Disability Studies, Multiculturalism and Urban Science Education: A Mixed-Methods Phenomenography of Graduate Student Learning Phillip A. Boda Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2017 © 2017 Phillip Andrew Boda All rights reserved ABSTRACT Disability Studies, Multiculturalism and Urban Science Education: A Mixed-Methods Phenomenography of Graduate Student Learning Phillip A. Boda Urban and multicultural science teacher education research seeks to educate new science teachers to more fully understand ‘Science-for-all’ and prepare them to effectively navigate urban classrooms. Therefore, to successfully enhance ‘Science-for-all,’ there is a need to address what the labeling (i.e., categorical labeling and/or mislabeling) of students with disabilities means for science teacher education, its research and practice. Consequently, we need more research in this nascent field to ground this claim in evidence rather than speculation, especially as the disproportionality of students of color being placed in special education becomes more prevalent for all disciplines. This dissertation used a phenomenographic design to study a cohort of graduate students’ conceptualizations of disability and difference as they progressed through the only required diversity course in a science education program at a large, urban university in the American northeast. Twenty-two students within this ‘Science-for-all’ course participated in the study, with a subset of ten that opted into a more in-depth data collection. Data collection included in-depth interviews, a modified Pedagogy of Science Teaching Test (POSTT-DIS), and a Classroom Learning Environment Questionnaire, as well as bi-weekly course reflections and bi-weekly lessons created by the participants. Mixed-methods data analyses addressed to what extent these graduate students embraced a Disability Studies in Education perspective relative to disability and also whether the students developed a critical lens toward difference (i.e., expressed, imagined, and/or imposed variations in human behavior and potential). Further analyses explored to what extent these theoretical elements transferred into pragmatic applications by the participants, for example in their lesson planning, that addressed disability and difference to provide evidence of their capabilities to bridge theory to practice. Findings suggest that the course maintained the relatively static conceptualizations about disability held by the participants – the likely contributing factors are explored in more depth, including recommendations for improvement. The data also suggest that while students in this course were able to theorize critically about multicultural issues in urban science education, their capacities to reflect on their pedagogical decisions and plan comprehensive ‘Science-for-all’ classroom learning environments remained disciplinary focused. Thus, rather than emphasizing critical pedagogies that are pertinent for effective and transformative change in science education for diverse populations, the participants remained focused on narrowly defined, content-specific ways of teaching and learning science. Implications for this research include focusing on both the goals and implementations of courses such as this one, attending to the unique case of disability as outside the realm of conceptualizing difference, and attending to graduate students’ needs to help them bridge the divide between theory to practice. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………………….. iv LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………………………… vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………………... viii I. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………….. 1 Rationale for Study …………………………………………………………………... 3 Problem Statement …………………………………………………………………… 5 Goals of the Study ………………………….………………………………………… 7 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………………………………….. 10 History of Educational Inclusion and Exclusion ………………..………...…...…….. 10 Inclusion and Educational Reform ………………………………..…..………..……. 13 Disability Perspectives ………….………………………………………...………….. 15 Science Teacher Education: Disability, Multiculturalism and Urban Realities .......… 17 Conceptual Framework: Medicalization, Culture and Disability ……...…………….. 21 The Place for Disability ……………………………...………………………………. 23 The Place for Conceptual Change …………..……………………………...………... 26 Research Questions .....…………….…………………………………...….…………. 28 III. METHODOLOGY …………………………………………………………………. 30 Research Design .…………………………………………………………………….. 32 General Design of the Phenomenography …………………………………… 33 Setting .……………………………………………………………………….. 36 Participants ..………………………………………………………………..… 37 Data Collection Methods .……………………………………………………………. 38 i Research Question 1 ...……………………………………………………….. 40 Research Question 2 ……...………………………………………………….. 42 Positionality of the Researcher ………………………………………………………. 43 Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………………… 50 Research Question 1 ……………...………………………………………….. 50 Research Question 2 ………………………...……………………………….. 53 Ethical Considerations ……………………….………………………………………. 56 Limitations ..………………………………………………………………………….. 57 IV. FINDINGS …………………………..………………………………………………. 58 On Vocabulary ……………………………………………………………………….. 58 Positionality ………………………………………………………………………….. 60 Research Question 1 …………………………………………………………………. 61 Research question 1a ………………………………………………………… 61 Research question 1b ………………………………………………………… 62 Labeling ……………………………………………………………… 65 Integrating …………………………………………………….……… 70 Perceiving ………………………………….………………………… 76 Research Question 2 …………………………………………………………………. 83 Research question 2a ………………………………………………………… 83 Research question 2b ………………………………………………………… 84 Labeling ……………………………………………………………… 90 Enabling ……………………………………………………………… 93 Transmitting ………………………………..………………………… 97 ii Limiting ……………………………………………………………… 100 Research question 2c ………………………………………………………… 106 Summary of Findings ………………………………………………………………… 108 V. DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………………………….. 109 Research Question 1 …………………………………………………………………. 109 Research Question 2 …………………………………………………………………. 113 Intersection of the Research Questions ………………………………………………. 116 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………… 120 APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………. 146 A. Research Question and Data Alignment ……………………………………………... 146 B. Phenomenographic Interview Scenarios and Teacher Responses …………………… 147 C. POSTT-DIS 1 Questionnaire ………………………………………………………… 153 D. Course Syllabus ……………………………………………………………………… 169 E. CLE Questionnaire …………………………………………………………………... 174 F. Open-Ended Questioning for Bi-Weekly Lesson Plans ……………………………... 178 G. POSTT Keys …………………………………………………………………………. 179 H. Initial Teacher Reflection Rubric Content (Ward & McCotter, 2004) ………………. 180 I. List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………… 181 iii LIST OF TABLES A. Table 3.1. Demographic Data of All 22 Participants in the Research from this Course … 38 B. Table 3.2. Description of Categories Used to Code POSTT-DIS Reflections and Participants’ Lesson Plans ……………………………………………………………..… 56 C. Table 4.3. Descriptive Statistics for POSTT-DIS Questionnaires ………………..……… 62 D. Table 4.4. Representative Samples of Each Category of Description for the Concept ‘Disability’ Collected from the Phenomenographic Interviews with the 10 Subset of Participants in the Course Cohort ………………………………………………………... 63 E. Table 4.5. Phenomenographic Outcome Space of the Category of Description ‘Disability’ from 20 Semi-Structured Interviews Collected from the 10 Interviewees Pre-/Post-Course: Blacked-out intersections were not observed in the data, Shaded intersection only present Post-Course …………………………………………………………….......…………….. 64 F. Table 4.6. Phenomenographic Outcome Space of the Category of Description ‘Difference’ from 156 Classroom Reflection Utterances Collected from the 22 Participants within the Course ………………………………………………………………………………...….. 87 G. Table 4.7. Thematic Conclusions of each Description of Thinking for the Description of ‘Difference’ as found within the Category of Description ‘Difference as Label’ ……….. 91 H. Table 4.8. Thematic Conclusions of each Description of Thinking for the Description of ‘Difference’ as found within the Category of Description ‘Difference versus Enablement’ ............................................................................................................................................. 94 I. Table 4.9. Thematic Conclusions of each Description of Thinking for the Description of ‘Difference’ as found within the Category of Description ‘Difference being Transmitted’ …………………………………………………………………………………………..... 98 iv J. Table 4.10. Thematic Conclusions of each Description of Thinking as found within the Category of Description ‘Disability as Limitation’ ......................................................… 101 v LIST OF FIGURES A. Figure 3.1. Phenomenographic Interview Structure. Participant presented with scenario and teacher response, they then have to discern best exemplary concept in scenario’s context (circle 1), they are asked to reflect on personal experience (circle 2) in reference to the context (circle a), and asked to reflect on their degree program (circle 3) in reference to the context (circle a) ………………………………….……………………………………… 35 B. Figure 3.2. Sequence of Student Behavior Scenarios. Participant is presented each scenario, then the Phenomenographic Interview Structure in Figure 1 is implemented, followed by the next scenario and subsequent reiteration