51 pages • 1 hour read
Zaretta L. HammondCulturally Responsive Teaching and The Brain: Promoting Authentic Engagement and Rigor Among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2014A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more. For select classroom titles, we also provide Teaching Guides with discussion and quiz questions to prompt student engagement.
Part 2, Chapters 5-7Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 5 Summary and Analysis
Hammond argues for learning partnerships, which she defines as an academic and emotional partnership that teachers form with students, pillared upon three components: rapport, alliance, and cognitive insight. These three components work together as a formula, in which rapport added to alliance results in greater cognitive insight. These learning partnerships are more than friendly relationships; the goal is to promote higher order thinking and academic development by means of a productive, trusting relationship. In fact, Hammond refers to relationships as the “cornerstone of culturally responsive teaching” (87).
Hammond encourages teachers to intentionally discover what the state of rapport is within their classrooms. She suggests following a series of specific steps to gain a better understanding of the relationships being established between teachers and students. The first step involves identifying a specific student to cultivate a better relationship within the classroom context. The second step consists of using honest reflection to assess the quality of the relationship with the student identified in the previous step. Another step is to create a system where intentional listening and observing the focal student becomes regular practice. The subsequent steps involve tracking data that will serve to improve the quality of the relationship.
Throughout this chapter, Hammond suggests how teachers can build rapport without oversimplifying or sentimentalizing the process. Hammond acknowledges that relationships do not magically flourish overnight. At the same time, she is unwavering in her conviction that students will not learn to their full potential if the learning process is devoid of relational connection. By linking the importance of relationship building to the internal mechanisms of the brain, Hammond appeals to neuroscience as a source of credibility.
Chapter 6 Summary and Analysis
Hammond expands on the previous chapter by elaborating on how alliances with students are created within the learning partnership. When teachers position themselves as students’ allies, they create a shared understanding about working together toward a common, specific goal. Within this alliance, trust and rapport are necessary components predicated on a relational bond. According to Hammond, there are three vital components that comprise the teacher-student alliance: first, the pact, in which both students and teachers commit to specific actions and attitudes to meet a goal or develop a skill; second, teacher as ally and warm demander, in which teachers navigate a balance between “care” and “push” to hold students to high expectations without overwhelming them, thereby avoiding an amygdala hijack; third, student as driver of their own learning, in which students commit to being active participants in the process.
Hammond emphasizes the importance of valuable feedback in the process of the learning partnership. Feedback should ideally reassure “students that they will not be stereotyped or doubted as less capable” (104). Moreover, feedback should consist of actionable next steps for the student. As teachers provide feedback in an honest yet affirming manner, the alliance of the learning partnership is strengthened by the joint commitment to continual improvement.
Hammond argues that disparities in achievement have exponentially increased the importance of building trusting relationships; these eventually become alliances centered around the student’s learning goals. Hammond returns to the intersection of neuroscience and social justice. Educators should offer emotional support to students while providing meaningful feedback, which “stimulates the growth of neurons and dendrites in the brain” (102). Without feedback, the brain does not fully process how the information applied was expressed. Without an emotional alliance, students feel unsupported.
Chapter 7 Summary and Analysis
Hammond discusses how a student’s academic mindset determines the efficacy of a learning partnership. While a paradigm shift is often necessary for students to replace self-doubt with independent, self-motivated learning, teachers cannot manufacture or cajole a student’s change in mindset. According to Hammond, a student’s academic mindset is rooted in the limbic brain that generally results in either a fixed or growth mindset. Based on a student’s previous experiences, the limbic brain has programmed a sense of threat or safety. In many cases, the teacher must guide the student to the belief, based on observable evidence, that they are indeed able to learn and improve. Hammond cautions that when students experience microaggressions, an amygdala hijack often occurs, triggering or reinforcing a negative academic mindset. For students to believe in their own academic potential, they must reframe their perceptions of mistakes, which are not only inevitable, but also valuable within the context of academic learning.
Hammond alludes to the disparities in academic achievement and the responsibility of consciousness that arise from greater awareness. Students’ negative academic mindsets are related to the achievement gaps that have come to define their own narratives about their capability. For learners who have become dependent, Hammond argues that the goal must be “to deliberately tell another story, one that runs counter to the dominant messages a student gets on a day-to-day basis” (115). To help students craft revised narratives and perspectives, Hammond argues that teachers have a responsibility to help students “develop critical hope and recognize their true potential” (120).
