Math, Class, and Katrina Aftermath

367 Pages·2017·2.54 MB·English

by  Susan J. Ikenberry

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff NNeeww OOrrlleeaannss
SScchhoollaarrWWoorrkkss@@UUNNOO
University of New Orleans Theses and
Dissertations and Theses
Dissertations
12-2014
MMaatthh,, CCllaassss,, aanndd KKaattrriinnaa AAfftteerrmmaatthh:: TThhee IImmppaacctt ooff EExxppeerriieenncceess
TTeeaacchhiinngg MMaatthheemmaattiiccss ttoo LLooww--iinnccoommee MMiiddddllee SScchhooooll SSttuuddeennttss oonn
MMiiddddllee--iinnccoommee TTeeaacchheerrss’’ PPeeddaaggooggiiccaall SSttrraatteeggiieess
Susan J. Ikenberry
[email protected], [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td
Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, Education
Economics Commons, Science and Mathematics Education Commons, and the Social and Philosophical
Foundations of Education Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Ikenberry, Susan J., "Math, Class, and Katrina Aftermath: The Impact of Experiences Teaching
Mathematics to Low-income Middle School Students on Middle-income Teachers’ Pedagogical
Strategies" (2014). University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 1925.
https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1925
This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO
with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the
copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from
the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/
or on the work itself.

This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an
authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Math, Class, and Katrina Aftermath:
The Impact of Experiences Teaching Mathematics to
Low-income Middle School Students on Middle-income
Teachers’ Pedagogical Strategies

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
University of New Orleans
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy
in
Curriculum and Instruction

by

Susan Jeanine Ikenberry

M.A., City University of New York

December 2014
Copyright © 2014 by Susan Jeanine Ikenberry.
All rights reserved.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to first thank members of my dissertation committee for their
important parts at various stages of this dissertation journey. Yvelyne Germain-
McCarthy first introduced me to the interesting possibilities of mathematics
teaching and student engagement with interdisciplinary and applied curricular
projects. I have greatly appreciated her mentoring, support, and friendship. I am
in deep admiration of the enthusiasm and tireless devotion she brings to her work
and her students, and to extending the opportunity of a first-class mathematics
education to all students. I’d also like to thank Richard Speaker for initially
introducing me to great educational thinkers, to big picture views of educational
philosophy and history, and to the important implications for teaching and learning
of finer theoretical differences. I also want to thank him for helping to reunite a
dispersed and bedraggled graduate community in the months following Hurricane
Katrina. Pat Austin also deserves my deep appreciation for her critical reading of
the initial document, for challenging me to improve some parts, for advising me in
the final stages, and for negotiating administrative obstacles. I was deeply touched
that she recognized the part of my journey that was a solo flight and that it had not
defeated but empowered me. Finally, Ivan Gill deserves many thanks for lending
his expertise in working with a student he’d never met and for raising good
questions about basic assumptions of our discipline that often go unquestioned.
I’d like to thank one other great teacher I have been fortunate to learn from,
anthropologist Eric R. Wolf. He introduced me to a new way of reading history and
iii
theory, a long list of rich ethnographies, and a way of connecting the local and the
cultural with broader political and economic realities that frame but do not
determine human agency and improvisation.
In addition to teacher-mentors, I would like to acknowledge my debt to all the
students I have taught and the teachers I have worked with. Many of the problems
I have identified and the questions I have asked have come from working to
promote thinking, questioning, and analyzing among many-talented students in a
range of educational contexts.
My colleague Kent Grumbles deserves enormous credit for urging me to
complete this project. He has been a great mentor and I have greatly appreciated
his optimistic view of human potential and his unruffled enjoyment of life with all
its vagaries and unexpected turns. I’d also like to thank Anna Pennell whose
experiences with her own doctoral research inspired me to revisit mine.
Thanks are also due to my community of friends at New Garden Friends
Meeting. Their ready friendship and inclusion of our family made reorganizing and
reorienting our lives after Katrina much easier. Their commitments to peace and
social justice have been inspirational. Great thanks should also go to Scott Gibson
who went beyond the call of friendship to reading and commenting on initial parts
of my dissertation.
I would also like to thank my good friends Angeles Pla Farmer and Jerry
Farmer for the deep friendship we shared in New Orleans for many years. I am
indebted to Angeles for her abiding belief that I would – must – finish this project.
iv
Her love and faith have in some way contributed to this document, though we lost
her before it was done.
I owe a large debt to my parents Gilford and Nelda Ikenberry who raised us,
their children, to be critical thinkers, to question, and to understand that answers
are usually more complex than simple. We are also very grateful to them for taking
our family in for the year following Katrina.
Finally, I would like to thank two of the most important people in my life.
First, J. Fred Humphrey, my life partner, who finally returned the favor of listening
to him reading parts of his dissertation out loud by reading parts of mine. His
support, his belief that I had a contribution to make, and his humor have helped me
complete this project. And Brett Johannes Ikenberry-Humphrey who has been
ever-supportive, ever-confident, and always ready to celebrate milestones. To Brett,
I hope to celebrate many of yours in the years to come.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ xi
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... xii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1
Introduction
Background
Disconnect: Reform Ideal versus Low-Income “Realities”
Teacher “Wisdom”: A Static Given? Or Operative Teacher Knowledge
Formed in Low-Income Environment?
Statement of the Problem
Theoretical Frameworks
Structure and Agency
Social Constructivism
Purpose of the Study
Research Questions
Significance of the Study
Implications for Reform
Implications for Theories of Education’s Role in Reproducing Inequity
Limitations of the Study
Confounding Variables Affecting Evacuee Student Academic Behavior
Small Qualitative versus Large Quantitative Study
Organization of the Study

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ........................................................ 22
Introduction: Modern Teachers’ Pedagogical Dilemmas, Framed by Outcomes in
the Progressive Era

Part One: Dewey Lost and Thorndike Won – Implications of the Dominant
Educational Model for Inequality and Opportunity
Introduction: Teachers and Schools Transforming Society – Or Not: Theories
about Education’s Reproductive and Transformative Functions and
Potentials

vi
Structure – Education and Inequality Discourse: Reproducing and
Transformative
Pierre Bourdieu: Education Reproducing Culturally
Habitus: Between Structure and Subjectivist Agency
Education: Differentiates and Legitimizes
Value and Limitations of Bourdieu’s Theories to the Present Study
Paulo Freire: Transforming versus Reproducing Pedagogies
The Mechanism of Reproduction
Education as Transformation
Value and Limitations of Freire’s Theories to the Present Study
Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis: Reproducing, Corresponding Hidden
Curriculum
The Economic Imperative Underlying Educational Reform
Differentiated Correspondence of Schooling to Structure of Work
Comparisons: Bourdieu, Freire, and Bowles and Gintis
Value and Limitations of Bowles’ and Gintis’ Theories to the
Present Study
Evidence of Reproduction from the Classroom
Agency – Three Theories Highlighting Authentic Attempts to Modify Structure
Paul Willis: Learning to Labour
The Ethnographic Findings
Education’s Role
Value and Limitations of Willis’ Theories to the Present Study
Philippe Bourgois: In Search of Respect
Education’s Role
How Agency Leads to Self-Destruction a.k.a. Reproduction
Value and Limitations of Bourgois’ Theories to the Present Study
Solorzano and Bernal: Transformational Resistance
Summary of Themes Arising from the Reproduction and Agency Discourses, and
Questions They Raise for the Present Study

Part Two: Theory and Practice – Mathematics Teachers Working to Modify
Their Students’ Predicted Life Chances
Theory to Practice: Two Opposing Educational Models
Objectivist (Managerial) Educational Perspectives
20th Century Scientific Efficiency Foundations
Post-World War II Systems Model
Objectivist (Traditional) Mathematics Education in Practice
Constructivist (Pedagogical) Educational Perspectives
Constructivist Foundations
The NCTM Standards
Reform Mathematics Education in Practice

vii
Practice Modified: Complexities of High-Poverty Teaching, According to the
Research Literature
Students Are Inadequately Prepared: Meaning, Remediation,
Acceleration
Students Prefer “Direct Instructional” Styles: Culture and Code-
Switching
Poverty, Racism, and Trauma Negatively Impact the Learning
Environment
Behavior Management Problems Affect the Type of Instruction That Can
Take Place
The School Culture Undermines the Climate the Teacher Hopes to Create
in the Classroom
Segregation by Socioeconomic Class and Achievement
High-Stakes Testing in a High-poverty Context Undermines
Higher-Order Learning and Intensifies Under Achievement
Who Teachers Teach – The “Bubble Group”
Type of Knowledge and Learning Teachers Teach
Teaching Backwards: Using the Test as Curriculum
Negotiating a “Perfect Storm”: Testing and Resegregation
Summary of Themes Arising from the Theory and Practice Discourses, and
Questions They Raise for the Present Study
Chapter Conclusion

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 165
Introduction and Purpose
Context
Research Questions
Research Design
The Participants
Participant Selection
Justification for Using this Particular Population
Procedures
Interview Questions
Data Analysis Procedures
Limitations
Autobiographical Disclosure
Chapter Summary

viii
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS................................................................................ 186
Introduction
Purpose of the Study
Research Questions
Description of Findings by Teacher Participant
Teacher 1: Megan
Background
Research Question Responses
Teacher 2: Colette
Background
Research Question Responses
Teacher 3: Monica
Background
Research Question Responses
Teacher 4: Kendra
Background
Research Question Responses
Teacher 5: Molly
Background
Research Question Responses
Cross Comparison of Responses by Research Questions
Research Question One
Research Question Two
Research Question Three
Research Question Four
Chapter Summary

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 277
Introduction
Purpose of the Study
Research Questions and Summary of Findings
Discussion
Pedagogical Orientation and Its Implications
Remediation and Acceleration
Culture Matters
Summary: Factors That Influenced Teachers’ Choices
Implications for Improving Education for High-Poverty Students
Limitations
Recommendations for Future Study
Concluding Comments

REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 320
ix