This study used course descriptions to analyze the opportunities that student teachers had to develop culturally responsive and sustaining teaching skills at the top 10 colleges and universities that awarded education certificates in New York City. Each document was analyzed using the five themes of CRSE discussed in the introduction. The following section briefly summarizes the data, sample, and method of analysis used to determine findings.

Data & Sample

Researchers requested a compiled list of NYS institutions that awarded education certificates to NYC teachers until 2016. Each college was sorted by greatest number of certificates awarded to the least number of certificates awarded. The top 10 schools responsible for awarding the most certificates were included in the sample for this study; collectively, they awarded 2081 initial and professional certificates, which represents 60% of all teaching certificates earned up until the year 2015-2016 in New York City. 2015-2016 was the year of data most recently available when this study was conducted. Our sample of universities in descending order, starting with the highest number of graduates are: CUNY Queens College (n=360), Touro College (n=328), CUNY Brooklyn College (n=268), CUNY Hunter College (n=262), CUNY City College (n=162), Adelphi University (n=160), Columbia University (n=145), New York University (n=142), Long Island University (n=129), and CUNY Lehman College (n=125). Table 2 lists each included college and university’s number of graduates by certificate type. Half of the top 10 colleges and universities are in the City University of New York (CUNY) system.

Researchers used universities’ websites and published graduate bulletins to locate certificate completion requirements for initial education certificates and create a database of course descriptions for each college and university. It should be noted that all course descriptions were collected in the 2017-2018 academic school year except for NYU. NYU course descriptions we pulled from the 2018-2019 catalog (see more information in the limitations). Each unit of analysis is a single course in a program of study leading to an initial teaching certification in New York State public schools. For each school, we included course descriptions for the elementary education certificate and the Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) or bilingual certificate. A quota sampling method was used to select three more programs to represent the diverse range of teacher certifications.

This sampling allowed researchers to make comparisons across elementary/childhood education and bilingual/TESOL education and explore other program offerings that may not be available across all universities and colleges. The course descriptions in this study represent 50 teacher certification programs from the 10 colleges and universities that certify the most teachers in New York City. There were a total of 732 course descriptions that were analyzed for this study; on average twelve courses per degree, five degrees per institution (table 3). This sample is representative of the opportunities available to most prospective teachers seeking initial certification to work in New York City public schools to learn about and develop CRSE skills.

Analysis

Five hundred and forty course descriptions were uploaded and analyzed in the qualitative software, Atlas.ti. Analysis occurred in two phases. The first phase was a computer assisted analysis that identified courses that had CRSE keywords present in course descriptions. The CRSE keywords were derived from the five themes of CRSE, previously mentioned in the introduction, which include: (Cultural Background, Sociopolitical Consciousness, Relevancy, Critical Action, and Student Dignity). Courses that included CRSE keywords were marked affirmatively as CRSE content. In the second phase of analysis, researchers manually reviewed each affirmed CRSE course description and the context of the CRSE keyword. A course description generally failed to satisfy the CRSE criteria if it mentioned CRSE keywords but did not provide satisfactory language that indicated a CRSE worldview. For example, if a course description included the word “diversity” without context about how marginalized students should be seen as assets, meaningfully included, or understood through their social positioning, that course would not be classified as CRSE content.

Similarly, if a course mentioned family engagement but in the context of “communicating standards” to parents, that course was not coded as meeting the requirements of CRSE; whereas a course that mentioned “positive, reciprocal relationships with families of diverse backgrounds” did. Language such as preparing teachers to serve in “urban settings” was identified as coded language for a deficit perspective and was not coded as CRSE. An affirmative example of CRSE content is a course designed for teachers to recognize “political forces that influence the programs offered to students and their families.” In instances where the context of the CRSE content was ambiguous, the course description was referred to a panel of raters who ultimately determined whether the course should be identified as CRSE content.

Limitations

The purpose of this research project was to learn about the ways that universities and colleges are preparing New York City teachers to implement culturally responsive and sustaining education. Our examination of over 700 course descriptions is one way to understand how well prepared new teachers are, but it has its limitations. Our research did not examine course syllabi, interview professors and instructors, interview student educators, observe college courses, or collect data on the classes that students actually completed. Our research is limited to the options that universities and colleges provide to students to complete their credits toward their initial certificate. Additionally, course descriptions for New York University were collected a year after courses for other colleges and universities. This is important because over the last couple of years, the New York City Department of Education has adopted an explicit focus on culturally responsive and sustaining education. NYU courses were collected at a different time due to staff turnover which paused the research project. NYU course descriptions from the 2017-2018 could not be located for the study.

Finally, it is possible that a course description might not include components of CRSE while the actual course does actually prepare educators to teach in culturally responsive ways and vice versa. Courses with descriptions that signal CRSE content could be taught in ways that diminish or demean students of color and other marginalized identities; likewise, courses with descriptions that do not mention aspects of CRSE could be taught with content and pedagogy that are truly culturally responsive. While these limitations provide some context to how our research findings should be interpreted, our research still provides some insight into the opportunities that student educators had to prepare them to implement CRSE.