PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES OF CULTURALLY RELEVANT SCIENCE TEACHING IN AMERICAN INDIAN CLASSROOMS

YOUNKYEONG NAM, GILLIAN ROEHRIG, ANNE KERN and BREE REYNOLDS

PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES OF CULTURALLY RELEVANTSCIENCE TEACHING IN AMERICAN INDIAN CLASSROOMS

Received: 1 April 2012; Accepted: 16 October 2012

ABSTRACT. This study explores the perceptions of culturally relevant science teachingof 35 teachers of American Indian students. These teachers participated in professionaldevelopment designed to help them better understand climate change science content andteaching climate change using both Western science and traditional and culturalknowledge. Teacher perceptions of practices using culturally relevant instruction wereevaluated. The data were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The results fromthe survey analysis show that the teachers’ existing practices of culturally relevant scienceteaching were limited in choosing topics relevant to American Indian culture. We foundthree common themes from the teachers’ perceptions of culturally relevant scienceteaching, meaning of culturally relevant science teaching, teaching strategies, and purposeof culturally relevant science teaching from the qualitative data. We also found thatteachers with higher survey scores perceive culturally relevant science teaching differentlythan teachers with lower survey scores, specifically for the purposes and teachingstrategies of culturally relevant science teaching. The results show that teachers withhigher survey scores tended to perceive culturally relevant science teaching as a two-waylearning process between teachers and students where the teachers can learn traditionalscience knowledge from the students. They also tend to perceive using concrete traditionalscience examples as effective teaching strategy for culturally relevant science teaching andbuilding strong relationships with American Indian students as the most important purposeof culturally relevant science teaching. We also discuss common challenges faced byscience teachers when trying to implement culturally relevant science teaching withAmerican Indian students.

KEY WORDS: American Indian education, culturally relevant science teaching

Recent rhetoric in the USA urges the need to “enlarge the pipeline ofstudents who are prepared to enter college and graduate with a degree inscience, engineering, or mathematics” (National Academies & Committeeon Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century, 2006, p. 6). Aprimary obstacle to increasing the pipeline is the lack of student interest inscience, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), particularlyfor students from underrepresented groups (Lynch, 2000). AmericanIndian students are especially underrepresented in STEM disciplines, aswell as being the most underserved and underrepresented by traditionalcurriculum materials and instructional approaches (Monhardt, 2003).There exists a critical need to address science education for American

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (2013) 11: 143Y167# National Science Council, Taiwan 2012

Indian students by promoting respect for native ways of knowing andexploring educational models that better align with native cultures (Cleary& Peacock, 1998; Deloria & Wildcat, 2001).

Over the last 30 years, there have been a number of studies exploringthe impact of culturally relevant teaching on students from diversecultural backgrounds. These studies have explored a variety of outcomes,including impact on science achievement, interests, and cultural identity(e.g. Burke, 2007). However, the majority of these studies tend to targetAfrican American, Hispanic, and other second-language students,particularly in urban settings. Culturally relevant teaching for AmericanIndian students is largely ignored by science educators and criticaltheorists. In her book, “Red Pedagogy,” Grande (2004) expresses concernthat critical theorists have failed to recognize and value American Indianknowledge and ways of knowing that have had a long and enduring placein history, well before the current mainstream conception of education inthe USA. American Indian struggles over tribal lands, resources, treatyrights, and intellectual property have been neglected by educators andstakeholders who ultimately decide educational policies. To assist scienceteachers in implementing culturally congruent instruction that addressesthe unique culture and epistemologies of American Indians, it is criticalthat scholars address this lack of consideration of American Indianaudiences.

To better assist science teachers of American Indian students indeveloping culturally relevant science teaching practices, it is important tofirst understand their perceptions and current practices regardingculturally relevant science teaching and to situate these perceptions inframeworks for culturally relevant science teaching. Thus, this studyexplores the following research questions:

1. What are science teachers’ current culturally relevant science teachingpractices in American Indian classrooms?

2. How do teachers perceive culturally relevant science teaching inAmerican Indian classrooms?

3. What are the challenges to implementing culturally relevant scienceteaching in American Indian classrooms?

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Arguments supporting the need for culturally relevant science teachingfor American Indian students have been emerging over the last couple of

YOUNKYEONG NAM ET AL.144

decades (e.g. Ovando, 1992; Cajete, 1999; Gilbert, 2011). The majorconcern is bridging indigenous worldviews in understanding naturalphenomena with Western views of science (Barnhardt & Kawagley,2005). Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) is a critical subset ofindigenous knowledge for culturally relevant science teaching that can beunderstood as “a cumulative body of knowledge, practice, and belief,evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations bycultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (includinghumans) with one another and with their environment” (Berkes, 1999, p.8). TEK is now valued by some scientists and used to solve importantbiological and ecological problems (Snively & Corsiglia, 2001).However, TEK and native worldviews remain at odds with US sciencestandards (National Research Council, 1996) which are based on thepredominant norms and views of Western science (Cajete, 1999;Kawagley, Norris-Tull & Norris-Tull, 1998). Indigenous views andTEK include a particular belief system about nature with uniqueepistemological and cultural values, as well as language. These areintegral to school experiences in order for American Indian students tobridge Western science worldviews with those of their community (Agbo,2001; Cajete, 1999; Cleary & Peacock, 1998; Kawageley, 2001).However, research related to culturally relevant science teaching forAmerican Indian students is still in its infancy.

Recently, Roehrig, Campbell, Dalbotten & Varma (2012) proposed apedagogical framework for teaching climate change with AmericanIndian students. This framework blends three approaches to teachingand learning science integrated with culturally relevant science teaching:(1) interdisciplinary approaches to learning big ideas in science, (2) place-based approaches to develop local understanding and motivation, and (3)inquiry-based approaches to learning. While this framework wasdeveloped for teaching climate change in native communities, it can beapplied to other science topics in a manner that is respectful and inclusiveof indigenous epistemologies and culturally relevant science teaching asdescribed below.

A number of compelling connections can be made between interdis-ciplinary curricular approaches to science teaching and indigenousworldviews. These worldviews are holistic and directly consider thenumerous interconnections between living and natural entities (Brayboy& Castagno, 2008) and are grounded in the idea that everything isinterconnected (Deloria, 1992). Educators have argued the necessity ofusing native worldviews and TEK for teaching science as the fundamentalelements of American Indian epistemology (e.g. Cajete, 1999; Kawageley,

PERCEPTIONS OF CULTURALLY RELEVANT SCIENCE TEACHING 145

2001; McKinley, 2005; Riggs, 2004) and these views are better aligned withan interdisciplinary approach. As Snively & Corsiglia (2001) point out, TEKis guided by “traditional wisdom, tends to be holistic, viewing the world asan interconnected whole” (p. 12).

Place-based approaches to teaching are grounded in the notion thatgeographical places are rich in social, cultural, and historical significance,yet become devoid of life “when we fail to consider places as products ofhuman decisions” (Gruenewald, 2003a, p. 627). Semken & Freeman(2008) note that “in the natural sciences, place-based pedagogy isadvocated as a way to improve engagement and retention of students,particularly members of indigenous or historically inhabited communi-ties” (p. 1044). Davidson-Hunt & O’Flaherty (2007) add that “the goalsof a place-based learning community are to support people in respondingto their own needs, developing a capacity to generate their own researchprojects, creating supportive relationships with other actors through thebuilding of dynamic processes for the coproduction of locally relevantknowledge” (p. 295). However, Gruenewald (2003b) suggests that place-based approaches are not enough for “transformation and conversation”and ultimately meaning making for American Indian students. Hesuggests that the paradigm of critical pedagogy of place blends place-based approaches with critical pedagogies focused on the empowermentof individuals with specific attention to historical and cultural perspec-tives (Gruenewald, 2003b).

The importance of culturally relevant teaching for American Indianstudents has been addressed by several American Indian educators (e.g.Cleary & Peacock, 1998; Demmert & Towner, 2003; Gilbert, 2011).While different terms are used, such as culturally oriented education(Mahan, 1981), culturally based education (Demmert & Towner, 2003;Gilbert, 2011), and culturally congruent instruction (Sievert & LaFrance,2011), all of these scholars argue the importance of considering AmericanIndian students’ learning and communication styles (e.g. Morgan, 2010),using native language (e.g. Demmert & Towner, 2003; Gilbert, 2011;Morgan, 2010; Ovando, 1992), using instructional methods that valuetraditional and cultural teaching methods (e.g. Preston, 1991), andcommunity participation and application of social and political customsand values of the community (e.g. Demmert & Towner, 2003).

Science curriculum models that incorporate TEK and culturallyrelevant science teaching mirror inquiry-based approaches for teachingscience (Demmert & Towner, 2003; Gilbert, 2011). For example, Gilbert(2011) proposed a four-phase learning cycle model: (1) motivate studentsto learn a scientific concept, (2) connect the science concept with TEK,


(3) expand and explore the concept using scientific inquiry, and (4)connect to Western science. These studies highlight the importance ofinquiry-based approaches, as well as integration of TEK and Westernscience.

In summary, the common elements for culturally relevant scienceteaching suggested in the literature are: (1) using topics relevant toAmerican Indian traditional and cultural practices and contemporaryissues in native communities, (2) using instructional methods andlearning styles appropriate for American Indian students, such ashands-on learning and learning through observation and stories, (3)making science learning meaningful by integrating native views andepistemologies, and (4) using place as a context for learning inconjunction with TEK. Yet, for many teachers, implementingculturally relevant science teaching remains a challenge. Thus, thisstudy aims to understand teachers’ perceptions and implementation ofculturally relevant science teaching in American Indian classrooms.Specifically related to their use of culturally congruent content andinstructional methods that reflect the unique cultural, scientific, andcontextual perspectives of the students they teach.

METHODOLOGY

Given the study objectives, a mixed-methodology study was used(Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). The data for this study came fromthree main sources: (1) a survey to document teacher’s currentculturally relevant science teaching practices, (2) open-ended surveyquestions prior to the profession development workshops, and (3)semistructured interviews during the semester following the summerworkshops. The quantitative component of the study was designed tounderstand how frequently the teachers’ instructional practicesincluded culturally relevant approaches. The qualitative componentof the study consisted of open-ended survey items and semistructuredinterviews (Berg, 1998), in order to develop a richer understandingof the teachers’ experiences and perceptions of culturally relevantscience teaching by allowing teachers to elaborate on theirperceptions and uses of culturally relevant science teaching and toprovide more detailed examples. By combining quantitative andqualitative research, a theory emerges from the data that iselaborated through the teachers’ experiences and perceptions of


culturally relevant science teaching practices with American Indianstudents.

Context

The context for this study is the two NASA Innovations in ClimateEducation projects: CYCLES—teachers discovering climate changefrom native perspectives and the Intermountain Climate EducationNetwork (ICE-Net). CYCLES and ICE-Net are 3-year teacherprofessional development programs designed to support climatechange education (CCE) in American Indian communities throughthe application of our culturally relevant CCE framework (Roehrig etal., 2012) described in the “Theoretical Framework” section.

The first CYCLES and ICE-Net professional development workshopsoccurred during the summer of 2011. Teachers learned about the scienceof climate change and how to incorporate culturally relevant and place-based strategies in their CCE lessons. For more details on the structure ofthe professional development workshops, see Kern, Roehrig, Reynolds,Bhattacharya, Varma, Hougham, Finley et al. (2012).

Participants

A total of 38 teachers participated in the CYCLES and ICE-Net climatechange professional development programs (only 35 completed all of thedata collection). All of the teachers work in schools on or nearreservations in the states of Minnesota, Idaho, and Washington. Themajority of teachers (29) taught middle or high school science. Theremaining nine were a mix of technology, social studies, and cultureteachers. Demographic details on the teacher participants are in Table 1.

TABLE 1

Participant teachers’ demographic Information

CYCLES teachers(N = 23)

ICE-Net teachers(N = 15)

Female 16 8Male 7 7Native 4 0Non-native 19 14Teaching experience (years) 4 – 35 (Ave = 14) 1 – 23 (Ave = 13)


The low number of native teachers in our study mirrors the demographicsof teachers in schools with high enrollments of American Indian studentsacross the USA; Figueira (2004) reported that only 38 % of teachers intribal schools and 15 % of teachers in these high-enrollment publicschools were American Indian or Alaska Native. Additionally, themajority of native teachers teach at the elementary level.

Data CollectionCulturally Relevant Science Teaching Survey. Thirty-five participantteachers completed a culturally relevant science teaching survey prior tothe summer workshops. The survey used two of the four categories from theCulturally Congruent Instruction Survey (Sievert & LaFrance, 2011), the useof cultural content and specific instructional strategies. Survey items weremodified to remove specific references to Montana tribes in the originalsurvey and two items not specifically related to teaching science. Surveyitems directly reflect culturally relevant science teaching practices docu-mented by scholars as being appropriate for American Indian students andhave been reported in the literature in exploring the science practices ofteachers of American Indian students in Montana (Sievert & LaFrance,2011). The cultural content scale included five items that consider theinclusion of cultural stories, contemporary and historical issues, and content,such as TEK, into the curriculum. The instructional scale included nine itemsrelated to the use specific pedagogical strategies, such as cooperativelearning, project-based learning, and community involvement. The frequen-cy of the teachers’ use of specific culturally relevant science teachingstrategies was measured by using a six-point Likert scale (1, never; 2,seldom; 3, sometimes; 4, often; 5, very often; and 6, always).

Qualitative Data Sources. In addition to the Likert scale survey,teachers were asked to answer the following five open-ended questionsabout their perceptions of culturally relevant science teaching prior to thesummer workshop. The first two questions were asked again after theworkshop.

1. What does culturally relevant science teaching for American Indianstudents mean to you?

2. What is your image of the American Indian community, culture, andstudents?

3. How does your experience of teaching American Indian students affectyour thinking about American Indian students’ learning style or theircultural knowledge?


4. In what ways are parents or community members involved in yourscience teaching?

5. How does your school or district help you to improve or develop yourprofessional knowledge about culturally relevant science teaching?

Semistructured interviews were conducted during the semester following thesummer workshop with 15 representative participant teachers. Each interviewlasted approximately 30 – 45 min and was audiotaped and transcribed. Theinterview questions included the following prompts with probing questions toelicit details about specific strategies and content mentioned by teachers:

1. What does culturally relevant (science) teaching mean to you?2. What is the purpose of using culturally relevant teaching approaches?3. What is the most important thing you have learned about culturally

relevant science teaching from the summer workshop?4. Have you used some of the topics from the workshop to make your

teaching more culturally relevant? If yes, what topic? And why? If not,why not? What are the challenges you face in implementing culturallyrelevant science teaching?

5. In general, what are the challenges for making your teaching moreculturally relevant?

Data Analysis. The Likert scale questions in the survey data were analyzedusing simple descriptive statistics of participant teachers’ responses for eachsurvey item. For the qualitative data, an inductive approach (Patton, 2002)was used for analyzing the teachers’ responses to the open-ended questionsand interviews. The inductive approach allowed for themes to emerge fromthe data instead of predetermined patterns. First, the data was read carefullyand core categories were developed to describe teachers’ perceptions aboutimplementation of culturally relevant science teaching, including topicsused, instructional approaches, purpose, and challenges for culturallyrelevant science teaching. The data was then organized in a matrix to lookfor cross-case themes. Four researchers participated in the data analysisprocess in order to enhance the validity of the interpretations (Patton, 2002).

RESULTS

Current Culturally Relevant Science Teaching Practices

In this section, information is shared on the teachers’ use of specificcontent and teaching strategies that were argued as important components


of culturally relevant instruction (e.g. Agbo, 2001; Cleary & Peacock,1998; Demmert & Towner, 2003; Gilbert, 2011). We used the surveyresults to provide a general understanding of the teachers’ perceptions ofculturally relevant science teaching and challenges related to theimplementation of culturally relevant science teaching in the classroom.Table 2 presents the frequency with which the teachers reported usingspecific types of content relevant to the various American Indian tribesrepresented in both projects. As Table 2 shows, overall, teachers’ use ofculturally relevant content falls between seldom and sometimes, with9 – 17 teachers in each category marking that they never use culturallyrelevant content. Of note, the least frequent use of culturally relevantcontent is TEK.

Table 3 presents the frequency with which the teachers usedspecific culturally relevant instructional strategies. The strategies inTable 3 fall into two broad groups: (1) “good teaching” strategies(student-centered and inquiry-based) for all students and (2) culturallyrelevant strategies specifically tied to native culture and students. AsTable 3 shows, overall, the teachers’ use of good teaching strategies,such as cooperative learning and hands-on instruction, falls betweensometimes and very often with most items averaging around often.The final four items in Table 3 are more specifically aligned with

TABLE 2

Frequency of teacher responses to use of culturally relevant content (N = 35)

ContentNever(1)

Seldom(2)

Sometimes(3)

Often(4)

Veryoften(5)

Almostalways(7) Mean

Traditional stories fromlocal tribes

12 8 9 1 4 1 2.4

Contemporary issuesrelevant to local tribalcommunities

13 6 8 2 6 0 2.8

Historical content aboutlocal tribes

11 9 7 5 2 1 2.5

Traditional scienceknowledge from localtribes

17 8 6 2 1 1 2.0

Science content tied toplace-based contextsrelevant to local tribes

11 6 10 4 1 3 2.6


teaching practices related to culture that specifically addressinstructional methods which draw on teachers’ TEK including

TABLE 3

Frequency of teachers’ responses to use of culturally relevant instructional strategies

InstructionNever(1)

Seldom(2)

Sometimes(3)

Often(4)

Veryoften(5)

Almostalways(6) Mean

Students work incollaborativegroupsa

1 0 3 10 7 2 4.2

Used extendedwait time inconversationswith studentsa

1 1 4 9 5 3 4.1

Encouraged studentsto assumeresponsibilityfor their learninga

1 1 5 6 4 3 4.0

Used alternativeforms ofassessmenta

3 6 3 4 5 2 3.3

Provide specificformative feedbackto each studenta

1 3 5 5 6 3 3.9

Used culturalmetaphors,analogies, orsymbols torepresent sciencecontent

9 5 7 8 3 2 2.8

Used local nativelanguage duringinstruction

18 4 6 3 2 2 2.2

Used scienceactivities in whichstudents engaged inproblems relevantto their community

4 8 9 6 3 5 3.3

Local communitymembers or tribalelders were guestteachers

19 6 7 1 2 0 1.6

aGeneral pedagogical strategy items were only included on the MN survey (N = 23)


cultural representation of science content, native language use,connections to place, and connection with students’ community.There is a noticeable difference in teachers’ response patterns onthese items compared to general pedagogical items. With theexception of “Used science activities in which students designedsolutions to problems relevant to their community,” these items fallinto the seldom to sometimes range. The higher ranked item in thisgroup could be considered place-based and thus more generallyappropriate pedagogy, as opposed to being pedagogy unique toAmerican Indian students. Of particular note, over half of theteachers never used the categories of “Local tribal elders or othertribal community members were guest teachers” and “Use of localnative language in instructional interactions with students.”

Teachers’ Perceptions of Culturally Relevant Science Teaching

In this section, we describe the teachers’ perceptions of culturallyrelevant science teaching based on three main categories thatdescribe the what, how, and why of culturally relevant scienceteaching from the teachers’ perspectives: (1) meaning of culturallyrelevant science teaching, (2) effective teaching strategies forculturally relevant science teaching, and (3) purposes of culturallyrelevant science teaching. From the qualitative data, we obtainedricher descriptions of the teachers’ views and practices ofculturally relevant science teaching that expand on the surveyresults described above. In the following section, we describe eachof these main categories and subcategories that emerged from thedata.

The Meaning of Culturally Relevant Science Teaching. We found thatthe teachers’ perceptions of the meaning of culturally relevantscience teaching can be summarized into three subcategories: (1)incorporating locally relevant events into science instruction, (2)recognizing and respecting traditional beliefs and history, and (3)integrating TEK into science instruction. Each of these subcategoriesis described further in the succeeding subsections.

INCORPORATING LOCAL RELEVANT EVENTS INTO SCIENCE INSTRUCTION. Alittle over half of the teachers discussed using place-based examples intheir instruction. These teachers associated cultural relevance with thelocal landscape and place as opposed to cultural traditions, norms, history,beliefs, and TEK. For example, Hattie stated:


To make something culturally relevant, it has to be, you know, everyone has a differentcultural background. So I kind of think of it as may be regional or just making itsomething relevant to their life’s personally. Weather that would be about the area wespecifically live in.

Some of the teachers in this group clearly stated their lack of culturalknowledge and thus inability to distinguish between science teaching andculturally relevant science teaching, as evidenced by the following two quotes:

Culturally relevant science is very tricky to me. It means adding a cultural aspect into thelessons I am teaching my students. It is kind of a toss-up as to how much culture I shouldput in because I am not the expert in their culture. I can bring what I know to the table.(Emily)

I taught for 1 month on an Indian Reservation and don’t see a vast difference in teaching scienceto any culture. The roadblocks are the same, evolution, climate change alike. (Trevor)

RECOGNIZ ING AND RESPECT ING TRADIT IONAL BEL IEFS AND

HISTORY. Approximately one third of the teachers recognized theimportance of honoring native perspectives and incorporating theirstories and traditions, but their descriptions did not explicitly addressscience examples. As stated by Michael, “[culturally relevant scienceteaching] means including, inviting culture into the classroom at everyopportunities. Make sure to view every topic from native perspective,include stories, legends, beliefs,” and for Betty, “[culturally relevantscience teaching] means that we include elements of our lessons thattouch the Native American lives and past.” Many teachers, however,struggled to provide specific examples of how they incorporated thesevalues and stories into their science teaching and some were unsure ofhow to access this information. As Trish stated, “I have occasionallyasked for cultural input from various sources but unfortunately I donot recall asking for Native American input.”

INTEGRATING TEK INTO SCIENCE INSTRUCTION. One third of the teachersstated the importance of bridging culture and science either throughusing specific examples of native uses of nature (e.g. traditionalmedicines) or the inclusion of TEK. Some native teachers describedthis as a more philosophical position that pervaded their instruction.As Joan stated:

Well, to me, it (culturally relevant science teaching) would be teaching … Let’s say youare doing earth science. Teaching in native culture, it is mother earth, so it would containthe respect for all the living things on the earth and respect would be the big thing withthat. That’s what comes to my mind right now.


Other teachers, such as Mark, were able to expand this philosophicalposition of respect for nature with specific examples:

For the cultural aspects, the circle of life is very important in any culture, for that matter. In anypart of the word, it always revolves around the circle of life, any circle. The fire [last year], inmoderation, a lot of the organisms or plants tend to rely on fire in order to regenerate.

Other teachers were able to provide examples of native science that theyincorporated into their science lessons without expanding on an underlyingphilosophical approach. This was a more piecemeal approach of searchingfor native examples to illustrate a school science topic. For example, the twoteachers with lower overall scores on the survey stated “It means putting intothe curriculum things that are important to them” and “It means putting theNative American perspective into lessons especially the things about givingand taking of the Earth.” While other teachers were able to provide specificexamples, Cathy stated, “In a unit in the physical sciences, I used someexamples of traditional medicines and modern pain relievers.”

Five teachers with higher overall survey scores talked about culturallyrelevant science teaching as also for being for their own learning from theirstudents and community. They perceived culturally relevant science teachingas not being a unidirectional process but a two-way learning process betweenteacher and students. These teachers frequently clarified that AmericanIndian students and community members have an important knowledge thatis a very useful resource for teaching science. For example, Rachel stated,“There is a lot of science knowledge in the community. There is a lot thatthey have and can teach me.” Similarly, Tatiana said:

I have marvelous well-informed and practiced students who are learning family traditionsthe traditional way and who are also being trained to share and support the learning andexperience of their classmates … When this works, it’s like magic. The whole experiencegoes electric, and into overdrive.

Another teacher, Kevin, shared about the contributions of indigenouscultures to science:

There was a lot of science that was done by indigenous people and indigenous culture ofthe past that can be incorporated in to the class. Whereas, we study things now withtechnology we have now. But indigenous cultures were studying the same things withtechnology they had and talking about their result and how similar they are and how theyuse the same methods we use today, just with different tools.

The qualitative data suggest that two broad groups of teachers existrelated to the meaning of culturally relevant science teaching. One group,approximately half of the teachers, expressed concern that it was


important to respect native view and beliefs in their science teaching, buttheir discussion of culturally relevant science teaching was vague andlacking details in terms of how to incorporate native views andperspectives in the science lesson. Additionally, these teachers struggledto provide specific examples of culturally relevant content. The secondgroup of teachers, approximately half of the teachers, described anunderlying philosophy of respect for nature and native beliefs and wasable to back up this perspective with specific examples. Additionally,they perceived culturally relevant science teaching as a two-directionalprocess with the community as holders of important information andthose they have much to learn from their students and community. Whilethese teachers do not explicitly refer to TEK or indigenous knowledge,their responses embodied the essence of these constructs.

Teaching Strategies for Culturally Relevant Science Teaching. Teachers’perceptions of culturally relevant science teaching strategies aregrouped into three subcategories: (1) providing hands-on experiences,(2) place-based teaching, and (3) integrating traditional teachingstyles. Each of these subcategories is described in detail in thesucceeding subsections.

PROVIDING HANDS-ON EXPERIENCES. As noted in the survey data,teachers reported more frequent use of general “good teaching”strategies, such as cooperative learning groups and use of authenticassessments. An additional reform-based pedagogy emerged from theopen-ended survey and interview data of using hands-on approachesto learning. While, hands-on or inquiry-based learning is advocated asa positive strategy for working with American Indian students(Demmert & Towner, 2003), the one quarter of teachers coded inthis group grouped American Indian students as being just like otherstudents; as Betty stated, “they enjoy hand-on activities like otherstudents.” Two other teachers in this group stated, “I find they enjoythe same hands-on experiences the other kids enjoy. They oftenprefer to sit back and watch before just diving in.” and “I don’t thinkthey learn that much differently than a non-Native student. I feel weall learn in a very similar way.”

These teachers recognized the importance of considering differentlearning styles, but without regard for students’ cultural background. Asone of the teachers, Rachel, summarized, “As for learning styles, it is justgood teaching practices to try to reach all students on their plane that willhelp all students regardless of background or ethnicity.”


PLACE-BASED TEACHING. Approximately half of the teachers empha-sized the importance of using place as a context to help students seescience as being relevant. For most of these teachers, their localenvironment was used as an extension of the classroom to explorescience in the context of their place, but without explicit culturalconnections. For example, one teacher stated, “Local science issuesare frequently infused in my lessons by simply using periodicals andnews stories. I use the robust geologic history of northern Idaho togive students context for physical science concepts.” Other teachersused examples of investigating the local creek and taking studentsoutside for field trips for the purpose of “promot[ing] place basedcontexts like the effects of juniper thinning on herbaceous under-stories.” In other examples, teachers used local events to highlightscientific concepts, as exemplified in the following quote:

The biggest thing that we’re dealing with is that last year there was a major fire in theboundary waters that ended up removing a lot of the elder trees and the result is that newtrees are going to be coming in behind them. So, we talked about the succession andsecondary succession of plants and how that works in relation to a major burn comparedto a smaller burn. We were told that the pine trees will eventually start to go down innumbers and the numbers of hardwood trees are going to start to increase. As in, we mightstart seeing more oak, maples, the deciduous trees. (Mark)

Only one teacher in this group discussed place-based approachesbeyond simply using the local environment and context of place. AsKevin stated, “I include place-based learning to show how the content isapplicable to their lives while recognizing and respecting that there aremany different ways of knowing.”

INTEGRATING TRADITIONAL TEACHING STYLES. Close to half of the teachersemphasized the importance of inviting elders into the classroom, usingelders’ ideas, knowledge, and native language as effective teachingstrategies. These teachers were those with more frequent use of culturallyrelevant approaches from the survey and they were very open-minded toincluding elders and community experts in their classrooms. Thefollowing two quotes describe how elders and community experts wereintegrated by these teachers into the classroom:

There is an open door policy for my classroom, and I am in constant search for localexperts to stop and visit my classes. Sometimes they do stop in and share their knowledgewith our students … I have a few elders and culture staff I can rely on. I can ask how tosay a certain words in Ojibwe. Or what would be the best way to teach a certain topic, sothat the students are interested. (Mark)


I get lots of tribal science people involved with my older kids … We have visitedreplantings, syrup camps, floodplains and gardens … windmills and water treatmentplants. We’ve been visited by archaeologists and fisheries experts. I have videotapes ofour elders speaking about legends, history, traditions, syrup camps … hunting. (Tatiana)

These teachers were also able to provide specific examples of TEKconnected to place and utilized an elder or community expert to bringTEK into their instruction. One exception was a native teacher who wascomfortable in integrating TEK into his classrooms:

A point of view that we often get in our lessons is the western point of view, but we cantake that and mold it to fit the classroom that I am working in and make lessons relevant tothe students as much as I can, so its culturally connecting. For example, for theAnishinabe, everything is seasonal. Starting off the year when you are studying … wellright now it our wild rice season and when we are looking at the science and looking athow wild rice, how the plant is. You can study it the western way, so we try and fuse whatthat means culturally. And bridging the gaps with wild rice, and then you move on tohunting with deer, trapping with beaver, and just trying to tie everything cultural you caninto what our standards tell us we have to teach. Trying to infuse both points of view inyour lesson planning. (Ben)

From this analysis, three groups of teachers emerged. One group seesAmerican Indian students as being no different to other students and relieson “good teaching strategies for all,” such as hands-on learning. Thesecond group layers in place-based approaches to learning to providecontext for learning within students’ lives and local environment but doesnot connect place to cultural or native ways of knowing. The third grouputilizes TEK in their teaching repertoire, connecting place to cultural andseasonal activities and the integration of elders and community expertsinto the classroom.

Purpose of Culturally Relevant Science Teaching. In this section, theteachers’ perceptions of culturally relevant science teaching are describedin terms of their view of the purpose of culturally relevant scienceteaching. Three subcategories emerged from the qualitative data: (1)helping students see the value of science, (2) improving students’ self-esteem and social and cultural identity, and (3) building relationshipswith students. Each of these subcategories is described in the succeedingsubsections.

HELPING STUDENTS SEE THE VALUE OF SCIENCE. More than half of theteachers described one purpose of culturally relevant science teaching asbeing to motivate their students to learn science. As stated by one teacher:


The most important purpose of [culturally relevant science teaching] is making [science]relevant to the kids so that it means something to them. So that they have these ideas ofscientific concepts and they can apply them, not just know them as abstract concepts thatwere in a book somewhere and that they have this mish-mash of facts in their head butthey can actually apply the science that they have to learn to their lives, their communities,to their families. (Kevin)

While most of the teachers connected to place-based learning and findinglocal relevance for specific science content, a few teachers described the needto bridge betweenWestern science and TEK to help students see more valueand relevance in learning science. As one teacher stated:

My role is to try to bring science that maybe is taught differently through their culture andtry to incorporate that into my lesson plan. … I think a lot of times I cannot make the kidssee the value in science their way. Sometimes what they may see in school is not taught athome, and I want to try and make sure that they know that there are different ways. Youknow, that science is well rounded and what they do in their community is scientific too… just making sure that they know that it’s valuable too. (Karen)

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ SELF-ESTEEM AND SOCIAL AND CULTURAL

IDENTITY. Three teachers, primarily native teachers, expressed concernsabout the development of their American Indian students’ social and culturalidentity. In the teachers’ words, “If students understand more about theirculture and hear it at school, they will feel better about who they are andwhatthey can accomplish” and “Encouragement is vital, often times the studentsdon’t see themselves as capable or seldom were praised. They feel moreincluded when the native culture is tied into the lesson.”

These teachers expressed the need for their students to have a strongerconnection to their culture to see their lives in a more positive light. AsJean, a non-native teacher, expressed:

The only thing that I really can think of it (purpose of culturally relevant scienceteaching), quite honestly, is for them to connect with their culture. Historically, theircurrent culture is nothing like their historical culture. And I think if my students reallyunderstood that significance of their historical culture, then they might see their lives in adifferent view than how they see them now.

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH STUDENTS. Three teachers, again primarilynative teachers, viewed the purpose of culturally relevant science teachingas building strong relationships with their American Indian students. Forexample, one of the teachers said, “Well the purpose is, we are trying toreach the kids, and middle school kids are a tough age. Anytime you canconnect with them personally you are going to open a few more eyes andears, and that is really the purpose.” However, these teachers also viewed


these relationships as being built on respecting and valuing connections tostudents’ culture. These teachers referred to the importance of beingaccepted as a teacher whom American Indian students and parents couldtrust, as illustrated in the following quote:

Building relationship is the upmost important thing to do because our kid don’t trustevery easily. Most families do not believe that education is the answer .... becauseof that our kids don’t trust people, especially educational facilities because ofhistorical trauma. They do not relate well to teachers who don’t bring in examplesof their own culture. (Anne)

Challenges in Implementing Culturally Relevant Science Teaching

The teachers expressed various challenges in implementing culturallyrelevant science teaching. These challenges are summarized into twomain subcategories: external (science standards, parents, community,and student attitude) and internal (lack of knowledge about theAmerican Indian culture, low awareness, and less connection with theAmerican Indian community).

External Challenges. Over half of the teachers spoke of externalchallenges in implementing culturally relevant science teaching.Challenges related to the state science standards were a concernprimarily for teachers in nonreservation schools. These schoolsbordered reservations and served high proportions of AmericanIndian students (approximately 30 % of the student population),representing a different challenge than teachers at reservation schoolswith 90 – 100 % American Indian students. For example, a teacherssaid, “Not all students in our school are Native American so I taughtthe state standards”, and “I have no problem teaching their culturebut I will emphasize all other cultures too. Otherwise, we bring outthe racial inequalities and tension rises.”

Interestingly, the following quote, from a native teacher in a 100 %native school also expressed concern about the standards and the legalrequirements to teach to these standards:

Unfortunately with our standards, we are being, our hands are being more and more tied.We have to stick to what we are supposed to do with the standards. But the standards arebased on the western point of view on science. (Ben)

Teachers with less frequent use of culturally relevant science teachingfrom the survey expressed concern about students’ lack of academic skill,behavior, and low interest in learning science. As one of the teachers said,


“Most of my students have a 6th grade reading level. High school scienceis intimidating and difficult”. Another teacher went on to say aboutapplying a lesson from the workshop in her classroom:

It is very chaotic place to work. It’s very unpredictable. And so if it’s something that is noteasily … for instance that whole planetarium thing, extremely interesting, but I don’t see itever working where I work because it would be really difficult knowing the maturity level ofmy student. There is no way that (lying close together) is going to happen with some of thesekids. Although it was really very interesting to me, it’s not something I can use. (Jean)

Lack of family and community support was raised as a challenge,again primarily for teachers with lower frequency of culturally relevantscience teaching implementation from the survey. For example, one of theteachers spoke directly of family support, “I mean we can all becomebetter teachers and everything like that and we strive to be, but when thehome piece isn’t there, then it makes it very difficult.” With respect tolack of community support, another teacher stated, “You make arrange-ment and get commitments from community members and governmentagencies and they either cancel at the last minute or do not show up.”

The most frequent challenge expressed by teachers with low frequenciesof culturally relevant science teaching use was related to their perception ofstudents’ lack of interest and knowledge in their own culture. Some teachersexpressed that students are not interested in learning their culture, “ManyNative American students in our school community do not have an interest inlearning about their culture” and “Some students have a deep culturalconnection, but it is the minority.” Another teacher went on to say:

I feel that the Native American students as a whole know very little about their culture andthey don’t seem real concerned about it. They seem disconnected; lacking accountability,respect for themselves, others and their environment.

One teacher went as far to say that “as a white person, I know more abouttheir traditional culture than they do. I see them as students in need of aneducation. I am not there to teach them culture.” It was evident that severalteachers saw no need to implement culturally relevant science teachingbecause, in their view, the students do not care about their culture.

An opposing view from a teacher with higher culturally relevant scienceteaching use from the survey is reflected in the following quote:

My biggest problem challenge right now is bright kids who can learn, who are interested,but who will not put pencil to paper, or finger to keyboard. I have a population of studentswho are refusing to be educated—in any style. They are choosing failure. This is also apopulation that knows little or nothing of the culture, the history, and the responsibilities


of adult life. Providing them a cultural experience or reinforcement can be a toss-up …Some actually will participate. I really think I get some participation, and some willalways be better than none … As long as I’m seeing some involvement, some recognitionof the continuum, I will continue. (Tatiana)

This native teacher associates limited awareness of their culture as beingrelated to lack of interest in learning. Her perceptions and experiences arethat, by providing cultural connections for her students, she can improvestudents’ behavior and motivation to learn.

Internal Challenges. Internal challenges refer to teachers’ stated lackof knowledge of TEK, cultural history, and traditions. Even teacherswith stated interest and general knowledge in native culture clearlyarticulated concerns about their lack of TEK, for example, Emilystated:

The challenge for me is that I know things from a very historical standpoint. I knowthings, I know good literature, I know the culture. However, I do not know as muchof the actual cultural traditions when it comes to scientific things, which is what Ireally interested me about this program. I don’t know much of the scientific things,and I think that’s definitely lacking for the students and that’s lacking in beingtaught. The students are interested in it. They are. They’re captivated by it. But, asfar as my knowledge, I think that just my lack of knowledge in that area tends tolimit. That’s the challenge!

Yet, one of the native teachers discussed his White colleagues’attitudes toward culturally relevant science teaching as “hiding behindtheir ethnicity.” He clearly stated that non-native teachers shouldmake the effort to build a strong relationship with their students“because kids are smart enough to know who care for them even ifthey are not a Native American.”

CONCLUSION

Overall, most teachers reported that they seldom drew on culturallyrelevant content and instructional practices in their science teaching. Infact, most teachers were unable to provide any specific examples of TEKor culturally relevant science teaching in their teaching. While mostteachers reported that they routinely used reform-based pedagogicalpractices, such as inquiry-based and cooperative learning practices, theyseldom reported using pedagogical practices specifically linked to cultureand native ways of knowing. In fact, many teachers reported they neverused community-specific resources, elders or community members, nativelanguage, and traditions to inform their science teaching.


While responses to the survey provided a snapshot of the teachers’uses of culturally relevant science teaching, the qualitative responsesprovided deeper insight into their understandings of culturallyrelevant science teaching. The interview and open-ended responsessuggest that teachers’ views of culturally relevant science teachingvary according to their perceptions and knowledge of traditionalscience content and culturally relevant science teaching strategies.Teachers views can be described in three broad groups that illustratetheir overall perceptions and use of culturally relevant scienceteaching: (1) those who could give clear examples of and useculturally relevant science teaching in their teaching, (2) those whoexpressed the need to use culturally relevant science teaching butlacked the knowledge of how to implement, and (3) those who didnot articulate a need for culturally relevant science teaching, seeingtheir American Indian students as the same as any other student.

A small group of teachers provided clear examples of culturallyrelevant science teaching. They suggested their science teaching consistedof a two-way learning process between teacher and student and betweenthe students themselves. These teachers treated TEK and native ways ofknowing on the same footing as Western science, aligned with the ideasof Snively & Corsiglia (2001). These researchers call for science teachingto be aligned with native worldviews and TEK to enable American Indianstudents to explore and make sense of Western science. In addition, theseteachers involved community members and elders to tell historical orcultural stories and provide TEK related to current science topics. Thepower of involving community participation to represent the views andvalues of the community was advocated by Demmert & Towner (2003) toempower American Indian students in learning. The only culturallyrelevant science teaching strategy found in the literature, but not a part ofthis group of teachers’ perception of culturally relevant science teaching,was the use of native language (Demmert & Towner, 2003). This isunderstandable, given that most of the teachers are non-native and wouldnot have had an opportunity to engage in the language, and it should alsobe noted that, in our study, the students themselves are often unfamiliarwith their native language.

Most teachers expressed the importance of culturally relevant scienceteaching for teaching their American Indian students, but when pressed togive specific examples of cultural relevance or TEK, they were unable togive specific examples. However, while these teachers did not mentionspecific examples of TEK, they suggested the need to draw on nature andrespect for Mother Earth in teaching science for American Indian


students. In addition to a desire for cultural respect, place-basedapproaches resonated with this group of teachers. However, while theyemphasized the importance of using place as a context for teachingscience, these teachers used this pedagogical approach without explicitcultural connections. Place-based approaches are valuable approaches toscience teaching (Semken & Freeman, 2008) but critical place-basededucators (Gruenewald, 2003b) advocate for the integration of cultureinto the discussion of place to provide critical “transformation andconversation” that provides important historical and cultural perspectiveskey for American Indian students’ learning.

There were, however, another small group of teachers who did not orcould not see the need for culturally relevant science teaching in theirclassrooms. These teachers saw no difference between science teachingfor American Indian students and simply good science teaching. Theseteachers also tended to highlight more challenges to culturally relevantscience teaching, noting students’ lack of motivation and ignorance of theculture. Ultimately, all teachers expressed challenges in using culturallyrelevant science teaching approaches, both external in terms of theirstudents and internal in terms of teachers’ knowledge and attitudes.Among the external context challenges, the most frequent challengerelated to difficulties in engaging and motivating students in showing aninterest in their culture and history. This perception of student disinterestcould, however, be related to the teachers’ lack of knowledge of authenticcultural stories and narratives, culturally relevant science teaching strategies,and understanding of their students (Ninnes, 2001; Riggs, 2004). Most of theteachers felt challenged by their inability to engage their students becausethey did not know the cultural stories and histories or lacked anyunderstanding about ways to engage their American Indian students.

Our study presents some interesting insights from teachers of AmericanIndian students, many who have taught for years in reservation schools,into the relationship between science teachers’ practices and perceptionsof culturally relevant science teaching. These insights are not only usefulfor understanding teachers’ practices of culturally relevant scienceteaching but provide direction for professional development to encourageculturally relevant teaching for American Indian students. There is a clearneed to implement culturally relevant science teaching for all students, butespecially American Indian students, and understanding the perceptions andchallenges of classroom teachers is an important first step. Native teachersare stronger in their cultural knowledge and interactions with AmericanIndian students and, as stated by other researchers, there is a need for morenative teachers in reservation schools. However, given the preponderance of


non-native science teachers, it is critical that consideration is given toassisting these teachers to develop culturally relevant science teaching.However, professional development must occur with the full participationand collaboration of the community; the non-native teachers experiencingsuccess with culturally relevant science teaching used resources within thecommunity to develop their TEK and to bring culturally relevant issues,topics, and knowledge into their classrooms.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This material is based in part upon work supported by the NASAInnovations in Climate Education program under grant numbersNNX10AT53A and NNY10AT77A.

REFERENCES

Agbo, S. (2001). Enhancing success in American Indian students: Participatory research atAkwesasne as part of the development of a culturally relevant curriculum. Journal ofAmerican Indian Education, 40(1), 31–56.

Barnhardt, R. & Kawagley, A. O. (2005). Indigenous knowledge systems and Alaskanative ways of knowing. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(1), 8–23.

Berg, B. L. (1998). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. NeedhamHeights: Allyn and Bacon.

Berkes, F. (1999). Sacred ecology: Traditional ecological knowledge and resourcemanagement. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.

Brayboy, B. M. B. & Castagno, A. E. (2008). How might native science inform “informalscience learning?”. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(3), 731–750.

Burke, C. (2007). Neighborhood science stories: Bridging science standards and urbanstudents’ lives. Teaching Education, 18(4), 357–367.

Cajete, G. A. (1999). Igniting the sparkle: An indigenous science education model.Skyland: Kivaki.

Cleary, L. M. & Peacock, T. D. (1998). Collected wisdom: American Indian education.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Davidson-Hunt, I. J. & O’Flaherty, R. M. (2007). Researchers, indigenous peoples, andplace-based learning communities. Society and Natural Resources, 20(4), 291–301.

Deloria, V., Jr. (1992). Relativity, relatedness and reality. Winds of Change, 7(4), 35–40.Deloria, V., Jr. & Wildcat, D. R. (2001). Power and place: Indian education in America.Golden: Fulcrum.

Demmert, W.G., Jr, & Towner, J.C. (2003). A review of the research literature on theinfluences of culturally based education on the academic performance of NativeAmerican students. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.Retrieved from http://www.nwrel.org/Americaned/cbe.pdf.


http://www.nwrel.org/Americaned/cbe.pdf

Figueira, A. (2004). A new native teacher corps: Integrating culture and language inschooling. NABE News, September/October, 22–25.

Gilbert, W. S. (2011). Developing culturally based science curriculum for NativeAmerican classrooms. In J. Reyhner, W. S. Gilbert & L. Lockard (Eds.), Honoringour heritage: Culturally appropriate approaches to indigenous education (pp. 43–55).Flagstaff: Northern Arizona University.

Grande, S. (2004). Red pedagogy: Native American social and political thought. BlueRidge Summit: Rowman & Littlefield.

Gruenewald, D. A. (2003a). A multidisciplinary framework for place-conscious education.American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 619–654.

Gruenewald, D. A. (2003b). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place.Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3–12.

Kawageley, O. (2001). Tradition and education: The world made seamless again. In K.James (Ed.), Science and Native American communities: Legacies of pain, visions ofpromise (pp. 51–56). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Kawagley, A. O., Norris-Tull, D. & Norris-Tull, R. A. (1998). The indigenous worldviewof Yupiaq culture: Its scientific nature and relevance to the practice and teaching ofscience. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 133–144.

Kern, A. L., Roehrig, G. H., Reynolds, B., Bhattacharya, D., Varma, K., Hougham, R. J.,Finley, F., Miller, B. G., Liu, S., Nam, Y. & Karahan, E. (2012). Teacher professionaldevelopment for climate change education in native communities. Clearwater:Association of Science Teacher Education.

Lynch, S. J. (2000). Equity and science education reform. New Jersey: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

Mahan, J. M. (1981). Native Americans as teacher trainers: Anatomy and outcomes of acultural immersion project. Los Angeles: The American Educational Research Association.

McKinley, E. (2005). Locating the global: Culture, language and science education forindigenous students. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 227–241.

Monhardt, R. M. (2003). The image of the scientist through the eyes of Navajo children.Journal of American Indian Education, 42(3), 25–39.

Morgan, H. (2010). Teaching Native American students: What every teacher should know.Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 75(6), 44–47.

National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington:National Academies Press.

National Academies & Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21stCentury (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing Americafor a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Ninnes, P. (2001). Writing multicultural science textbooks: Perspectives, problems,possibilities, and power. Australian Science Teachers, 47(4), 18–24.

Ovando, C. J. (1992). Science. In J. A. Reyhner (Ed.), Teaching American Indian students(pp. 223–240). Norman: The University of Oklahoma Press.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Preston, V. (1991). Mathematics and science curricula in elementary and secondary.Washington, DC: Department of Education, Indian Nations at Risk Task Force.Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED343767.pdf.

Riggs, E. M. (2004). Field-based education and indigenous knowledge: Essentialcomponents of geoscience education for Native American communities. ScienceEducation, 89(2), 296–313.


http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED343767.pdf

Roehrig, G. H., Campbell, K. M., Dalbotten, D. & Varma, K. (2012). CYCLES: Aculturally-relevant approach to climate change education in native communities.Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 6, 73–89.

Semken, S. & Freeman, C. B. (2008). Sense of place in the practice and assessment ofplace-based science teaching. Science Education, 92(6), 1042–1057.

Sievert, R. & LaFrance, J. (2011). Development, validation, and preliminary use of culturallycongruent instruction survey. Orlando: National Association of Research in Science Teaching.

Snively, G. & Corsiglia, J. (2001). Discovering indigenous science: Implications forscience education. Science Education, 85(1), 6–34.

Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (1998). Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches.Thousand Oaks: Sage.

YOUNKYEONG NAM AND YOUNKYEONG NAM

The College at Brockport—State University of New York242 A.W. Brown Building, 350 New Campus Drive, Brockport, NY 14420, USAE-mail: [email protected]

Gillian Roehrig

STEM Education Center, 320 Learning and Environmental SciencesUniversity of Minnesota1954 Buford Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108, USAE-mail: [email protected]

Anne Kern

Science EducationUniversity of Idaho, Coeur D’Alene1031 North Academic Way, Coeur d’Alene, ID USAE-mail: [email protected]

Bree Reynolds

Center for Teaching and LearningRoss UniversityP.O. Box 266, Roseau, Commonwealth of DominicaE-mail: [email protected]

Younkyeong Nam


Documents

PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES OF CULTURALLY RELEVANT SCIENCE TEACHING IN AMERICAN INDIAN CLASSROOMS