From Identity Mirrors to Academic Equity: Elementary Teachers’ Conceptualizations and Enactment of Culturally Responsive Teaching

Technical Summary: From Identity Mirrors to Academic Equity

Problem Statement
Despite the increasing demographic diversity of U.S. schools and the established importance of Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT) for promoting educational equity, significant gaps remain in understanding how elementary teachers conceptualize and enact these practices. Existing literature often treats elementary educators as a monolithic group, failing to account for substantial developmental differences between primary (Kindergarten–2nd grade) and upper elementary (3rd–5th grade) contexts. Furthermore, while CRT frameworks emphasize academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness, it is unclear how teachers' understandings of these dimensions vary across developmental stages and whether their classroom practices reflect the full scope of CRT, particularly regarding sociopolitical aims and critical consciousness. This study addresses the need to examine elementary teachers' perceptions and enactments of CRT across different grade bands to inform more nuanced professional learning and teacher preparation.

Methodology
This qualitative study employed a reflexive thematic analysis approach to explore the conceptualizations and enactments of CRT among 39 elementary teachers (K–5) from 11 school districts in Pennsylvania.

• Participants: The sample consisted of 22 teachers in the K–2 band and 17 teachers in the 3–5 band. Participants were predominantly female (97.4%) and White (79.5%), with teaching experience ranging from 1 to 29 years. They were recruited via purposive sampling to ensure experience with culturally and linguistically diverse student populations.
• Data Collection: Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews conducted via Zoom between Fall 2025 and Spring 2026. The interview protocol covered five domains: conceptualizations of CRT, relationships and family partnerships, instructional practices, culture and behavior, and challenges/supports. Interviews lasted 45–60 minutes, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subjected to member checking.
• Data Analysis: The researcher utilized Braun and Clarke's (2006, 2021) reflexive thematic analysis. An inductive approach allowed themes to emerge from the data, with a specific analytic lens applied to compare K–2 and 3–5 perspectives. The analysis was guided by three theoretical frameworks: Ladson-Billings' Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP), Gay's Culturally Responsive Teaching, and Hammond's work on CRT and the brain.

Key Contributions
The study makes three primary contributions to the field of elementary education and CRT:

1. Developmental Differentiation: It challenges the treatment of elementary teachers as a single group by empirically demonstrating that the conceptualization and enactment of CRT differ significantly between primary and upper elementary contexts.
2. Relational vs. Critical Tension: It identifies a persistent gap where teachers strongly embrace the relational and identity-affirming dimensions of CRT but show limited evidence of enacting its critical consciousness and sociopolitical dimensions.
3. Refined Framework for Practice: It proposes that CRT is not a static set of practices but a developmental practice that evolves from "identity mirrors" in early grades to "academic equity" in upper grades.

Results
Thematic analysis revealed four interconnected themes:

1. Developmental Conceptualizations of CRT:

   • K–2 Teachers: Conceptualized CRT primarily through the lens of belonging, identity affirmation, and emotional safety. They focused on providing "mirrors" for students to see themselves reflected in materials and routines, and on fostering acceptance of differences (e.g., "people are different, and it's okay").
   • Grades 3–5 Teachers: Shifted the conceptualization toward academic responsiveness and educational equity. While representation remained important, these teachers emphasized modifying curriculum, adapting instruction, and creating opportunities for student voice and agency in learning.

2. Relationships and Trust as the Foundation:

   • Across all grade levels, relationship-building was the most consistent theme. Teachers viewed authentic relationships with students and families as the prerequisite for CRT.
   • K–2: Emphasized family partnerships, home-school communication, and creating emotional safety.
   • Grades 3–5: Focused on knowing students as "full humans," leveraging student voice, and positioning students as cultural experts.

3. Enacting CRT Through Instructional Practices:

   • K–2: Practices centered on exposure and representation (diverse books, multilingual visuals, discussions of traditions).
   • Grades 3–5: Practices involved deeper integration of cultural knowledge into academic content. Teachers adapted lessons to connect academic concepts (e.g., math problems) to students' lived experiences and positioned students as active contributors to classroom knowledge.

4. Interpreting Behavior Through a Cultural Lens:

   • Teachers recognized that student behavior, communication styles, and emotional expression are culturally shaped. They described efforts to challenge their own assumptions and interpret behaviors (e.g., eye contact, authority interactions) within cultural contexts rather than through deficit-oriented lenses. This was viewed as a mechanism for equitable classroom management.

Significance and Claims
The paper claims that CRT is both a relational and developmental practice. The study suggests that while teachers are effective at implementing the relational and cultural competence dimensions of CRT, there is a notable absence of critical consciousness (examining power, privilege, and systemic inequities) in their descriptions and practices.

The authors argue that this gap indicates a need for professional learning that moves beyond cultural awareness to support age-appropriate engagement with equity and social justice. The study posits that CRT should not be viewed as a fixed set of practices applied uniformly; rather, it must evolve to meet the changing social, emotional, and academic needs of students as they progress through elementary school. The findings highlight that while "relationalized" CRT is accessible to teachers, educational leadership and preparation programs must provide specific scaffolding to help educators integrate critical consciousness and equity-oriented pedagogy across all developmental levels.