
“I noticed they really connect to certain types of problems that deal with real issues like housing and money, so I
incorporate those. This way they are getting interested and getting empowered.”
P: “What can I say, she knows them so well. She learns about them and knows what they need.”

4.1.3 Communication

Communication is a foundational aspect of CRMT as “many of educators’ decision-

making on the potential and realized achievement of students of color is dependent on
communication abilities (their own and students’)” (Gay, 2010, p. 77). Teachers in this
study recognized (verbally and in practice) that communication is rooted in culture and
that they must be able to communicate with students in order to provide access to the
mathematics. All three teachers utilized various styles of classroom discourse to “provide
multiple, active, repeated encounters in conveying and receiving oral” (p. 107) and written
communication (Sheets, 2005). Teachers recognized that in order to teach mathematics,
particular attention must be paid to communication styles and the linguistic nature of
teaching and learning (Dandy, 1991; Smith, 1971). In the text box below, for example, a
storytelling example relating to big and little brother was observed. In this story, Ms.
Bradley uses the concept of siblings caring for one another, a common occurrence in her
community, to discuss relationships between numbers and how to find a common denom-
inator. Thus, big brother is essentially the larger multiple, and since he is the caretaker, he
determines the least common denominator.

Teacher engages in storytelling to illustrate content…example—tells story of big brother and little brother when
discussing common denominators
Teacher makes a point to sit down with each student and speak with them (either one-on-one or in a small group)
in Spanish each day. Seems to tie back to what she said about “understanding that relationships are important
and you have to talk to your kids.”
S: “She’s taking us to church!” (Referring to the way the teacher is “preaching” about mathematics concepts)
(taken from memos) Non-verbal communication (across teachers, such as focusing on posture, showing care
through proximity and touch, winks, and general position in the classroom) is foundational to student
understanding and is culturally situated (teachers discuss how posturing is important across contexts).

4.1.4 Reflection and revision

Within each setting, reflection and revision were constant and informed the relationship
building that was happening in the classroom. This attention to student understanding and
shifting of techniques occurred in the classroom on a moment-to-moment basis (if students
were not responding to a particular lesson, for example) and a longer-term basis (if students did
not perform well on a fraction or state assessment, for example). While this type of reflective
practice is common to many “good” teachers, participants in this study reflected with an
explicit focus on the classroom environment and cultural connectedness (knowledge and
communication). This also played into pedagogical decisions in the classroom and the highly
disciplined and mathematically focused nature of each setting.
392 E.P. Bonner

Teacher noted that although her style (which is basically her personality) stays pretty much the same, each kid or
group of kids has its challenges, so she has to find these and start over. She is always thinking, what do I need
to change to get the math across?
“It is hard to compare [teaching strategies] that work at another school to here because these students are so unique.
This scripting [sic] doesn’t leave any room for teachers to change based on the needs of their students.”
During review, students are doing choral responses and definitions. T: “Give me the definition for improper
fraction”, S (all): “an improper fraction is…[mumbles and laughs]”. T: “no, no, no, wait, wait, wait, now calm
down and take a breath. What is an improper fraction?” S (all): same response. Teacher physically stops and
asks students to take out their journal. She spends 10 min going over the definition of improper fraction, and
has students give examples for their journals.

4.1.5 Pedagogy/discipline

Pedagogy and discipline in each classroom were intertwined and fluid and provided opportu-
nities for teachers not only to utilize the developing cornerstones but also to gain more
knowledge and communicate in various ways through the lesson. This helped teachers to
understand the pedagogical practices that would allow students the greatest access to the
mathematics material. Furthermore, it provided a classroom environment in which high
expectations were clear through high expectations for learning and behavior—these seemed
to go hand in hand in each classroom. In other words, there was no classroom management
system or plan that was separate from pedagogical practice; rather, student engagement and
interest were almost inherent in practice.

“Schools want students to sit all pretty and perfect, but they behave if they are busy and engaged…you have to
consider that they have interests too.”
Students working in pairs—when they finish discussing the problem, they help others—it is almost second nature.
Students are so engaged with material, and so proud and confident, that they cannot wait to share that
knowledge. Classroom discipline is almost built in to the pedagogical practice…does she decipher between
teaching and disciplining (behavior and/or teaching rigor)?
The cornerstones seem to drive the cycle of pedagogy and discipline, and everything the teacher does is student-
centered.
“if I have a lot of behavior problems…I don’t now, but in the past, I know I need to make changes. I see it that
teaching and classroom control should not be separate.”

4.1.6 Power in the mathematics classroom

In observing teachers and students build these relationships, a unique dynamic wherein
students were entrusted with power in the classroom was uncovered, providing insights into
the characteristics of a culturally responsive mathematics classroom. Specifically, the teachers
in the study verbalized that traditionally underserved students often feel disempowered in the
mathematics classroom, largely because of prior experiences in mathematics, and this is why
the teachers provided opportunities for student empowerment. As such, there was an attention
paid to mathematical power, and in each setting it was fluid, constantly shifting from learner to
teacher. This aspect of instruction is situated within the cornerstones because it not only
strengthened relationships but was based on the knowledge and communication aspects of
instruction. More specifically, in giving up some power in the classroom, teachers were
explicitly and implicitly contributing to the relationships between categories.
Ms. Bradley, for example, looked to students to pick music for particular mathematics
songs and activities and encouraged student performances of mathematics material in class.
After the material is presented in a culturally connected way, “the students have a chance to
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 393

practice and rehearse,” says Ms. Bradley. “Pretty soon all of the students, especially my
[special education] students want to explain the math and they feel good about themselves.”
She also constantly “goes back and talks to the students to get [her] ideas,” utilizing their lived
experiences to guide presentation styles and contextualization of material.
Ms. Jones and Ms. Allen also embrace a fluidity of power in the classroom. Ms. Jones
reports that this is intricately tied to trust in the classroom, stating “I try and let them know they
can say whatever they want to say and I’ll respond to it in a positive way…within limits
obviously, but they can ask the same thing over and over again, and I’m not gonna jump on
them. I let them believe they’re running things, you know, and I think that that’s what they
need to do in math. They need to take responsibility for that.” Ms. Allen related the power
aspect of her classroom to her interest in mathematical history, stating “one of the biggest
things that I’ve always looked into was the creation of the schools by Pythagoras and how he
created his math schools; they were open forums where people would just go in and talk and
say an idea and everybody would discuss it and that’s the way I want to run my classroom.” As
such, each setting had a unique mix of elements that resulted in student empowerment. Each
can be described using the larger emergent themes in Fig. 1. Thus, though the classrooms
appear to be very different outwardly, these common themes emerged in each setting.
In memos, the researcher made sense of the power structures, particularly transfers of
power, in classrooms, as shown in Fig. 2. The arrows represent the flow of power and the lines
represent implicit (dotted) or explicit (solid) modes of transferring power.
These drawings are very simplified versions of what the researcher observed, but present an
interesting illustration of how power shifts in traditional versus culturally responsive mathematics
classrooms. In traditional mathematics classrooms, the teacher exclusively takes a power
stance in the classroom. Students are explicitly (“sit quietly and take notes”) and implicitly
(teacher as holder of knowledge) told that they do not have power in the classroom. In
culturally responsive mathematics classrooms, however, teachers constantly, explicitly and
implicitly (examples provided in text box below) share power with students. In turn, students
may return power to the teacher, but are given some of the responsibility of knowledge
“holding.” In these classrooms, for example, it was difficult to determine who was driving
the lessons (students or teacher) at any one point in time.

A problem involving finding the length of the sides of City Park is on the board. T: “How might you approach this
problem?”…first student comes to front (teacher sits down) to explain his thinking, T: “if you draw a line here
[diagonal], you pretty much have two triangles”, etc. Another student comes up next and actually draws the
two triangles and assigns values/variables to each side, S2: “couldn’t this work too? It’s the same thing”;
another student (sitting) responds, S3: “shouldn’t there be an x on that side too [referring to a length
measure]?” Note: teacher has not spoken for 10 min during this discussion.
After an “off task” discussion about the cost of running a “candy business” going up—T: “So what is the
problem, exactly?” S: “Miss, I have to know how much candy to buy and how much to sell it [for] to make it
worth it, you know [to make a profit]?” T: “well, that sounds like a problem we can work on right now. James,
can you take over and walk us through this?”

4.2 Culturally responsive aspects of instruction

Embedded in these findings is the notion of culturally responsive mathematics teaching. As

such, it is important to explicitly note the characteristics that drive the choice for this
framework, as opposed to a more general framework of “good” teaching. This work aligns
with prior work (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995) that indicates that culturally responsive
teachers not only create environments in which students experience academic success but also
394 E.P. Bonner

Teacher
Traditional: Teacher Culturally Responsive:

Student
Student

Fig. 2 Power constructs

create spaces where students develop and maintain strong racial and cultural identities.
Furthermore, culturally responsive teachers hold high expectations for students (Gay, 2010)
and understand cultural filters. It has been established that students in these classrooms
demonstrated high academic achievement in mathematics, so here, short examples of teachers’
explicit foci on cultural identity development are provided. Examples of this aspect of CRT are
also embedded throughout the article.
Racial identity development has been linked to mental health and self-esteem outcomes of
children of color (Caldwell, Zimmerman, Bernat, Sellers, & Notaro, 2002). Certainly, devel-
oping racial perceptions are influenced by a multitude of factors including family interactions,
school culture and communication norms, community values, peer groups, media, and the
legal system (Arnett, 1995; Steinberg, 1990). Though all of these factors are important to
overall ethnic development, learning environments and teacher–student interactions play a
vital role in students’ racial and cultural identity development. Ms. Jones, for example, stated
that in talking to her students, she “learned that looking adults in the eye can be construed as
threatening,” so she would adjust her teaching style to provide a culturally safe classroom. Ms.
Jones also understood her own “whiteness,” as described in several models in the literature
(Helms, 1990), and viewed her practice through a critical lens based on this knowledge. For
example, she recognized that, often, “teachers don’t even realize they are doing it [discrimi-
nating against certain cultures] because it’s just the way they’ve always done things.”
Similarly, Ms. Allen was attuned to her students’ struggles with cultural identity. “They
always tell me their family expects them to work in a trade, like cosmetology,” she said. “I
have to work with them through that,” Ms. Allen explained, understanding that family
expectations do not necessarily align with educational goals. Furthermore, Ms. Allen indicated
that this often leads teachers to adopt a deficit view of the students and their families and to
“say things like these kids…or really the family…doesn’t care about education. I don’t think
that is fair.”
Likewise, Ms. Bradley was a performer and lover of music in general. She noticed this in
her students too, as they came into the classroom singing rap music. Ms. Bradley embraced
and connected to this area of student interest and used rap as a vehicle for learning mathe-
matics. She created the math rap, for example, which was developed with students, and put a
core set of mathematical ideas to rap music. Students were encouraged to develop songs to
communicate mathematical ideas and were comfortable using their music in her classroom.
This countered the pervasive attitude in other schools that one of Ms. Bradley’s students
described, “everyone [at the other school] thought it was just so cool to be stupid and dumb,
but here [in Ms. Bradley’s school] people brag all the time about, like, if they know their times
tables better than someone else.” As such, Ms. Bradley’s teaching style made it “cool” to be
good at mathematics. This explicit attention to academic achievement coupled with a focus on
cultural identity development and self-esteem and critical consciousness speak to the cultural
aspects of these teachers’ practice.
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 395

4.3 Pedagogical themes

Across the three settings, several pedagogical commonalities were unearthed in observa-
tion and deconstructed in interviews. As with the cornerstones, these themes did not look
the same in each classroom, but represented similar pedagogical techniques. These themes
represent important outcomes of this work as they are directly relevant to classroom
practice and the theoretical base in CRMT. Furthermore, they provide examples of practice
that illustrate the findings (see Fig. 1) as a whole and show how the categories are dynamic
and interpretive.

4.3.1 Warm demander pedagogy

The teaching methods unearthed in this study support the idea of warm demander pedagogy as
an element of culturally responsive teaching (Ware, 2006) and extend this idea to classrooms
with various underserved populations. Warm demanders have been characterized as teachers
who “provide a tough-minded, no-nonsense, structured, and disciplined classroom environ-
ment for kids whom society had psychologically and physically abandoned” (Irvine & Fraser,
1998, p. 56) who “[are] successful with students of color because the students believe that
these teachers did not lower their standards and [are] willing to help them” (Ware, 2006, p.
436). These teachers are often characterized by their deep-seated positive beliefs about
students and culturally connected ways of communicating. This often includes maintaining a
firm tone and direct way of speaking to students. This phenomenon has been most widely
documented as a characteristic of successful African American teachers (Siddle-Walker, 2000;
Ware, 2006), and this study showed that Ms. Bradley was a warm demander, as described by
such previous work.
As described above, Ms. Bradley’s classroom was highly structured and disciplined,
focusing on high expectations and success through “tough love.” When a student did not
have his or her homework, for example, Ms. Bradley would take the student in the hallway to
call his or her parent or guardian. Furthermore, if a student was not participating in the group
chants or problem-solving activities, Ms. Bradley would “call him [or her] out and take him [or
her] to church,” meaning she would stop the lesson and “preach” about the decisions students
were making and the importance of academic success. Ms. Bradley explained that this type of
discipline is “what they get at home from their mama or grandmamma—you can’t mess
around.” Furthermore, she indicated that this type of culturally connected communication and
maintenance of high expectations allowed students to develop racially and culturally “so that
they don’t have to give up what they are used to for the sake of passing class…they have to do
this in other classes and I’m not going to teach them to be White.” These beliefs underpinned
Ms. Bradley’s practice and communicated to students a great deal of care and consideration for
their success and mental strength as cultural beings.
Though Ms. Bradley’s practices aligned most readily with warm demander pedagogy as
described in the literature, the researcher found that Ms. Jones and Ms. Allen could also be
characterized as warm demanders, though the outward characteristics of this type of instruction
varied greatly in each classroom. Ms. Jones, for example, took on a more conversational tone
with her students, allowing them to speak freely in their native language when “they aren’t
allowed to do that in most classes.” Furthermore, she designed activities through which
students could work using their strengths and cultural knowledge, and therefore expected
the work to be done well. If students were struggling, she would sit down with them and push
their thinking “until they [got] it and [got] it good…they can’t get away with doing things
halfway in here when I give them every opportunity to ask me questions and figure it out.”
396 E.P. Bonner

This type of instruction held these students, who had largely not experienced success in
mathematics previously, to a high standard while allowing them to develop culturally in a
caring environment.
Ms. Allen communicated high expectations to her students in various ways that helped
them to build confidence in mathematics and personal identity. Her demanding demeanor was
both unusual, because the students were all female and largely Hispanic, and highly effective,
because in mathematics in the USA, this is a traditionally underserved population. Most
obviously, Ms. Allen felt passionate about “providing students with the resources…and then
asking them to go find the answers.” In class, as pairs of students were working on a word
problem, for example, a student may ask, “Ms. Allen what is hypotenuse again?,” to which
Ms. Allen would reply, “you have the computer, you tell me.” She would then have the student
share the finding with the class, making sure the concept or term was well understood.
Furthermore, students were expected to be able to perform at any time, as was illustrated
when in the middle of class Ms. Allen would call on random students to work problems on the
board. Through such practices, Ms. Allen was able to maintain a classroom environment in
which students viewed mistakes as learning opportunities and had “the confidence to seek out
answers from each other instead of just [Ms. Allen].”

4.3.2 Movement

Within each classroom, there was a constant feeling of purposeful movement during
mathematics instruction. In all three settings, this was evident in the teacher’s demeanor
as each of them was constantly moving around the classroom, either helping students,
facilitating group discussions, or leading the class in a choral or group response.
Moreover, there was a great deal of movement between mathematical concepts during
the class periods. Ms. Bradley had a large piece of poster paper at the front of the
classroom on which she would record a concept as it was learned. At any time during
class, she may ask students for a definition or application from any part of the list in an
effort to incorporate constant review into the classroom. This also related to the high
expectations in Ms. Bradley’s classroom as students were expected to retain information
and “recall anything they had learned at the drop of a hat.”
Ms. Jones would often set up task centers for her students, each of which focused on a
different mathematical concept. These centers allowed Ms. Jones to address students’
diverse learning preferences while keeping them engaged and “on their toes so they don’t
sit back and think they know it all.” Furthermore, students were allowed to move through
various concepts on which they needed practice, resulting in self-directed learning and
assessment.
Ms. Allen’s use of technology in mathematics and differentiated instruction allowed her to
vary her instructional techniques from moment to moment. Students may come into the
classroom and work on a warm-up from the whiteboard, for example, and might then be
directed to log on to a classroom-based web site to watch a pre-recorded PowerPoint with a
partner. Students are then prompted to work in groups on a series of problem-solving activities
and discussions which culminate in a group conversation about the topic at hand. While
students direct their own mathematical learning, Ms. Allen walks the room, facilitating
activities and generating discussion.
The arrows and dynamic interplay between cornerstones in Fig. 1 are meant to reflect this
sense of constant movement in the culturally responsive mathematics classroom. This also
relates to the idea that teachers are constantly reflecting on and revising lessons and contributes
to the fluidity of the power structure in the classroom.
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 397

5 Implications

Through exploring the ways in which culturally responsive teachers work at the classroom
level, and the ways in which these practices do not necessarily align with predominant
standards of practice, this work attempts to go beyond gap gazing (Gutiérrez & Dixon-
Román, 2011). Though this work is motivated by data on achievement gaps, the analysis
presented in this study examines contexts in which teachers are challenging the dominant
discourse in school mathematics through designing experiences in which students are allowed
to mathematize everyday experiences as well as political ones that relate directly to their
identities and lives.
Theoretically, this work affirms and contributes to what we know about culturally responsive
teaching, specifically in mathematics, and provides more nuanced views. Most importantly, this
work illustrates the importance in research of the question “what’s the context?” (Martin et al.
2010, p. 20) and the significance of attending to the rich complexities of individual classrooms.
Teachers in this study, who work within a similar general framework (see Fig. 1), have radically
different classroom practices that yield similar results in terms of student achievement and
identity redevelopment. Ms. Bradley, in fact, teaches in very procedural ways, in contrast to
recommendations from organizations such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(2000) that are oriented toward teaching mathematics via problem solving. This realization
ties into and extends work dealing with ways in which society denies marginalized
children access to dominant discourses (Delpit, 1993; Hooks, 1989). Using non-dominant
methods involving recall, music, and rhythm, Ms. Bradley nevertheless was able to give her
poor, African American students access to the dominant discourse of traditional mathematics,
providing her students “keys…into the larger world, never knowing if the doors would ever
swing open to allow them in” (Delpit, 1993, p. 289). Ms. Bradley is providing a space where
students can maintain their own identity and discourse while mastering the dominant discourse
that will allow them to “access economic power…[and] transform dominant Discourses for
liberatory purposes” (Delpit, 1993, p. 292). This begs the question, are the dominant strategies
for mathematics instruction best for all students? Furthermore, in teaching students of color in
non-culturally connected ways, are we denying students access to the dominant discourse?
Research and commentary in these areas is needed.
There are many implications for this work in terms of mathematics teacher practice and pre-
service mathematics teacher education. Although this study was carried out in American
schools, these implications are internationally relevant. Teachers across the world are seeing
demographic changes in their classrooms and are looking for innovative ways to reach
underserved mathematics learners who are consistently falling behind in terms of achievement
(Ismail, 2009; Lamb et al. 2001; Lee et al. 2005; Marks, 2005). Commonly, teachers report that
work in the area of culturally responsive teaching, though helpful in theory, is not easily
applied or put into practice. The grounded theory presented in this research is one step in
making this theoretical framework more accessible to mathematics teachers and mathematics
teacher educators and can be used as a framework from which to encourage and facilitate more
culturally responsive mathematics pedagogy.
This theory gives mathematics teachers a more practical place from which to work and
provides focus through the identification of the cornerstones. Thus, mathematics teachers who
seek to become more culturally responsive may be empowered to begin by gaining knowledge
about their student population while trying to communicate personally and mathematically in
culturally connected ways. Furthermore, the idea that relationships are central to culturally
responsive mathematics teaching may provide teachers with greater insight into where to focus
their efforts when working with students from various backgrounds.
398 E.P. Bonner

The framework provided in Fig. 1 can also be used as a tool in mathematics teacher
education programs. Too often, culturally responsive mathematics teaching is viewed and
taught as an add-on to a traditional mathematics teacher education program; this theory can
provide mathematics teacher educators a framework from which to work throughout the entire
program, infusing multicultural methods into each aspect of mathematics teacher preparation.
Pre- and in-service teachers can utilize this framework when working with students, designing
lessons, and reflecting on practice. Over time, each teacher can find his or her own ways to
embody and integrate the cornerstones of culturally responsive mathematics teaching.
Moreover, the framework can be utilized by mathematics teacher educators as a guideline
for modeling culturally responsive mathematics teaching.
Ultimately, there is a crucial need for more research in the area of culturally responsive
mathematics teaching at the international level. In studying successful mathematics teachers of
underserved student populations, we can more readily prepare teachers for diversity while
providing not only theoretical paradigms but also concrete ideas as to how success in
mathematics can be accomplished more readily. In re-conceptualizing what it means to teach
mathematics by incorporating cultural considerations into the conversation, we can more
effectively reach all learners.

References

Arnett, J. (1995). Broad and narrow socialization: The family in the context of a cultural theory. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 57, 617–628.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Bonner, E. P. (2011). Unearthing culturally responsive teaching: The legacy of Gloria Jean Merriex. Lanham,
MD: Hamilton Books.
Borman, G. D., & Overman, L. T. (2004). Academic resilience in mathematics among poor and minority
students. The Elementary School Journal, 104(3), 177–195.
Boykin, A. W., & Allen, B. A. (2004). Cultural integrity and schooling outcomes of African American children
from low-income backgrounds. In P. B. Pufall & R. P. Unsworth (Eds.), Rethinking childhood (pp. 104–
120). Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University.
Caldwell, C. H., Zimmerman, M. A., Bernat, D. H., Sellers, R. M., & Notaro, P. C. (2002). Racial identity,
maternal support, and psychological distress among African American adolescents. Child Development,
73(4), 1322–1336.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London:
Sage.
Chiu, M. M., & Xihua, Z. (2008). Family and motivation effects on mathematics achievement: Analysis of
students in 41 countries. Learning and Instruction, 18, 321–336.
Dandy, E. B. (1991). Black communications: Breaking down the barriers. Chicago, IL: African American
Images.
Delpit, L. D. (1993). The politics of teaching literate discourse. In T. Perry & J. W. Fraser (Eds.), Freedom’s plow:
Teaching in the multicultural classroom (pp. 285–296). New York, NY: Routledge.
Delpit, L. D. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York, NY: The New Press.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Teachers construct constructivism: The center for constructivist teaching/teacher prepara-
tion project. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 205–216). New
York, NY: Teachers College.
Foster, M. (1997). Black teachers on teaching. New York, NY: The New Press.
Gay, G. (2009). Preparing culturally responsive mathematics teachers. In B. Greer, S. Mukhopadhyay, A. B.
Powell, & S. Nelson-Barber (Eds.), Culturally responsive mathematics education (pp. 189–205). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Teachers College.
Greer, B., Mukhopadhyay, S., Powell, A. B., & Nelson-Barber, S. (Eds.). (2009). Culturally responsive
mathematics education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Practices of highly successful mathematics teachers 399

Gutiérrez, R., & Dixon-Román, E. D. (2011). Beyond gap gazing: How can thinking about education compre-
hensively help us (re)invision mathematics education? In B. Atweh, M. Graven, W. Secada, & P. Valero
(Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 21–34). New York, NY: Springer.
Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward a pedagogy for social justice.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Gutstein, E., & Peterson, B. (Eds.). (2005). Rethinking mathematics: Teaching social justice by the numbers.
Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools.
Helms, J. E. (1990). Black and white racial identity attitudes: Theory, research, and practice. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press.
Hooks, B. (1989). Talking back. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Howard, G. R. (2006). We can’t teach what we don’t know: White teachers, multiracial schools (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Teachers College.
Irvine, J. J. (2003). Educating teachers for diversity: Seeing with a cultural eye. New York, NY: Teachers
College.
Irvine, J. J., & Fraser, J. (1998). Warm demanders. Education Week, 17(35), 56.
Ismail, N. A. (2009). Understanding the gap in mathematics achievement of Malaysian students. The Journal of
Educational Research, 105(5), 389–392.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American Children. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant teaching. Theory Into
Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lamb, S., Hogan, D., & Johnson, T. (2001). The stratification of learning opportunities and achievement in
Tasmanian secondary schools. Australian Journal of Education, 45(2), 153–167.
Lee, J. (2006). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of NCLB on the gaps: An in-depth look into
national and state reading and math outcome trends. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard
University.
Lee, V. E., Zuze, T. L., & Ross, K. R. (2005). School effectiveness in 14 sub-Saharan African countries: Links
with 6th graders’ reading achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(2–3), 207–246.
Marks, G. N. (2005). Accounting for immigrant non-immigrant differences in reading and mathematics in twenty
countries. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(5), 925–946.
Martin, D. B., Gholson, M. L., & Leonard, J. (2010). Mathematics as gatekeeper: Power and privilege in the
production of knowledge. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 3(2), 12–24.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: A qualitative
approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(1), 132–141.
National Center for Education Statistics (2009). The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2009 (NCES 2010-
451). Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston,
VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Nieto, S. (2010). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities (10th anniversary edition).
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching
(4th ed., pp. 905–947). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Schoen, H. L., Cebulla, J. J., Finn, K. F., & Fi, C. (2003). Teacher variables that relate to student achievement
when using a standards-based curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(3), 228–259.
Sheets, R. H. (2005). Diversity pedagogy: Examining the role of culture in the teaching-learning process.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Siddle-Walker, V. (2000). Valued segregated schools for African American children in the South, 1935–1969: A
review of common themes and characteristics. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 253–285.
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 94–
106.
Smith, B. O. (1971). On the anatomy of teaching. In R. T. Hyman (Ed.), Contemporary thought on teaching (pp.
20–27). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Steinberg, L. (1990). Autonomy, conflict, and harmony in the family relationship. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliot
(Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 255–276). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Ware, F. (2006). Warm demander pedagogy. Urban Education, 41(4), 427–456.
Copyright of Educational Studies in Mathematics is the property of Springer Science &
Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.