Welcome to module twelve! The guiding question for this module is – What is the role of translanguaging in promoting school belonging?

For this module you will read chapter eleven in the text, watch the overview presentation and a video on being an advocate for students. and article (DeNicolo et al., 2017).

Instructional Planning Board Prompt:

For this planning board please develop a lesson that will be part of your thematic unit. This lesson should address social-emotional well-being, language development and content learning. Consider the following questions when planning Micro Lesson #4 :

1) How does the lesson build on translanguaging pedagogy and support student sense of belonging?

2)  What aspects of your lesson or unit reflect con respite, con cariño, como familia and acompañamiento>?

3) Describe how the lesson and/or unit reflect critical consciousness and socioemotional health?

Note

PLZ  use citation from the reading Ch11 and Reimagining Critical Care 

the answer should look like file ex lesson plan 

https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X17690498

Review of Research in Education
March 2017, Vol. 41, pp. 500 –530
DOI: 10.3102/0091732X17690498
© 2017 AERA. http://rre.aera.net

500

Chapter 21

Reimagining Critical Care and Problematizing
Sense of School Belonging as a Response to

Inequality for Immigrants and Children
of Immigrants

Christina Passos DeniColo
Min Yu

ChristoPher B. CrowleY
susan l. GaBel

Wayne State University

This chapter examines the factors that contribute to a sense of school belonging for
immigrant and immigrant-origin youth. Through a review of the education research
on critical care, the authors propose a framework informed by cariño conscientizado—
critically conscious and authentic care—as central to reconceptualizing notions of school
belonging. Research studies on teacher–student and peer relationships, student agency, and
organizing are reviewed to identify how they function to disrupt structural factors that
maintain educational inequities. Belonging as a concept is problematized through a re-
envisioning of curriculum, pedagogy, and school–community relationships as a means to
reduce inequality for immigrant and immigrant-origin youth and children.

Inequality of educational experiences for immigrant youth and children of immi-grants continues to be shaped by educational policies, programs, and practices that
devalue students’ knowledge and position them at the margins. This marginalization
occurs largely due to prevailing ideologies of cultural deficit, the superiority of English,
and meritocracy, the notion that one’s success is determined solely by one’s effort
(Bartolomé, 2008b; Darder, Baltodano, & Torres, 2003; N. Flores & Rosa, 2015;
Freire, 1970). Educational reform movements that center on accountability have con-
tributed to the narrowing of perceptions of knowledge within schools (Zacher Pandya,
2011). The emphasis on standardization and high-stakes measurement of learning
creates conceptions of learning that fail to acknowledge the linguistic complexity of

690498RREXXX10.3102/0091732X17690498Review of Research in EducationDeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging
research-article2017

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 501

bilingual language practices and the language-brokering skills that many immigrant-
origin youth possess (Orellana, 2001). In this review, we argue that a lens informed by
critical authentic care enables education researchers and practitioners to identify ide-
ologies and structural barriers that maintain unequal access to education for immi-
grant-origin youth (Patel, 2013) and deter the enactment of culturally sustaining
environments (Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2014). We highlight studies that show the
factors that enable students to build on the cultural and linguistic knowledge that they
possess and construct a sense of belonging in schools.

Over the past several decades, there has been a growing body of research that has
explored what it means for students to have a sense of school belonging and how that
contributes to well-being (Kia-Keating & Ellis, 2007) and engagement with aca-
demic content in ways that produce positive outcomes for students (R. González &
Padilla, 1997). Studies on a sense of school belonging have drawn primarily on quan-
titative methods to examine belonging as an internal process and identify its relation-
ship to academic motivation (Goodenow & Grady, 1993) and self-efficacy (Bandura,
2000; Lewis et al., 2012). Few studies have explored the significance of school
belonging for immigrant and immigrant-origin youth and children (Kia-Keating &
Ellis, 2007). We build on these findings and define a sense of school belonging as
both an individual feeling of being a valued member of a learning community and as
a relational construct (Drolet & Arcand, 2013). Levitt and Schiller (2004) working
from a social field perspective differentiate between ways of being and ways of belong-
ing. Ways of being denote the interactions individuals have with others and participa-
tion within institutions that may or may not reflect their identities. Ways of belonging
are reflected in the involvement with others and in activities within institutions in
ways that communicate or contribute to a shared identity (Levitt & Schiller, 2004).
We see school-based relationships and student agentive engagement within the school
community as mechanisms that provide pathways for belonging in schools.

Given the persistence of inequities in educational access that position immigrant
and immigrant-origin youth as outsiders and nonmembers, in this review we examine
education research to understand the complexity of school belonging for this popula-
tion and the significance it holds for learning and identity development. Studies have
identified how the racialization and marginalization that Latinx1 youth experience
contributes to feelings of not belonging within U.S. society (Flores-González, Aranda,
& Vaquera, 2014). For immigrant youth who are undocumented and migrate as
young children, feeling a sense of connection or belonging in school settings is tenu-
ous (R. G. Gonzales, Heredia, & Negrón-Gonzales, 2015) as belonging is inherently
linked to citizenship (Abu El-Haj & Bonet, 2011) and those without citizenship in the
United States are positioned as not belonging (Negrón-Gonzales, 2014).

We seek to understand from the existing research what a sense of school belonging
means for reducing school inequality for immigrant youth and children of immi-
grants. The primary questions guiding this review are the following: What are the
mediating factors that support a sense of school belonging for immigrant-origin
youth? What is the relationship between critical care and school belonging? In what
ways can the mechanisms associated with school belonging reduce educational

502 Review of Research in Education, 41

inequality for immigrant-origin children and youth? Drawing on a theoretical frame-
work of critical pedagogy we answer these questions by first providing a review of
studies that examine critical care and school belonging. We then explore research on
the mechanisms that promote belonging: participation, agency, and engagement of
students from historically marginalized groups. Next we review research that expli-
cates the politics of belonging through practices and policies that bring students and
communities to the center of curriculum and pedagogy. We apply the findings and
insights from the review of empirical studies to the educational experiences of immi-
grant and immigrant-origin children and youth.

As our main goal is to reimagine and reconceptualize the concepts of critical care
and school belonging as a means of disrupting inequality for immigrant youth, we
center our review on studies that address the structural conditions of schooling that
undermine students’ lived notions of belonging. We recognize the importance of
considering the uniqueness of each immigrant group, the multiple identities that
youth possess such as gender, dis/ability, sexual orientation, as well as contexts that
bring together students from various backgrounds; however, it is beyond the scope of
this chapter to review the extant literature on specific immigrant groups or the inter-
sectionality of immigrant youth identities.

In this chapter, we argue that what we define as cariño conscientizado—a pedagogy
of critically conscious and authentic care is essential for reconceptualizing what it
means to belong in school. In developing this term, we draw on the research on
cariño (Prieto & Villenas, 2012; Rolón-Dow, 2005; Valdés, 1996; Valenzuela, 1999)
and Freire’s (1970) notion of critical consciousness to stress the critical and human-
izing perspective necessary to disrupt hegemonic and racist policies and identify the
mechanisms that promote school belonging for immigrant-origin youth and chil-
dren. Care in school-based relationships must be reimagined to challenge discrimina-
tory practices that maintain inequality in U.S. schools. This entails recentering the
focus of studies on the processes through which students, teachers, families, com-
munities, and other stakeholders are engaged in struggles to redefine and redevelop
the means by which they might belong in schools.

As part of our discussion, we develop a reconceptualization of belonging through
a review of studies that examine the concept of critical care and cariño. We highlight
the important role of agency and social capital in conceptualizing belonging as a
means of countering the policies and practices that perpetuate inequality for immi-
grant youth. Moreover, we want to challenge and extend existing research, which has
traditionally been rooted in notions of psychological well-being as it relates to both
defining and measuring students’ feelings of belonging.

Our interest in understanding immigrant students’ sense of school belonging is
grounded in the importance of furthering education research focused on challenging
longstanding inequalities. In framing our review and discussion in this way, we are
seeking to disrupt inequalities by advocating for a paradigm shift in education
research as it pertains to the school curriculum and pedagogy, school–community
relationships, and opportunities for children and youth from bilingual, bicultural,
and immigrant communities.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 503

ImmIgRaNt youth IN u.S. SChoolS

For many immigrant youth and children of immigrants, experiencing a sense of
school belonging may play an essential role in their academic and linguistic persever-
ance (Souto-Manning, 2013). Immigrant-origin youth vary in their prior educa-
tional experiences (Portés & Rumbaut, 2014), proficiency in English, and adaptation
to U.S. cultural norms. They also vary in terms of the degree of stress experienced as
a result of the political context, separation from family, forced relocation, or trauma
(Kia-Keating & Ellis, 2007; Patel, 2013). Feeling a connection or sense of member-
ship to others within the school community may provide support for processing,
managing, and making sense of their experiences, academic learning, and the devalu-
ation of their knowledge and abilities.

Immigrant youth and children of immigrants and their parents may experience
gaps in communication and relationships due to differences in language proficiency
and the pressure to adapt to U.S. customs that youth experience (Rumbaut, 2005).
Families may experience a shift in roles, whereas children function as “experts”
(Suárez-Orozco, Marks, & Abo-Zena, 2015) for their parents due to the develop-
ment of language skills that enable them to translate for family members (Martinez,
McClure, & Eddy, 2009; Orellana, 2001; Prieto & Villenas, 2012), and act as cul-
tural brokers (Suárez-Orozco & Suárez-Orozco, 2001), due to their experiences navi-
gating school and their communities. Some children and youth may feel a sense of
pride in being an interpreter or cultural mediator for their adult family members;
however, the skill level involved in language brokering may not be recognized within
schools (Orellana, 2001).

While all youth experience the challenge of understanding themselves in new
ways as they approach adolescence, this process is confounded for immigrant-origin
youth who are forced to navigate multiple sets of expectations while developing their
identities (R. G. Gonzales et al., 2015). In addition to expectations from their fami-
lies, they may also adhere to religious principles and cultural practices that counter
gender norms in the United States (Sarroub, 2001). Students entering middle and
high schools face the added challenge of limited time before graduation to acquire the
English language skills and content knowledge necessary to prepare them for college
or the workforce. Educational programs that provide sustained instruction in students’
primary language have been proven to be effective for English language acquisition for
emergent bilinguals (Rolstad, Mahoney, & Glass, 2005; Umansky & Reardon, 2014);
however, due to restrictive language policies, the majority of immigrant-origin students
will not have access to programs (García, 2014; Menken & Solorza, 2014) designed
to meet their linguistic and cultural strengths and needs (Hopkins, Lowenhaupt, &
Sweet, 2015; Nieto, 1998). In addition to a lack of instructional support in their
home languages, their linguistic knowledge is likely to be positioned as a barrier to
academic achievement.

Studies have identified differences between immigrant students and children of
immigrants. Newcomer youth demonstrate a higher level of motivation to engage in

504 Review of Research in Education, 41

school (Kao & Tienda, 2005; Suárez-Orozco, Pimentel, & Martin, 2009; Valenzuela,
1999) and connect with teachers (Peguero, Shekarkhar, Popp, & Koo, 2015). These
areas of school motivation have been found to weaken or diminish after the second
generation (Peguero & Bondy, 2011; Portés & Rumbaut, 2014), contributing to a
decrease in academic attainment or success (Portés & Rumbaut, 2001; Suárez-Orozco
& Suárez-Orozco, 1995; Valenzuela, 1999). Although Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco,
and Todorova (2008) found that over time some newcomer students’ academic success
improved, these differences across generations highlight the dehumanizing nature of
schools that most likely contributes to decreases in motivation for second-generation
students (Valenzuela, 1999).

The educational experiences and feelings of belonging of undocumented youth
and children are inevitably rooted in the barriers to full participation in society that
they encounter and the consistent contradiction of being immersed in ideologies of
meritocracy and the American Dream in their schooling while being denied rights
due to their citizenship (Negrón-Gonzales, 2014). Undocumented youth in mixed-
status families experience additional layers of complexity regarding who belongs and
are forced to navigate the responsibilities and emotions that go along with that (R. G.
Gonzales et al., 2015). Many undocumented immigrants, youth, and their families
live in a constant state of anxiety and stress stemming from the fear of being identi-
fied as undocumented due to the stigma it carries and risk posed by immigration
raids.

Since the passing of Plyler v. Doe (1982), undocumented children and youth were
granted the legal right to schooling in the United States, but this access to school was
not a guarantee of equity or social mobility (R. G. Gonzales et al., 2015) and did not
spare students from marginalization. Being tracked in overpopulated schools with
limited resources created exclusionary contexts for undocumented students and
blocked their access to curriculum and mentorship (R. G. Gonzales et al., 2015). R.
G. Gonzales et al. (2015) found that students who gained entry to Advanced
Placement or gifted classes experienced a sense of belonging and support, but for
undocumented students who did not have the opportunity to develop positive rela-
tionships through courses such as these, school was an additional burden where they
experienced a lack belonging.

The Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, a bill
presented to congress in 2001 was designed to provide undocumented youth with
access to citizenship if they met specific criteria (Beltrán, 2014). The bill addressed
some of the barriers undocumented youth encounter through provisions for voting
rights, in-state tuition, and financial aid eligibility (S. Flores, 2010; R. G. Gonzales
et al., 2015). It was designed as a potential pathway to citizenship for children who
demonstrated academic success and traits aligned with being “good” and “worthy”
through academic success and service to the community (Beltrán, 2014).

While the bipartisan bill has not passed, over the past two decades, immigrant
rights efforts have developed into an organized movement (Flores-González &

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 505

Gutiérrez, 2010). Undocumented youth have contributed extensively to the
DREAMer movement and due to their efforts, 10 states had in-state tuition laws by
2006, significantly increasing the number of undocumented higher education
students in those states (S. Flores, 2010). While it is beyond the scope of this article
to discuss the organizational strategies that gave life to the movement, it is important
to note that youth enacted their agency (Negrón-Gonzales, 2014) as a way to “re-
articulate their exclusion as inclusion” (p. 265). DREAMers, many of whom had
previously taken great care to never reveal their undocumented status, spoke out to
the media and in congress, to fight for fair pathways to citizenship. Negrón-Gonzales
(2014) found through her study of undocumented youth activists in California that
while the youth were consistently forced to navigate their exclusion from full partici-
pation in society, their agency and courage serve as testimonies to their potential and
the potential that lies within marginalized and contradictory spaces (for a discussion
on participation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth, see Terriquez,
2015).

Social and Political Context

The criminalization of immigration adds to the complexity of the immigrant
youth experience noted above. Regardless of the vast diversity among the immigrant
population, the exclusionary focus of immigration policies and rhetoric extends to all
marginalized groups (Pallares, 2014). Although studies have clearly indicated that
immigrants are less likely to engage in criminal behavior, policies and rhetoric sur-
rounding immigration position immigrants as criminals, particularly those who are
undocumented (Ewing, Martínez, & Rumbaut, 2015),

The current political climate that has a presidential candidate calling for a ban on
Muslims entering the United States and the construction of a wall to prevent immi-
gration from Mexico, among other equally offensive and divisive statements, affects
schools (Justice & Stanley, 2016). This anti-immigrant and xenophobic rhetoric is
not new (Olsen & Dowell, 1989; Suárez-Orozco et al., 2008); however, it continues
to marginalize undocumented (Flores-González et al., 2014) and immigrant-origin
youth (Nieto, 1998) as well as U.S. born minoritized students. In a recent nonran-
domized survey of 500 teachers across the United States, conducted by the Southern
Poverty Law Center, teachers reported an increase in the use of hate language by
students and a decrease in their capacity to respond to student anxieties (Costello,
2016). The survey results indicated that immigrant and U.S.-born students across
racial and cultural groups expressed fear of future deportation under a Trump admin-
istration and despair due to their peers’ support for the discriminatory stances dis-
played in the presidential campaign and media (Costello, 2016).

This political context contributes to the stigmatization, and exclusion experienced
by immigrant youth, particularly those who are undocumented or in mixed status
families. R. G. Gonzales, Suárez-Orozco, and Dedios-Sanguineti (2013) write,
“Developing a sense of belongingness, of meaning, and purpose—all processes that

506 Review of Research in Education, 41

are prone to disruption in the coming of age undocumented—require particular
attention and nurture” (p. 1191). In the following section, we discuss the ways that
school policies and practices deter belonging. We then review studies on care to iden-
tify how critical authentic care can provide the attention and nurturing necessary to
create inclusive school contexts that manifest belonging.

the RelatIoNShIP BetweeN INequalIty aND
laCk of SChool BeloNgINg

We draw from critical theories of education to examine the ways that schooling as
an institution creates and maintains inequality for immigrant and immigrant-origin
youth and children as well as students from historically marginalized communities.
Freire (1998) posits that for education to be liberatory, the ideologies that shape
instructional policies and practices must be identified and understood in relation to
hegemony and maintenance of the status quo. Thus, the political nature of education
must be kept at the forefront through conscientização—the development of a critical
awareness regarding one’s reality in relation to power in society, which, in turn,
enables praxis (Freire, 1970). Through conscientização and praxis teachers and learn-
ers actively counter dehumanizing practices and reposition lived experience to the
center of school-based learning.

In examining the politics of school belonging for immigrant-origin youth, we
build on Goodenow and Grady’s (1993) definition of belonging as “the extent to
which [a student] feels personally accepted, respected, included and supported by
others” (p. 61) in school contexts. Belonging is understood as a basic need (Maslow,
1970), feeling, and experience that is based on relationships with others; however, we
acknowledge that a sense of belonging may not manifest in similar ways across con-
texts and cultures. Critical theories enable us to reconceptualize belonging through
the concept of cariño conscientizado or critical and authentic care. Pedagogy rooted in
critical care requires political and ideological clarity (Bartolomé, 2008b) and takes
into account the situated nature of the expression and interpretation of caring behav-
iors. In the following section, these concepts are examined through studies of human-
izing pedagogies that honor students’ wholeness, acknowledge the intersectionalities
they embody, and recenter students’ lives in teaching and learning.

The relationship between school inequality and the lack of school belonging for
students from historically marginalized groups has long been established (Antrop-
González, 2006; Nieto, 1998; Valencia, 2002; Valenzuela, 1999). Throughout U.S.
history, schools have been structured to systematically destroy students’ connections
to their home cultures, languages, and familial funds of knowledge as a means of
domination and control (Del Valle, 2003). The erasure of students’ languages and
cultures was essential to the goal of assimilation through schooling through the 19th
and much of the 20th century (Del Valle, 2003; Deyhle & Swisher, 1997; Moll &
Ruiz, 2002; San Miguel, 2004; G. J. Sánchez, 2002; Valencia, 2002; Valencia &
Solorzano, 1997). Wiley (2014) notes that while there have been periods in U.S.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 507

history where bilingualism was supported, it was under the guise of assimilation for
immigrants from Europe and subordination for American Indians. The intolerance
of languages and language varieties other than Standard English became part of the
U.S. national identity after World War I (Gándara & Hopkins, 2010; Wiley, 2014).
As Ferguson, Heath, and Hwang (1981) describe, “Whenever speakers of varieties of
English or other languages have been viewed as politically, socially, or economically
threatening, their language has become a focus for arguments in favor of both restric-
tions of their use and imposition of Standard English” (p. 10). Underlying this intol-
erance are monoglossic language ideologies that situate monolingualism as the
standard within society (García, 2009).

Ideologies surrounding the superiority of English, cultural deficits and assimila-
tion (Bartolomé, 2008b; Deyhle & Swisher, 1997; Giroux, 1983) are reflected in
specific aspects of schooling such as policies regarding language use (García, 2009),
tracking (Valenzuela, 1999), Eurocentric curriculum, and low expectations for stu-
dent learning (Antrop-González, 2006) on the part of teachers and administrators.
Schooling continues to be organized in a way that normalizes dominant ideologies
such as meritocracy (Patel, 2013) and colorblind perceptions that place responsibility
for academic achievement on students and their families (Bonilla-Silva, 2006;
Valenzuela, 1999).

Students’ lack of school belonging is rooted in structural policies and practices
that privilege Eurocentric values and norms while devaluing the cultural wealth
(Yosso, 2005) and knowledge students’ possess. School districts, in urban and cultur-
ally diverse contexts, as well rural new growth communities (Lichter, 2012) often lack
teachers who reflect the cultures and languages of students (Quiñones, 2016;
Valenzuela, 1999) and who are trained to meet students’ linguistic learning needs
(Faltis, 2013; Téllez & Varghese, 2013). For school districts experiencing shifts in
student populations, program implementation may be negatively affected by lack of
time dedicated to disrupting underlying ideologies (DeNicolo, 2016). For example,
immigrant youth attending schools with bilingual programs may benefit from
instruction in their home language; however, if their teachers hold deficit perceptions
regarding their knowledge and abilities, students and parents will not feel a part of
the school. According to N. Flores and Rosa (2015), raciolinguistic ideologies posi-
tion the linguistic knowledge of bilinguals as deficient and lacking. The authors state,
“. . . from a raciolinguistic perspective, heritage language learners’ linguistic practices
are devalued not because they fail to meet a particular linguistic standard but because
they are spoken by racialized bodies and thus heard as illegitimate by the white listen-
ing subject” (p. 161). Lack of school belonging thus refers to the collective force of
hegemonic ideologies, strategic actions, and unconscious perceptions and biases
(Sabry & Bruna, 2007; Winn & Bezidah, 2012), that consistently devalue students’
histories, languages, and cultural knowledge (Nieto, 1998; Rolón-Dow, 2005), nega-
tively affecting their developing identities (Isik-Erkan, 2015; Urrieta, Kolano, Jo,
2015; Valencia, 2002), their belief in themselves as learners, and their academic
potential.

508 Review of Research in Education, 41

examININg BeloNgINg thRough teaCheR–StuDeNt
aND PeeR RelatIoNShIPS

To understand factors that contribute to a sense of school belonging for
immigrant-origin youth and children, we look to the research on care theory and
caring as it relates to students placed at the margins through school policies and prac-
tices. Central to notions of belonging to a community within school is the sense that
one is seen, heard, and valued as evidenced through the actions, relationships, and
experiences of connectedness with others. Similar to “belonging,” which is a term
that encompasses a range of behaviors, scholars have cautioned that there is not a
commonly shared or universal understanding of “caring” (Antrop-González &
DeJesus, 2006; Cooper, 2009; McKamey, 2011; Valenzuela, 1999). In the paragraphs
that follow, we discuss studies that have extended and built on Noddings’s (1984)
conceptualization of caring and connections between theories of care and belonging
in education.

For Noddings (1984), schools and schooling should be centered on caring, thus
establishing a learning environment created on a foundation of regard and respect.
Noddings (1992/2005) stressed the difference between aesthetic caring, the attention
to the aspects of teaching that are perceived as objective such as instructional goals,
and authentic caring. Authentic caring is rooted in relationships that attend to the
individual and their needs. This does not occur by happenstance but through seeing
oneself as “one-caring” (Noddings, 2013, p. 5), committed to engaging in teaching
and learning with students and knowing them as unique individuals with interests
and agency. Noddings (2013) expressed that schools should enact an ethic of care
through meaningful dialogue between teachers and students, opportunities for stu-
dents to engage in caring for and with others, and confirmation of students’ potential
as learners.

Valenzuela’s (1999) pivotal text Subtractive Schooling expanded on previous studies
of care theory through her in-depth exploration of how care or a lack thereof shaped
the educational experiences of Mexican and Mexican American high school students.
The study illustrated how teachers and students utilized distinct interpretations of
care to make sense of one another’s behaviors and actions. The teachers’ perceptions
of their students’ lack of care was based on external behaviors and rooted in deficit
ideologies. Caring, for the students, was rooted in the concept of educación, which
Valenzuela (1999) defined as, “the family’s role of inculcating in children a sense of
moral, social, and personal responsibility and serves as the foundation for all other
learning” (p. 23). While the Mexican immigrant youth and U.S.-born students in
Valenzuela’s study had distinct experiences regarding the ways they were perceived by
school staff, their perceptions of their teachers’ sense of commitment to their learning
and disinterest in helping them were based on educación, which prioritizes a person’s
well-being, use of good manners (Valdés, 1996), and what it means to be bien edu-
cado. Valenzuela noted that school staff, on the other hand, engaged in behaviors
associated with aesthetic caring, prioritizing details within the learning environment,
instead of authentic caring which was more aligned with educación.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 509

Valenzuela found that immigrant youth drew on the strength of their identities as
Mexicans alongside a deep appreciation for the opportunity to go to school. Due to
this, their teachers viewed them as being more concerned about school than their
Mexican American counterparts. Valenzuela cautioned however that the hopeful atti-
tude and humility of the Mexican youth also contributed to a degree of invisibility.
For all immigrant and children of immigrants to be fully seen in school, Valenzuela
(1999) posited that authentic caring was needed. From an authentic caring stance,
teachers take an active role to know their students, understand their resources, and
engage in critical dialogue on topics that shape their experiences such as racism. This
would allow for a repositioning of students’ repertoires of knowledge to the center of
teaching and learning and recognition of the structural policies that racialize and
marginalize students.

Critical Care

Rolón-Dow’s (2005) ethnographic study of nine Puerto Rican girls across their
seventh- and eighth-grade years examined the ways that caring was understood and
experienced by students and teachers. Complicating notions of caring through a criti-
cal race theory (CRT) and Latino critical race theory (LatCrit) lens, Rolón-Dow’s
study highlighted how history, power, and colonialism were key to understanding
school-based relationships and perspectives on caring

Rolón-Dow’s (2005) findings indicated ways that teachers’ perceptions of stu-
dents and the community where the school was located influenced their interpreta-
tions of the educational value families held for school. School staff viewed students’
behavior as evidence of their parents’ lack of care for education. The physical condi-
tion of the school communicated to students a lack of care for their well-being on the
part of school staff. There were instances where teachers’ perceptions were grounded
in an understanding of the contexts of students’ lives outside of school and Rolón-
Dow found that when this occurred both aesthetic and authentic forms of caring
were present. She noted however that while there were teachers that provided stu-
dents with temporary refuge from the structural racism they encountered, this was
not sufficient to counter the pervasiveness of the deficit perspectives that permeated
their experiences in school. This study illustrates the situated nature of care and the
need for school staff to examine the underlying ideologies that inform their percep-
tions of students and families.

Antrop-González and DeJesus (2006) use the term “soft caring” (p. 411) to refer
to caring that is rooted in colorblind and deficit ideologies. Building on the work of
difference scholars, Valenzuela (1999) and Thompson (1998) in particular, the
authors advocate for a theory of “critical care” (p. 413), complicating colorblind the-
ories (Thompson, 1998) on caring through social and cultural capital. Critical care
in the schools that were part of their study was identified as value for students’ cul-
tural, linguistic community knowledge, and skills that enabled students’ to access

510 Review of Research in Education, 41

their multiple identities in school. Through the use of decolonizing methodology,
Antrop-González and DeJesus found that authentic caring countered the marginal-
ization students had experienced in previous schools and involved truly seeing stu-
dents as agentive contributors to their education. Students experienced critical care
through personalismo (Santiago-Rivera, Arredondo, & Gallardo-Cooper, 2002), a
collection of behaviors that resembled the closeness within immediate and extended
families and established a sense of community that enabled them to function like a
family. The scholars used the term “hard caring” (2006, p. 413) to refer to the high
expectations and accessibility of the staff. Due to the staff ’s awareness and under-
standing of the community, they identified ways to support students, such as staying
in the building after school and ensuring that students had a way home. Teachers
viewed all aspects of their students’ development as their responsibility and this was
evident to students and their families.

Beauboeuf-Lafontant’s (2002) conceptualization of womanist caring is rooted in
an understanding of the “cultural, historical, and political positionality of African
American women, a group that has experienced slavery, segregation, sexism, and clas-
sism for most of its history in the United States” (p. 72). Drawing on Patricia Hill
Collins’s (1991) work, womanist epistemology recognizes the pervasiveness of
hegemony and views collectivity as essential to social justice. From this humanizing
perspective, womanist epistemology is concerned with freedom for all. Beauboeuf-
Lafontant applies this to understanding womanist caring in education. Womanist
caring educators embody maternal roles through a sense of investment and urgency
and deep commitment to the academic learning and socioemotional well-being of
their students (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2002). This form of caring is a by-product of
othermothering (Collins, 1991; Dixson, 2003; Foster, 1993)—the identification of
kinship with students and engagement with their learning connected to the greater
good of the community. Womanist care is also an enactment of political conscious-
ness (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2002): Womanist teachers view teaching as a social and
political commitment to fight for equity and equality for African Americans through
attention and care for each child (Cooper, 2009). This commitment is rooted in an
“ethic of risk” (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2002, p. 83), a spiritual sensibility that is
grounded in realism about the fact that social injustices exist and that work toward
social justice is ongoing, challenging, and driven by hope. Cooper (2009) found that
womanist care in schools is also evident in the caring practices of African American
mothers. Similar to the ways that womanist teachers embody a critical understanding
of the political nature of school and racism, Cooper’s study identified the ways the
mothers engaged in othermothering, supporting one another for the good of the
community. The mothers in Cooper’s study challenged the deficit perceptions held
by school staff regarding their lack of care for their children’s education. The mothers’
authentic caring was rooted in their identities and lived experiences and informed by
their experiences with racism and dedication to advocate for their children.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 511

Cariño

Prieto and Villenas (2012) define cariño as “authentic notions of caring” (p. 423)
and view this form of caring as intricately connected to critical awareness and advo-
cacy. For Prieto and Villenas, this type of praxis embodies a holistic view of students
situated within social and historical contexts. Through examining their own testimo-
nios, Prieto and Villenas (2012) identified “pedagogies of nepantla rooted in cariño”
(p. 426). Cariño was central to their pedagogy as it enabled them to view their teacher
education students from a humanizing perspective that positioned students’ biases as
a reflection of hegemony. Prieto and Villenas (2012) viewed their students “not as
individual racists, sexists, or nativists, but as cultural beings who are tapping into vast
epistemological systems that support hierarchies of dominance” (p. 426). This high-
lights the ideological and political awareness that is central to cariño.

Similar to Rolón-Dow (2005) and Beauboeuf-Lafontant (2002), Bartolomé’s
(2008a) study illustrated that political awareness regarding equity and ideology are an
essential aspect of what she calls authentic cariño. The preschool teachers in her study
were committed to respecting their students and creating contexts where the knowl-
edge they learned from home was honored and accessed for learning, such as the use
of students’ home language, Spanish. Cariño was expressed to students through
Spanish, because the teachers recognized the language learning and academic benefits
of students’ developing and maintaining their home language. The teachers in
Bartolomé’s study stressed the need for monolingual educators to find ways to show
their emergent bilingual students that they were important. They felt that through
authentic care or cariño non-Latina/o English-speaking teachers could communicate
respect to their Spanish-speaking students.

Freire (1998) referred to the words of poet Tiago de Melo, “armed love” (p. 40),
to describe the courageous love that is required of teachers, rooted in advocacy and
reflected in the persistence with which a teacher strives to know and teach their stu-
dents. Teaching from a position of armed love is centered on humanity, involves the
risk to speak out against inequities, and is expressed through dialogue. Valenzuela’s
(1999) account of Mr. Sosa, the band director who spent hours each evening prepar-
ing food for his students, exemplifies this type of love. Through learning about his
students’ lives, he realized a need they had and was able to fulfil his goal to connect
with them. Authentic caring may require more than what can be done during school
hours and can be taxing for teachers (Antrop-González, 2006). For this reason, cariño
must be linked with a political consciousness that addresses caring at the school level
through collaboration with students, families, and community members. Due to the
history of schooling and structural racism, collective approaches to authentic care are
necessary to disrupt inequities in policies and reconceptualize school belonging.

We draw on the studies above to reimagine critical care as a web of relationships
and humanizing practices that make visible students’ strengths to disrupt oppressive
policies and promote a sense of belonging. This is important for all youth but is
essential for undocumented students as R. G. Gonzales et al. (2015) describe based
on their study,

512 Review of Research in Education, 41

The degree to which they felt included in school shaped the ways they understood and responded to their
place in society. Indeed, this is not unique to undocumented students. But given the barriers they face to
higher education (exclusion from financial aid, low-income families) and to the broader polity, they
require integration into their schools at the level at which they can form trusting relationships with
teachers and have access to resources that can help them navigate a truncated everyday life. (p. 328)

Informed by the Freireian (1998) concepts of armed love and conscientização (Freire,
1970), we argue that critical authentic care or cariño conscientizado—functions as a
lens to identify the mechanisms for school belonging. We created the term cariño
conscientizado joining the Spanish word cariño with conscientização in Portuguese to
represent the scholarship on cariño and conscientização and to convey the critical
awareness necessary to disrupt and challenge educational inequality. In the following
section, we examine the ways that peer relationships and student agency function as
mechanisms for the development of a sense of school belonging.

Peer Relationships and Student Psychosocial well-Being

Furthering research on school belonging involves recognizing that while a positive
network of friends and peers plays a role in assuring feelings of appreciation (Drolet
& Arcand, 2013; Faircloth & Hamm, 2005) and access to classroom acceptance
(Long, Bell, & Brown, 2004), this does not provide adequate shielding from the
inequalities immigrant-origin youth and children encounter in schools. There is a
crucial need for research that interrogates the structural conditions of schooling that
undermine students’ genuine notions of belonging. We argue for a deepened under-
standing of the ways in which emergent bilinguals and immigrant-origin youth expe-
rience a sense of belonging in school as a means of informing policies and programs
to counter the structural barriers that marginalize them.

Some of the research on belonging has been rooted in psychology-based approaches
that focus on defining and measuring a sense of school belonging through peer rela-
tionships as they relate to students’ feelings of well-being. For example, Selman,
Levitt, and Schultz (1997) reported that students’ peers offered important emotional
supports that enhanced the development of psychosocial competencies in young chil-
dren and early adolescence. Part of this beneficial emotional support that students
received served to buffer feelings of loneliness and embarrassment, while also bolster-
ing self-confidence and self-efficacy. Peers were frequently cited as providing impor-
tant emotional sustenance during challenging times that supported the development
of psychological and social well-being (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2009), as well as accep-
tance within a classroom community (S. Brown & Souto-Manning, 2007; Dyson,
1993).

Peer interactions affect students’ sense of acceptance (Long et al., 2004), by pro-
viding and offering tangible forms of support and guidance. Peers can moderate the
effects of school-related violence and provide support and relief from anxiety (Gibson,
Gándara, & Koyama, 2004). That said, while peers may contribute to students’ feel-
ings of belonging in a classroom or school, peer interactions and friendship cannot be

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 513

the sole mechanisms for belonging and inclusion. Since immigrant youth often
attend highly segregated, low-resourced schools (Orfield, 1998), they may have
limited access to networks of support, for learning the steps necessary to pursue
higher education (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2009). Social support from peer relation-
ships has also been recognized as connected to aspects of schooling associated with
achievement.

Peer Support and Student achievement

In addition to the role that peers play in cultivating an emotional sense of belong-
ing and acceptance, studies show that peers provide tangible help with homework
assignments, language translation, and orientation within a new school setting
(Gibson, Bejínez, Flidalgo, & Rolón, 2004). For newly arrived immigrant students,
the companionship of conational friends has been found to function as a resource for
information on navigating school culture and norms (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2009).

Furthermore, peers have the ability to support academic engagement in concrete
ways by clarifying readings or lectures and helping one another complete homework
assignments—as Stanton-Salazar (2004) notes, this process of exchanging informa-
tion not only has an immediate impact on the day-to-day aspects of navigating
schooling but it also affects their longer term success such as exchanging information
about Scholastic Aptitude Tests, helpful tutors, volunteer positions, and other college
pathway knowledge. Moreover, by valuing certain academic outcomes and by model-
ing specific academic behaviors, peers establish the “norms” of academic engagement
(Ogbu & Simons, 1998; Steinberg, Brown, & Dornbusch, 1996).

agency, Social Capital, and organization

The body of research that examines peer relationships through a conceptual lens
drawing on psychosocial well-being provides worthwhile insights; however, more
research is needed to understand school belonging aimed at disrupting inequalities.
To encourage further research and analyses along these lines, we address studies that
incorporate critical discussions of the ways that agency, social capital, and organizing
for change influence peer relationships and school belonging.

Zine’s (2000, 2008) work highlights the significance of Muslim Student Associations
for Muslim youth in Canadian schools. The student associations functioned as a
space for students to acquire strategies for navigating the daily experiences of margin-
alization in school. This echoes research suggesting that organizations for Muslim
youth support processes for positive identity formation and the negotiation of pres-
sures stemming from being a religious minority within a secular society (Gilliat,
1997). Islamic student organizations provide Muslim students with a crucially
important system of support, while at the same time offering notions of familiarity
through the sponsorship of events and gatherings in accordance with Islamic conven-
tions. As Zine (2000) notes, Muslim Student Associations provide social and reli-
gious support beneficial to Islamic subcultures within schools, while also serving the

514 Review of Research in Education, 41

critically important function of both directly and indirectly challenging structural
and institutional obstacles.

Traditionally, theories of resistance in education tend to focus on issues surround-
ing class and/or race (Dolby, Dimitriadis, & Willis, 2004) as a catalyst for solidifying
student dissent and transforming it into collective action. Studies examining student
organizations, youth participatory action research (YPAR) projects, and community-
based extracurricular activities (Antrop-González, Vélez, & Garrett, 2008; Cammarota,
2016; Ginwright, Noguera, & Cammarota, 2006) demonstrate that student organiza-
tions and activities structure forms of resistance around racial/ethnic and religious
identification as a site for both political and social action, as well as educational cri-
tique. It is through the formation of these grassroots student organizations that stu-
dents from bi/multilingual, bi/multicultural, and immigrant communities are able to
form bases for challenging Eurocentrism in public schooling. Moreover, the mobili-
zation of strategies for formalized resistance involved developing foundations for col-
lective political action and advocacy, empowering students to engage in struggles over
the right to belong in schools.

Though formalized resistance, students can also directly challenge curriculum
content and textbooks that present biased information such as an overtly hostile and
intolerant perspective of Islam (Zine, 2008). Future research needs to take into con-
sideration the importance of challenging structural conditions and institutionalized
forms of discrimination in schools. Students’ psychological and social well-being is
important, but for inroads to be made toward systematically addressing inequalities,
more research is needed on the extent to which an increase in student sense of school
belonging might be a secondary outcome associated with addressing root causes of
oppression.

DISRuPtINg INequalIty thRough uNDeRStaNDINg
the PolItICS of SChool BeloNgINg

In this section, we seek to build on the research and arguments Abu El-Haj (2015)
has put forth as it relates to the politics of belonging for Muslim transnational com-
munities. This requires an understanding of students’ sense of belonging in school as
something that is deeply political (Castles & Davidson, 2000; Levinson, 2005;
Maira, 2009; Ríos-Rojas, 2011, 2014; P. Sánchez, 2007; Yuval-Davis, 2011). Such
understandings of school belonging involve “not only constructions of boundaries
but also the inclusion or exclusion of particular people, social categories, and group-
ings within these boundaries by those who have power to do this” (Yuval-Davis, as
cited in Abu El-Haj, 2015, p. 5).

Collective involvement is central to the politics of belonging and differs from
psychosocial constructions of belonging rooted in notions of well-being. Abu El-Haj
(2015) emphasizes that being part of a collectivity, especially a collectivity based on
nationality, “is never given, but instead is actively constructed through political proj-
ects” (p. 5). Consequently, it is critical to move beyond “analyses that focus on

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 515

questions of achievement, acculturation, and assimilation” (Abu El-Haj & Bonet,
2011, p. 51), when discussing the education of immigrant-origin children and youth.

Schools are one of the primary institutions where immigrant-origin youth learn to
develop a sense of belonging at a societal level (Abu El-Haj & Bonet, 2011). The
dominant discourses of assimilation and integration, as Levinson (2005) states, “pre-
suppose certain ‘desirable’ social characteristics, the prerequisites of political partici-
pation, which may or may not be deemed educable” (p. 334). These characteristics
entail the misrecognition of culture and identity and function through acts of mar-
ginalization. Problematizing traditional conceptualizations of student sense of school
belonging is aimed at challenging longstanding inequities. Therefore, our goal in this
work is to expand such a framework of understanding and advocate for a paradigm
shift in education research to explore the need for “robust accounts of the role that
schools play in shaping the parameters of social membership and political participa-
tion” (Abu El-Haj & Bonet, 2011, p. 32). Additional inroads toward advocating for
a politics of belonging framed in this manner can occur through the school curricu-
lum and pedagogy, school-community partnerships, and critically conscious teachers
of children and youth from immigrant communities.

DISRuPtINg INequalIty thRough CuRRICulum
aND PeDagogy

We believe it is important to foreground our discussion in this section with a very
brief mention of how we conceptualize our understanding of the curriculum. In one
sense, the curriculum entails the process of sanctioning and transmitting official
knowledge through the prescribed use of textbooks and curriculum materials (Apple,
2014). It is along these lines that the processes of sorting, selecting, organizing, and
framing knowledge should be recognized as inherently ideological (Apple, 2004).
And as such, the question of the curriculum has to do less with what knowledge and
much more with whose knowledge is privileged. This conceptualization of the cur-
riculum should also be recognized as encompassing both the official and hidden
curriculum. Thus, curriculum refers to the content that is covered in a particular
course or lesson as well as the instructional practices that are utilized to engage stu-
dents with content and the decision making that places students in the course. Yosso
(2002) stresses the need to view curriculum as encompassing the processes that shape
instruction that are not made explicit such as the content selection, student place-
ment, and rules of engagement. Looking at curriculum through a lens of cariño con-
scientizado means that we view curriculum as a process of environmental design that
privileges and promotes ideologies surrounding belonging and inclusion. For exam-
ple, items such as the posters with breakdowns of student performance on standard-
ized tests or participation in extracurricular events are also part of the school
curriculum. These types of displays send powerful messages to students about how
they are (or are not) valued, in what ways they belong in school, how the institution
of schooling positions them as both people and learners, and the kind of education

516 Review of Research in Education, 41

they are viewed as deserving. For immigrant-origin youth, particularly those who are
undocumented, curriculum more often communicates how they are not members of
society and do not belong.

Despite greater attention in recent years to issues of power and identity in curricu-
lum associated with analyses of race, culture, gender, and sexuality, more work needs
to be done in this area so that immigrants, children of immigrants, and emergent
bilingual students have greater opportunities to experience a sense of belonging in the
schools they attend. A. L. Brown and Au (2014) draw from the theories of cultural
memory and CRT to contextualize how the histories of race and curriculum are
portrayed—noting that “the voices and curricular histories of communities of color
in the United States are largely left out of the selective tradition associated with the
narrative of the field’s foundations” (p. 358). Another aspect of this work entails
advancing conceptions of multiculturalism insofar as efforts are undertaken which
focus on the critique of both the inequities of the status quo and liberal ideology that
fails to advance the cause of justice for people of color (Dixson & Rousseau, 2005).
Crucially, it is worth noting that Ladson-Billings and Tate’s (1995) critique of multi-
culturalism, needs to be recognized as an effort to mobilize action as opposed to a
dismissal of the need for more inclusive schooling.

Re-envisioning the curriculum—through a focus on bolstering students’ sense of
belonging in school—involves linkages to instructional practices grounded in cultur-
ally relevant pedagogies (K. D. Brown, Brown, & Rothrock, 2015; Ladson-Billings,
1995, 2009, 2014), culturally sustaining pedagogies (Paris & Alim, 2014), ethnic
studies curriculum (Dee & Penner, 2016; Halagao, 2010; Sleeter, 2011; Vasquez,
2005), and a recognition of teachers as cultural workers (Freire, 1998; Knoester &
Yu, 2015). Ladson-Billings (2014) discusses her work with the hip-hop and spoken
word program First Wave as an example of how culturally sustaining pedagogy (Paris,
2012) allows for a fluid understanding of culture, and teaching practices that explic-
itly engage questions of equity and justice. Through this work, scholars and educators
situate

culturally relevant pedagogy as the place where the “beat drops” and then layer the multiple ways that this
notion of pedagogy shifts, changes, adapts, recycles, and recreates instructional spaces to ensure that
consistently marginalized students are repositioned into a place of normativity—that is, that they become
subjects in the instructional process, not mere objects. (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p. 76)

Again, this requires that teachers and educators use culturally relevant pedagogies in
linguistically and culturally appropriate ways (Nieto, 2010; Roy & Roxas, 2011),
counter forms of discrimination in schools while simultaneously advocating for stu-
dents (Niyozov & Pluim, 2009; Rahman, 2013), work collaboratively through infor-
mal networks and inquiry groups (Abu El-Haj, 2003), actively confront forms of
marginalization through culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2010; Sleeter, 2012),
and advocate for the values present in well-planned and well-taught ethnic studies
curriculum (Sleeter, 2011).

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 517

It is with these points related to culturally relevant pedagogy in mind that we want
to turn our discussion to conceptualizations of the curriculum that are explicitly con-
nected to CRT. This work is not simply a matter of adding supplemental material to
the existing curriculum, although doing so might be a valuable first step for some,
but rather it is about reframing the curriculum around forms of resistance. For exam-
ple, Yosso (2002) discusses the idea of a critical race curriculum as an approach to
understanding curricular structures, processes, and discourses, informed by CRT—
highlighting five tenets: the centrality and intersectionality of race and racism, the
challenge to dominant ideology, the commitment to social justice, the value of expe-
riential knowledge, and interdisciplinary perspectives.

While the process of establishing shifts in the curriculum is one piece of a struc-
tural project related to content and pedagogy, another part of this has to deal with
epistemologies. S. M. Gonzales’s (2015) work in this area uses personal narrative to
examine the role of las abuelitas, or grandmothers, as educators in Mexican, Mexican
American, and Chicana/o culture—paying careful attention to how grandmothers
used abuelita epistemologies to counteract the subtractive schooling processes in the
United States, in order to resist the assimilative pressures, and thus positively affect
student adjustment and success. San Pedro (2015) also explores the notion of episte-
mological shifts within the curriculum by examining a Native American literature
classroom composed of a multitribal and multicultural urban student body, where
students in this course engage in whole-class discussions focusing on contemporary
and historical issues concerning Native American tribes and communities. Often
these conversations focus on issues of oppression, colonization, and the unjust treat-
ment of people of color. Significantly, the study challenges traditional ways silence
has been interpreted as a deficiency within standard schooling, moving toward a view
of silence as engaging, rich in identity construction, and filled with agency.

To truly belong in school, the experiences of immigrant-origin youth and children
need to be placed at the center of the curriculum (Cammarota, 2011; Campano,
Ghiso, & Welch, 2016; Chan, Phillion, & He, 2015; Li, 2006). Souto-Manning
(2013) uses critical narrative analysis to look at how institutional discourses of school
success in the United States shape the ways in which emergent bilingual and multi-
lingual students of color come to make sense of their schooling experiences. She
explores the ways in which young bilingual and multilingual students construct their
own identities through narratives both within and across settings and highlights the
need to create spaces in which language (mis)alignments are acknowledged, reposi-
tioned at the center of the curriculum, and positively reframed. DeNicolo, González,
Morales, and Romani (2015) attempt to counter deficit notions of Latinx students,
families, and communities by illuminating the powerful ways that students utilize
various forms of community cultural wealth (Yosso, 2005)—this entails challenging
directly the racist assumptions about Spanish being of lesser value than English and
Latinx students being less academically capable than their White, monolingual
English-speaking counterparts.

518 Review of Research in Education, 41

Cammarota and Romero’s (2011) work discusses participatory action research
(PAR) and YPAR as forms of curriculum for Latina/o high school students and how
it assisted in facilitating greater investment in both their participation in social set-
tings and their awareness of how to engage in forms of personal and social transfor-
mation. PAR and YPAR informs the pedagogical and epistemological aspects of the
Social Justice Education Project curriculum, which serves the cultural, social, and
intellectual needs of Latina/o students and allows them to “engage in Freire’s concep-
tion of culture and undertake a praxis that leads to a transformation of self and com-
munity” (Cammarota, 2011, pp. 840–841). One of the key takeaways from this
work is the emphasis placed on providing multiple paths for connecting academic
learning to the ways students use their cultural and linguistic knowledge outside of
school and the potential for this to bolster students’ sense of school belonging and
address larger issues of inequality.

the CultuRal PolItICS of BeloNgINg: ReImagININg
SChool–CommuNIty RelatIoNShIPS

In numerous regards, schools are considered the key institution through which
children and youth from bilingual, multilingual, and immigrant communities come
to understand and define their sense of belonging. School is also a site through which
the cultural politics of power and hegemony play out in daily practice. Research
examining the academic engagement and achievement of children and youth from
these communities often use culture as an analytic lens to “explain differences in
educational experiences, opportunities, and outcomes of ethnic and racial minority
students” (Ngo, 2013, p. 959). At the same time that this work is being done, it is
essential to be cautious about the fact that students, families, and communities can
be problematically defined in terms of cultural deficits. Viewing ethnic and racial
identities as subtractive is detrimental to the goals of supporting students’ academic
success (Warikoo & Carter, 2009). Conceptualizing ethnicities, cultures, and identi-
ties as assets that are essential to students’ potential, orient students toward the goals
of upward academic achievement. However, one of the substantial challenges to this
involves countering the types of entrenched structural biases, forms of discrimina-
tions, and systematic mechanisms of oppression that continue to persist and that
reflect the social, historical, and political context (Abu El-Haj & Bonet, 2011).

Having noted this, given the focus of this chapter, it is not possible to engage fully
in extensive debates about the nuances and complexities surrounding notions of cul-
tural politics. Instead, we are framing this review of research around both promoting
and furthering a research agenda that is focused on challenging inequalities. As such,
we have chosen to highlight a few studies in order to investigate how some are work-
ing to challenge the deficit constructions of children, families, and communities
through the disruption of discriminatory practices in schools—specifically in terms
of reimagining education in ways that establish more sustainable and responsive rela-
tionships between schools and communities.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 519

A beginning point for challenging deficit notions of students, families, and com-
munities entails embracing a critical care approach where diversity is an asset as
opposed to an obstacle (Ayers, 2001) and that promotes drawing on local funds of
knowledge (N. González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005). It is often the case that the cul-
tural knowledge, skills, and abilities of individuals from socially marginalized com-
munities often goes unrecognized and unacknowledged. Yosso (2005) identifies
various forms of cultural wealth present in communities—aspirational, navigational,
social, linguistic, familial and resistant capital—and how they have the potential to
be nurtured and utilized in schools in powerful ways stressing,

They are not conceptualized for the purpose of finding new ways to co-opt or exploit the strengths of
Communities of Color. Instead, community cultural wealth involves a commitment to conduct research,
teach and develop schools that serve a larger purpose of struggling toward social and racial justice. (p. 82)

Another aspect related to school–community relationships insofar as the cultural
politics of belonging has to deal with directly addressing policies for religious expres-
sion. Collet (2010) advocates for an understanding of schools as “sites of refuge”—
meaning that schools are places where immigrants and refugee students should be
able to express religious identities and religious expressions in the absence of discrimi-
nation or persecution. He argues for greater inclusion through the recognition of
minority religions, given that they may involve group, and not only individualized
expression. Thus, students should not only have equal opportunities to engage in
silent prayer but also the right to observe religious holidays and participate in sym-
bolic religious expressions (Noddings, 2005), such as the wearing of hijab by Muslim
girls and the kirpan for Sikh boys. It is important to point out, in anticipation of
potential resistance, that the acceptance of students’ cultures and religious beliefs is
not the same as the endorsement of a particular religion by a public school.

To strengthen school–community relationships, it is important that stakeholders
maintain a proactive and cooperative model for collaboration (Sabry & Bruna, 2007). As
such, education for immigrant-origin students can take the form of a multifaceted inter-
play between students’ homes, community resources, school programs, and classroom
practice to enrich the curricular experience for students (Schlein & Chan, 2010). Similarly,
Abu El-Haj (2009) highlights some ways in which an Arab American community arts
organization served as an important site for promoting youth civic participation and
social activism—again, calling attention to the importance of communities as resources
for educators. And as another example, Antrop-González (2006) notes how a small
school, through its curriculum, was able to privilege the linguistic, cultural, and sociopo-
litical realities of its communities as a “sanctuary” for the students. This work echoes our
earlier discussions in this chapter regarding student–teacher relationships, notions of criti-
cal care, in addition to the importance of affirming and incorporating students’ racial,
cultural, and ethnic identities into the discourses of schooling.

Returning to our earlier point about directly confronting and challenging deficit
constructions of certain children, families, and communities, Long, Souto-Manning,

520 Review of Research in Education, 41

and Vasquez (2016) note that if such work is not undertaken, marginalized and
oppressed groups are going to continue to experience forms of discrimination through
inculcated cycles of systemic and structural inequity (Winn & Behizadeh, 2012). The
perpetuation of ongoing inequalities is evident in the processes through which chil-
dren of color, emergent bilinguals, and those living in poverty are labeled as deficient
in any number of ways. Such labels more often than not follow students throughout
their time in school—not only affecting students’ sense of worth or belonging but
also becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy with regard to students’ immediate and long-
term academic success.

It is here that a focus on the cultural politics of belonging through a strengthening of
school–community relationships has the potential to interrupt inequitable practices. As
we discussed earlier, culturally relevant and sustaining pedagogies serve an important role
in the enactment of the curriculum as it pertains to promoting students’ success and
achievement (Gay, 2010; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Paris, 2012). It is important to have
school leaders who challenge the deficit views of children and families in order to “make
the commitment to work with teachers to examine attitude, assumptions, practices, and
policies [and] move beyond talking about educating every child to taking action for posi-
tive and transformative change” (Long et al., 2016, p. 18).

Stronger collaborations between and among local community grassroots organiza-
tions, school districts, university researchers, and the city municipalities to develop
authentic curriculum projects, has the potential to facilitate change beyond immedi-
ate notions of classroom or school-based notions of belonging. As Valenzuela,
Zamora, and Rubio (2015) document, a grassroots community revitalization curric-
ulum project not only works to both value the cultural wealth of “participating stu-
dents, parents, teachers, and local arts institutions” (p. 47) but also assists in the
transformation of researchers and community leaders. Another example of how
schools are taking an active role in responding to resources within local communities
is occurring in New Zealand. Berryman, Glynn, Woller, and Reweti (2010) describe
educational transformation to better reflect a Māori worldview through the use of
culturally responsive pedagogies that seek to ensure Māori values are recognized and
legitimized. Again, through the cooperative interplay between schools and communi-
ties, cultural consciousness can be supported in ways that foster a greater sense of
school belonging. Ngo (2013) calls attention to forms of consciousness as a lens for
analyzing immigrant education that highlights the deployment of culture as social
critique and political strategy.

Supporting sense of school belonging for immigrant entails much more than their
individual feelings of involvement or inclusion. Supporting students’ sense of belong-
ing in ways that challenge and disrupt inequalities is very much about cariño consci-
entizado—critical and authentic care that enables school staff to tackle structural
racism directly, through multifaceted approaches to see, learn, collaborate with and
engage immigrant communities as democratic partners in supporting the education
of all students.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 521

CoNCluDINg thoughtS

Cariño conscientizado—a pedagogy of critical and authentic care, reconceptualizes
what it means to belong in school for immigrant and immigrant-origin youth and
children through the identification of mechanisms that promote school belonging.
Relationships, curriculum, and pedagogical practices that engage immigrant students
and their families as valued partners play central roles in disrupting inequality and creat-
ing opportunities for students to experience a sense of belonging in school. In working
toward active and direct means for disrupting inequalities—particularly as it relates to
forms of oppression and alienation experienced by immigrant and immigrant-origin
youth and children—perhaps one of the most important areas where inroads toward
addressing these problems might be made has to do with the education and prepara-
tion of teachers. To make genuine and authentic inroads toward supporting student
sense of belonging, teacher education needs to recenter its focus on preparing teach-
ers to work across languages, citizenship status, and immigration experiences in ways
that not only create opportunities for teacher candidates to reflect and identify the
prevalent myths they hold about immigrant communities but also require them to
actively confront and struggle against them (Fránquiz, Salazar, & DeNicolo, 2011).
The University of Arizona serves as one example of how colleges of education are
responding to this need. The Department of Teaching, Learning & Sociocultural
Studies developed a position statement expressing their commitment to hold them-
selves accountable to maintain an awareness regarding power, marginalization and
equity, among many other factors that contribute to inequality at an individual and
collective level. The Racial Literacy Roundtables at Teachers College (Sealy-Ruiz,
2013) are another example of current practices in teacher education that aim to dis-
rupt inequality through critical awareness. The roundtables bring together commu-
nity members, high school students, professors, and graduate students to engage in
critical discussions on race, equity, and schooling.

Additional recommendations for this type of work entail greater partnerships
between local communities and colleges of education. For example, as we discussed
above, both PAR and YPAR offer possible means by which to provide rich opportuni-
ties for students to practice, engage, and/or develop authentic notions of personal,
civic, and community/social activism. Furthermore, such endeavors also have poten-
tial to provide teacher candidates with worthwhile opportunities for reflection on the
ways that school policies, programs, and practices marginalize and racialize immi-
grant youth in order to become critically conscious regarding their own identities,
cultures, biases, and privilege (Valenzuela, 2016) and how these shape their instruc-
tional practices. Beginning this process during a teacher education program supports
the development of dispositions in teacher candidates that will enable the enactment
of cariño conscientizado—critical authentic care for immigrant and immigrant-origin
students and their families (Bartolomé, 2008a; Freire, 1998; Mercado, 2016).

Teacher education is not simply training (Crowley & Apple, 2009). Teachers need
to be recognized as generators of knowledge responsive to the diverse student

522 Review of Research in Education, 41

populations they serve (Ladson-Billings, 1999; Goodwin, 2002; Goodwin et al.,
2014) and advocates that position immigrant, refugee, and undocumented students
as knowledge producers. While it should go without saying, such work involves
active participation in struggles toward achieving justice for all students (Kumashiro,
2015; Zeichner, 2009), particularly within teacher education.

In order to foster schools as sites that are truly dedicated to notions of belonging
and inclusion, education research must take up the challenge inherent in a lens
informed by cariño conscientizado. There cannot be belonging within schools if the
structural inequities that shape the education of immigrant-origin youth in the
United States are not identified and dismantled. Exposing the ideologies that posi-
tion immigrant-origin youth at the margins would make visible the policies and prac-
tices that devalue students’ linguistic abilities (N. Flores & Rosa, 2015; Patel, 2013)
and uphold the myth of meritocracy (Freire, 1970). Through this level of conscious-
ness, we can disrupt the discourses that maintain illusions of inclusion for immi-
grant-origin youth and contribute to a broadening of the conceptions of learning.
Problematizing belonging pushes the field of education research to demonstrate the
possibilities that exist for school belonging that are rooted in the meaningful, agen-
tive, and transformative participation of immigrant and immigrant-origin children,
youth, and families.

NoteS
Min Yu and Christopher B. Crowley contributed equally to this work.
1We use the nonbinary and inclusive term Latinx to refer to Latinas/os; however, when

referring to specific studies, we maintain the terminology used by the authors.

RefeReNCeS
Abu El-Haj, T. R. (2003). Constructing ideas about equity from the standpoint of the par-

ticular: Exploring the work of one urban teacher network. Teachers College Record, 105,
817–845.

Abu El-Haj, T. R. (2009). Imagining postnationalism: Arts, citizenship education and Arab
American youth. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 40(1), 1–19.

Abu El-Haj, T. R. (2015). Unsettled belonging: Educating Palestinian American youth after
9/11. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Abu El-Haj, T. R., & Bonet, S. W. (2011). Education, citizenship, and the politics of belong-
ing youth from Muslim transnational communities and the “war on terror.” Review of
Research in Education, 35, 29–59.

Antrop-González, R. (2006). Toward the school as sanctuary concept in multicultural urban
education: Implications for small high school reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36, 273–301.

Antrop-González, R., & De Jesús, A. (2006). Toward a theory of critical care in urban small
school reform: Examining structures and pedagogies of caring in two Latino community-
based schools. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 409–433.

Antrop-González, R., Vélez, W., & Garrett, T. (2008). Examining familial-based academic
success factors in urban high school students: The case of Puerto Rican female high
achievers. Marriage & Family Review, 43, 140–163.

Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 523

Apple, M. W. (2014). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age (3rd ed.).
New York, NY: Routledge.

Ayers, W. (2001). To teach: The journey of a teacher (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.

Bandura, A. (2000). Self-efficacy: The foundation of agency. In W. J. Perrig & A. Grob (Eds.),
Control of human behavior, mental processes, and consciousness: Essays in honor of the 60th
birthday of August Flammer (pp. 17–33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bartolomé, L. I. (2008a). Authentic cariño and respect in minority education: The political
and ideological dimensions of love. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 1(1), 1–17.

Bartolomé, L. I. (2008b). Ideologies in education: Unmasking the trap of teacher neutrality. New
York, NY: Peter Lang.

Beauboeuf-Lafontant, T. (2002). A womanist experience of caring: Understanding the peda-
gogy of exemplary Black women teachers. Urban Review, 34, 71–86.

Beltrán, C. (2014). No papers, no fear. DREAM activism, new social media, and the queering
of immigrant rights. In A. Dávila & Y. M. Rivero (Eds.), Contemporary Latina/o media:
Production, circulation, politics (pp. 245–266). New York: New York University Press.

Berryman, M., Glynn, T., Woller, P., & Reweti, M. (2010). Māori language policy and
practice in New Zealand schools: Community challenges and community solutions. In
K. Menken & O. Garcia (Eds.), Negotiating language policies in classrooms: Educators as
policymakers (pp. 145–161). New York, NY: Routledge.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial
inequality in the United States (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Brown, A. L., & Au, W. (2014). Race, memory, and master narratives: A critical essay on US
curriculum history. Curriculum Inquiry, 44, 358–389.

Brown, K. D., Brown, A. L., & Rothrock, R. (2015). Culturally relevant pedagogy. In
M. F. He, B. Schultz, & W. Schubert (Eds.), The SAGE guide to curriculum in education
(pp. 207–214). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Brown, S., & Souto-Manning, M. (2007). “Culture is the way they live here”: Young Latin@s
and parents navigate linguistic and cultural borderlands in US schools. Journal of Latinos
and Education, 7(1), 25–42.

Cammarota, J. (2011). From hopelessness to hope: Social justice pedagogy in urban education
and youth development. Urban Education, 46, 828–844.

Cammarota, J. (2016). Social Justice Education Project (SJEP): A case example of PAR in a
high school classroom. In A. Valenzuela (Ed.), Growing critically conscious teachers: A social
justice curriculum for educators of Latino/a youth (pp. 90–104). New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.

Cammarota, J., & Romero, A. (2011). Participatory action research for high school students:
Transforming policy, practice, and the personal with social justice education. Educational
Policy, 25, 488–506.

Campano, G., Ghiso, M. P., & Welch, B. J. (2016). Partnering with immigrant communities:
Action through literacy. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Castles, S., & Davidson, A. (2000). Citizenship and migration: Globalization and the politics of
belonging. New York, NY: Routledge.

Chan, E., Phillion, J., & He, M. F. (2015). Immigrant students’ experience as curriculum. In
M. F. He, B. Schultz, & W. Schubert (Eds.), The SAGE guide to curriculum in education
(pp. 249–258). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Collet, B. A. (2010). Sites of refuge: Refugees, religiosity, and public schools in the United
States. Educational Policy, 24, 189–215.

Collins, P. (1991). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empower-
ment. New York, NY: Routledge.

524 Review of Research in Education, 41

Cooper, C. W. (2009). Parent involvement, African American mothers, and the
politics of educational care. Equity & Excellence in Education, 42, 379–394.
doi:10.1080/10665680903228389

Costello, M. B. (2016). The Trump effect. The impact of the presidential campaign on our
nation’s schools. Retrieved from https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/splc_the_
trump_effect

Crowley, C. B., & Apple, M. W. (2009). Critical democracy in teacher education. Teacher
Education and Practice, 22, 450–453.

Darder, A., Baltodano, M., & Torres, R.D. (2003). The critical pedagogy reader. New York,
NY: Routledge.

Dee, T., & Penner, E. (2016). The casual effects of cultural relevance: Evidence from an ethnic
studies curriculum (CEPA Working Paper No. 16-01). Retrieved http://cepa.stanford.
edu/sites/default/files/wp16-01-v201601

Del Valle, S. (2003). Language rights and the law in the United States: Finding our voices.
Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

DeNicolo, C. P. (2016). “School within a school”: Examining implementation barriers in a
Spanish/English transitional bilingual education program. Bilingual Research Journal, 39,
91–106.

DeNicolo, C. P., González, M., Morales, S., & Romani, L. (2015). Teaching through testi-
monio: Accessing community cultural wealth in school. Journal of Latinos and Education,
14, 228–243.

Deyhle, D., & Swisher, K. (1997). Research in American Indian and Alaskan native education:
From assimilation to self-determination. Review of Research in Education, 22, 113–194.

Dixson, A. D. (2003). “Let’s do this!” Black women teachers’ politics and pedagogy. Urban
Education, 38, 217–235. doi:10.1177/0042085902250482.

Dixson, A. D., & Rousseau, C. K. (2005). And we are still not saved: Critical race theory in
education ten years later. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 7–27.

Dolby, N., Dimitriadis, G., & Willis, P. E. (2004). Learning to labor in new times. New York,
NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Drolet, M., & Arcand, I. (2013). Positive development, sense of belonging, and support of
peers among early adolescents: Perspectives of different actors. International Education
Studies, 6(4), 29–38.

Dyson, A. (1993). Social worlds of children learning to write in an urban primary school. New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Ewing, W. A., Martínez, D. E., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2015). The criminalization of immigra-
tion in the United States. Retrieved from https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/
research/criminalization-immigration-united-states

Faircloth, B. S., & Hamm, J. V. (2005). Sense of belonging among high school students rep-
resenting 4 ethnic groups. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 293–309.

Faltis, C. (2013). Language, language development and teaching English to emergent bilin-
gual users: Challenging the common knowledge theory in teacher education and K-12
school settings. Association of Mexican-American Educators, 7(2), 18–29.

Ferguson, C. A., Heath, S. B., & Hwang, D. (1981). Language in the USA. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.

Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and lan-
guage diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85, 149–171.

Flores, S. (2010). State dream acts: The effect of in-state resident tuition policies and undocu-
mented Latino students. Review of Higher Education, 33, 239–283.

Flores-González, N., Aranda, E., & Vaquera, E. (2014). “Doing race”: Latino youth’s identi-
ties and the politics of racial exclusion. American Behavioral Scientist, 51, 1834–1851.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 525

Flores-González, N., & Gutiérrez, E. R. (2010). Taking the public square. The national strug-
gle for immigrant rights. In A. Pallares & N. Flores-González (Eds.), ¡Marcha!: Latino
Chicago and the immigrant rights movement (pp. 3–36). Urbana: University of Illinois
Press.

Foster, M. (1993). Othermothers: Exploring the educational philosophy of black American
women teachers. In M. Arnot & K. Weiler (Eds.), Feminism and social justice in education:
International perspectives (pp. 101–123). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Fránquiz, M. E., Salazar, M. D. C., & DeNicolo, C. P. (2011). Challenging majoritarian tales:
Portraits of bilingual teachers deconstructing deficit views of bilingual learners. Bilingual
Research Journal, 34, 279–300.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder & Herder.
Freire, P. (1998). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare to teach. Boulder, CO:

Westview Press.
Gándara, P., & Hopkins, M. (2010). Forbidden language: English learners and restrictive lan-

guage policies. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Hoboken, NJ:

Wiley.
García, O. (2014). Spanish and education: Global and local intersections. Review of Research

in Education, 38, 58–80.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York, NY:

Teachers College Press.
Gibson, M. A., Bejínez, L. F., Flidalgo, N., & Rolón, C. (2004). Belonging and school

participation: Lessons from a migrant student club. In M. A. Gibson, P. Gándara, &
J. P. Koyama (Eds.), School connections: U.S. Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement
(pp. 129–149). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Gibson, M. A., Gándara, P., & Koyama, J. P. (2004). School connections: U.S. Mexican youth,
peers, and school achievement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Gilliat, S. (1997). Muslim youth organizations in Britain: A descriptive analysis. American
Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 14, 99–111.

Ginwright, S. A., Noguera, P., & Cammarota, J. (Eds.). (2006). Beyond resistance! Youth activ-
ism and community change: New democratic possibilities for practice and policy for America’s
youth. New York, NY: Routledge.

Giroux, H. (1983). Critical theory and educational practice. Geelong, Victoria, Australia:
Deakin University Press.

Gonzales, R. G., Heredia, L. L., & Negrón-Gonzales, G. (2015). Untangling Plyler’s legacy:
Undocumented students, schools, and citizenship. Harvard Educational Review, 85, 318–
341.

Gonzales, R. G., Suárez-Orozco, C., & Dedios-Sanguineti, M. C. (2013). No place to belong:
Contextualizing concepts of mental health among undocumented immigrant youth in the
United States. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 1174–1199.

González, R., & Padilla, A. M. (1997). The academic resilience of Mexican American high
school students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19, 301–317.

González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in
households, communities, and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.

Gonzales, S. M. (2015). Abuelita epistemologies: Counteracting subtractive schools in
American Education. Journal of Latinos and Education, 14(1), 40–54.

Goodenow, C., & Grady, K. E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’
values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students. Journal of Experimental
Education, 62, 60–71.

Goodwin, A. L. (2002). Teacher preparation and the education of immigrant children.
Education and Urban Society, 34, 156–172.

526 Review of Research in Education, 41

Goodwin, A. L., Smith, L., Souto-Manning, M., Cheruvu, R., Tan, M. Y., Reed, R., &
Taveras, L. (2014). What should teacher educators know and be able to do? Perspectives
from practicing teacher educators. Journal of Teacher Education, 65, 284–302.

Halagao, P. E. (2010). Liberating Filipino Americans through decolonizing curriculum. Race
Ethnicity and Education, 13, 495–512.

Hopkins, M., Lowenhaupt, R., & Sweet, T. M. (2015). Organizing English learner instruc-
tion in new immigrant destinations district infrastructure and subject-specific school
practice. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 408–439.

Isik-Erkan, Z. (2015). Being Muslim and American: Turkish-American children negotiating
their religious identities in school settings. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 18, 225-–250.

Justice, B., & Stanley, J. (2016). Teaching in the time of Trump. Social Education, 80, 36–41.
Kao, G., & Tienda, M. (2005). Optimism and achievement: The educational performance of

immigrant youth. Social Science Quarterly, 76, 1–19.
Kia-Keating, M., & Ellis, B. H. (2007). Belonging and connection to school in resettlement:

Young refugees, school belonging, and psychosocial adjustment. Clinical Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 12, 29–43.

Knoester, M., & Yu, M. (2015). Teachers as cultural workers. In M. F. He, B. D. Schultz,
& W. H. Schubert (Eds.), The SAGE guide to curriculum in education (pp. 190–197.)
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Kumashiro, K. K. (2015). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward social justice
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32, 465–491.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children
(2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: Aka the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84, 74–84.

Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers
College Record, 97, 47–68.

Ladson-Billings, G. J. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A critical
race theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211–247.

Levinson, B. A. U. (2005). Citizenship, identity, democracy: Engaging the political in the
anthropology of education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36, 329–340.

Levitt, P., & Schiller, N. G. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field
perspective on society. International Migration Review, 38, 1002–1039.

Lewis, J. L., Ream, R. K., Bocian, K. M., Cardullo, R. A., Hammond, K. A., & Fast, L. A.
(2012). Con cariño: Teacher caring, math, self-efficacy, and math achievement among
Hispanic English learners. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–42.

Li, G. (2006). Culturally contested pedagogy: Battles of literacy and schooling between mainstream
teachers and Asian immigrant parents. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Lichter, D.T. (2012). Immigration and the new racial diversity in rural America. Rural
Sociology, 77, 3–35.

Long, S., Bell, D., & Brown, J. (2004). Making place for peer interaction: Mexican American
kindergarteners learning language and literacy. In E. Gregory, S. Long, & D. Volk (Eds.),
Many pathways to literacy: Young children learning with siblings, grandparents, peers and
communities (pp. 93–104). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Long, S., Souto-Manning, M., & Vasquez, V. M. (Eds.). (2016). Courageous leadership in early
childhood education: Taking a stand for social justice. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.

Maira, S. M. (2009). Missing: Youth, citizenship, and empire after 9/11. Durham, NC: Duke
University Press.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 527

Martinez, C. R., Jr., McClure, H. H., & Eddy, J. M. (2009). Language brokering contexts
and behavioral and emotional adjustment among Latino parents and adolescents. Journal
of Early Adolescence, 29, 71–98.

Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
McKamey, C. (2011). Restorying “caring” in education: Students’ narratives of caring for and

about. Narrative Works, 1, 78–94.
Menken, K., & Solorza, C. (2014). No child left bilingual accountability and the elimina-

tion of bilingual education programs in New York City schools. Educational Policy, 28,
96–125.

Mercado, C. (2016). Teacher capacities for Latino and Latina youth. In A. Valenzuela (Ed.),
Growing critically conscious teachers: A social justice curriculum for educators of Latino/a
youth (pp. 24–38). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Moll, L. C., & Ruiz, R. (2002). The schooling of Latino children. In M. M. Suárez-Orozco
& M. M. Páez (Eds.), Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 362–388). Los Angeles: University
of California Press.

Negrón-Gonzales, G. (2014). Undocumented, unafraid and unapologetic: Re-articulatory
practices and migrant youth “illegality.” Latino Studies, 12, 259–278.

Ngo, B. (2013). Culture consciousness among Hmong immigrant leaders beyond the
dichotomy of cultural essentialism and cultural hybridity. American Educational Research
Journal, 50, 958–990.

Nieto, S. (1998). Fact and fiction: Stories of Puerto Ricans in U.S. schools. Harvard
Educational Review, 68, 133–163.

Nieto, S. (2010). Language, culture, and teaching: Critical perspectives (2nd ed.). New York,
NY: Routledge.

Niyozov, S., & Pluim, G. (2009). Teacher’s perspectives on the education of Muslim students:
A missing voice in Muslim education research. Curriculum Inquiry, 39, 637–677.

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics & moral education. Berkeley:
University of California Press.

Noddings, N. (2005). The challenge to care in schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
(Original work published 1992)

Noddings, N. (2013). Caring: A relational approach to ethics & moral education (2nd ed.).
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-
ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29, 155–188.

Olsen, L., & Dowell, C. (1989). Bridges: Promising programs for the education of immigrant
children. San Francisco: California Tomorrow.

Orellana, M. F. (2001). The work kids do: Mexican and Central American Immigrant
Children’s contributions to households and schools in California. Harvard Educational
Review, 71, 366–389.

Orfield, G. (1998). The education of Mexican immigrant children: A commentary. In M.
M. Suárez-Orozco (Ed.), Crossings: Mexican immigration in interdisciplinary perspective
(pp. 276–280). Cambridge, MA: David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies/
Harvard University Press.

Pallares, A. (2014). Latinidad: Transnational cultures in the United States: Family activ-
ism: Immigrant struggles and the politics of noncitizenship. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers
University Press.

Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and
practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97.

Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining
pedagogy? A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100.

528 Review of Research in Education, 41

Patel, L. (2013). Youth held at the border of education and the politics of inclusion. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press.

Peguero, A. A., & Bondy, J. M. (2011). Immigration and students’ relationship with teachers.
Education and Urban Society, 43, 165–183.

Peguero, A. A., Shekarkhar, Z., Popp, A. M., & Koo, D. J. (2015). Punishing the children of
immigrants: Race, ethnicity, generational status, student misbehavior, and school disci-
pline. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 13, 200–220.

Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982).
Portés, A., & Rumbaut, R.G. (2014). Immigrant America: A portrait (4th ed.). Berkeley:

University of California Press.
Prieto, L., & Villenas, S. A. (2012). Pedagogies from Nepantla: Testimonio, Chicana/Latina

feminisms and teacher education classrooms. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35, 411–
429.

Quiñones, S. (2016). “I get to give back to the community that put me where I am”: Examining
the experiences and perspectives of Puerto Rican teachers in Western New York. Urban
Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0042085915623336

Rahman, K. (2013). Belonging and learning to belong in school: The implications of the
hidden curriculum for indigenous students. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of
Education, 34, 660–672.

Ríos-Rojas, A. (2011). Beyond delinquent citizenships: Immigrant youth’s (re)visions of citi-
zenship and belonging in a globalized world. Harvard Educational Review, 81, 64–95.

Ríos-Rojas, A. (2014). Managing and disciplining diversity: The politics of conditional
belonging in a Catalonian Institute. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 45, 2–21.

Rolón-Dow, R. (2005). Critical care: A color(full) analysis of care narratives in the schooling
experiences of Puerto Rican girls. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 77–111.

Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program
effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy, 19, 572–594.

Roy, L. A., & Roxas, K. C. (2011). Whose deficit is this anyhow? Exploring counter-stories
of Somali Bantu refugees’ experiences in “doing school.” Harvard Educational Review,
81, 521–542.

Rumbaut, R. G. (2005). Sites of belonging: Acculturation, discrimination, and ethnic identify
among children of immigrants. In T. S. Weiner (Ed.), Discovering successful pathways in
children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life (pp. 111–
164). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Sabry, N. S., & Bruna, K. R. (2007). Learning from the experiences of Muslim students
in American schools: Towards a proactive model of school-community cooperation.
Multicultural Perspectives, 9, 44–50.

San Miguel, G. (2004). Contested policy: The rise and fall of federal bilingual education in the
United States, 1960–2001. Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press.

San Pedro, T. (2015). Silence as weapons: Transformative praxis among Native American
students in the urban Southwest. Equity & Excellence in Education, 48, 511–528.

Sánchez, G. J. (2002). “Y tú, ¿qué?” (Y2K): Latino history in the new millennium. In
M. M. Suárez-Orozco & M. M Páez (Eds.), Latinos remaking America (pp. 45–58).
Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Sánchez, P. (2007). Urban immigrant students: How transnationalism shapes their world
learning. Urban Review, 39, 489–517.

Santiago-Rivera, A. L., Arredondo, P., & Gallardo-Cooper, M. (2002). Counseling Latinos and
la familia: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Sarroub, L. K. (2001). The sojourner experience of Yemeni American high school students:
An ethnographic portrait. Harvard Educational Review, 71, 390–415.

DeNicolo et al.: Critical Care and School Belonging 529

Schlein, C., & Chan, E. (2010). Supporting Muslim students in secular public schools.
Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education, 4, 253–267.

Sealy-Ruiz, Y. (2013). Using urban youth culture to activate the racial literacies of Black and
Latino Male high school students. In A. Cohan & A. Honigsfeld (Eds.), Breaking the mold
of education: Innovative and successful practices for student engagement, empowerment, and
motivation (pp. 3–11). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Selman, R. L., Levitt, M. Z., & Schultz, L. H. (1997). The friendship framework: Tools for
the assessment of psychosocial development. In R. L. Selman, M. Z. Levitt, & L. H.
Schultz (Eds.), Fostering friendship: Pair therapy for treatment and prevention (pp. 31–52).
New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.

Sleeter, C. E. (2011). The academic and social value of ethnic studies: A research review. Retrieved
from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/NBI-2010-3-value-of-ethnic-studies

Sleeter, C. E. (2012). Confronting the marginalization of culturally responsive pedagogy.
Urban Education, 47, 562–584.

Souto-Manning, M. (2013). Competence as linguistic alignment: Linguistic diversities, affin-
ity groups, and the politics of educational success. Linguistics and Education, 24, 305–315.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students. In M. A.
Gibson, P. Gándara, & J. P. Koyama (Eds.), School connections. U.S. Mexican youth, peers,
and school achievement (pp. 18–38). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Steinberg, L., Brown, B. B., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1996). Beyond the classroom. New York,
NY: Simon & Schuster.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Marks, A. K., & Abo-Zena, M. M. (2015). Introduction: Unique and
shared experiences of immigrant-origin children and youth. In C. Suárez-Orozco, M. M.
Abo-Zena, & A. K. Marks (Eds.), Transitions: The development of children of immigrants
(pp. 1–26). New York: New York University Press.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Pimentel, A., & Martin, M. (2009). The significance of relationships:
Academic engagement and achievement among newcomer immigrant youth. Teachers
College Record, 111, 712–749.

Suárez-Orozco, C., & Suárez-Orozco, M. (1995). Transformations: Immigration, family life,
and achievement motivation among Latino adolescents. Stanford CA: Stanford University
Press.

Suárez-Orozco, C., & Suárez-Orozco, M. (2001). Children of immigration. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.

Suárez-Orozco, C., Suárez-Orozco, M., & Todorova, I. (2008). Learning a new land:
Immigrant students in American society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Téllez, K., & Varghese, M. (2013). Teachers as intellectuals and advocates: Professional devel-
opment for bilingual education teachers. Theory Into Practice, 52, 128–135.

Terriquez, V. (2015). Intersectional mobilization, social movement spillover, and queer youth
leadership in the immigrant rights movement. Social Problems, 62, 343–362.

Thompson, A. (1998). Not the color purple: Black feminist lessons for educational caring.
Harvard Educational Review, 68, 522–554.

Umansky, I. M., & Reardon, S. F. (2014). Reclassification patterns among Latino English
learner students in a bilingual, dual immersion, and English immersion classrooms.
American Educational Research Journal, 51, 879–912.

Urrieta, L., Jr., Kolano, L., & Jo, J. (2015). Learning from the testimonio of a “successful”
undocumented Latino student in North Carolina. In E. Hamann, S. Wortham, &
E. Murrillo, Jr. (Eds.), Revisiting education in the new Latino diaspora (pp. 49–70).
Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Valdés, G. (1996). Con respeto: Bridging the distances between culturally diverse families and
schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

530 Review of Research in Education, 41

Valencia, R. R. (2002). Chicano school failure and success: Past, present, and future (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Valencia, R. R., & Solorzano, D. G. (1997). Contemporary deficit thinking. In R. R. Valencia
(Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice (pp. 160–210).
New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.

Valenzuela, A. (1999) Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring.
Albany: State University of New York Press.

Valenzuela, A. (Ed.). (2016). Growing critically conscious teachers: A social justice curriculum for
educators of Latino/a Youth. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Valenzuela, A., Zamora, E., & Rubio, B. (2015). Academia Cuauhtli and the eagle: “Danza
Mexica” and the epistemology of the circle. Voices in Urban Education, 41, 46–56.

Vasquez, J. M. (2005). Ethnic identity and Chicano literature: How ethnicity affects reading
and reading affects ethnic consciousness. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28, 903–924.

Warikoo, N., & Carter, P. (2009). Cultural explanations for racial and ethnic stratification
in academic achievement: A call for a new and improved theory. Review of Educational
Research, 79, 366–394.

Wiley, T. G. (2014). Diversity, super-diversity, and monolingual language ideology in the
United States: Tolerance or intolerance? Review of Research in Education, 38, 1–33.

Winn, M. T., & Behizadeh, N. (2012). Right to be literate: Literacy, education, and the
school-to-prison pipeline. Review of Research in Education, 35, 147–173.

Yosso, T. J. (2002). Toward a critical race curriculum. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35,
93–107.

Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8, 69–91.

Yuval-Davis, N. (2011). The politics of belonging: Intersectional contestations. London, England:
SAGE.

Zacher Pandya, J. (2011). Overtested: How high stakes accountability fails English language
learners. New York, NY: Teachers College Press

Zeichner, K. M. (2009). Teacher education and the struggle for social justice. New York, NY:
Routledge.

Zine, J. (2000). Redefining resistance: Towards an Islamic subculture in schools. Race,
Ethnicity, and Education, 3, 293–316.

Zine, J. (2008). Canadian Islamic schools: Unraveling the politics of faith, gender, knowledge, and
identity. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

Lesson: Creating a COVID-19 Public Awareness Campaign

Grade Level: 10

Subject: Biology

Translanguaging Objectives:

 

1. Students will use their oral and written English and Spanish to discuss the best ways to communicate COVID-19 issues to their peers, teachers, and the public.

1. Students will generate bilingual texts in brochure and poster form while explaining their use of Spanish and English words, grammar, etc.

Language Objectives:

1. Students in brainstorm in Spanish and English both orally and in written form the sentences, descriptions, and visuals to best communicate COVID-19 issues with varying people

1. Students will use suitable content-area vocabulary in English and Spanish

1. Students will create non-fiction texts in English and Spanish using proper grammar, syntax, and word choice

Resources:

1. Laptops, poster board, markers, scissors, iPads, bilingual dictionaries, Internet, language journals, pencils, pens, tape, paper, YouTube, other ads/posters/brochures in Spanish and English about COVID-19

Introduction:

1. Teacher shows the students interesting COVID-19 brochures, ads, and posters in English and Spanish

1. Students are asked why certain images, words, terms, etc. were used in each item

1. The teacher may ask questions like:

2. Why does this ad in Spanish use different images or phrases rather than the phrases or images that the English ads do?

2. What words used in either English or Spanish do you think are the most important in this brochure or poster?

2. Additional questions will be asked depending on time

Activity Part 1:

1. Students will be separated into groups with students of differing language abilities

1. Students will be given materials like poster board, markers, computers, etc.

1. The teacher will explain to students their activity, which will be creating brochures and posters about COVID-19 and COVID-19 prevention methods in English and Spanish

1. Each group will be tasked at creating a brochure and a poster, one must be in English and one in Spanish

1. Next, students will brainstorm in Spanish and English both orally and in written form sentences, syntax, descriptions, and visuals to communicate COVID-19 issues with varying people

1. Students will use their language journals, other ads/posters/brochures in Spanish and English about COVID-19, the Internet, and iPads or laptops to discuss orally, then generate lists of words, phrases, and visuals they could use in their brochures or posters

1. Then, the students will create the brochures and posters in Spanish and English

1. Students will visit other groups in the class and provide or ask for feedback about their created materials 

Activity Part 2:

1. After the teacher approves each poster, the students will copy the brochure/posters to post them around the school, post pictures of the poster on blogs, the school website, and Facebook pages, and distribute them to members of public via school events or visiting public places

1. The students will engage in English and Spanish with their peers, other teachers, parents, and members of the public about their posters and brochures

1. Students will respond in English and Spanish to social media posts, comments on blogs, and orally discuss them with people

Conclusion:

1. For homework, students will continue to engage online or in-person with people about COVID-19 while they share their content knowledge in Spanish and English 

1. Students will keep track of new words, phrases, etc. they encounter in their language journals to discuss later in class

1) How does the lesson design incorporate translanguaging in purposeful and strategic ways? This means that translanguaging is being used not to simply translate from one language to another and ensure that everyone understands, but to connect students to the content they are learning and the target language they are developing.    

1. Students are incorporating translanguaging to apply what they have learned throughout their unit about COVID-19. Students are experiencing COVID-19 in real-life and they have seen other ads, brochures, signs, speeches, etc. discussing COVID-19 and COVID-19 precautions. Often though, it is likely that the students mainly see these in English. By creating brochures and posters in English and Spanish, students are learning to translanguate fluently and practice their word choice, etc. based on the languages. Further, by engaging with the public, their peers, and teachers the students are practicing comprehension and engagement skills. Students will have to use varying linguistic levels and languages, depending on who and where they are talking. Students are engaging outside of the classroom and school as well, which is critical for them to build confidence and real-life experience using both languages. Students will always need to consider their word choice, linguistic level, and even culture when creating brochures and posters as well as when talking with individuals online or in-person. 

 

2)  Are translanguaging objectives directly related to content learning and demonstration of learning?

1. Micro lesson #3 allows students to apply what they have learned about COVID-19 over the larger unit. Earlier, students learned about how the COVID-19 viruses works, what measures are been taken to prevent it, and why those measures are effective. Students are then being asked to create posters and brochures that demonstrate their knowledge of COVID-19 and COVID-19 prevention measures. Students are able to integrate their written and oral Spanish and English language skills when completing their lesson assignments. In general, translanguaging objectives should always be related to both content learning and demonstration of learning. Even if students are in a class outside of language class, translanguaging allows students to apply their language skills to other subject content learning. By doing this in a class like science, students can practice integrating languages fluidly, learn other types of vocabulary, and practice their comprehension and engagement. 

 

3) Which translanguaging pedagogical strategies from chapter seven are utilized and how do they support comprehension, engagement, and use of target language?

 

1. This micro lesson mainly focuses on translanguaging to implementar pedagogical strategies.The students are sharing their writing to various sources like the school’s website, Facebook pages, local blogs, and within the school. Additionally, they have been asked to communicate with members of the public, their peers, and other teachers about the posters and brochures they created. Both of these help the students engage with various people in both Spanish and English. When they read other people’s comments on social media or hear them aloud, they must comprehend what is being said to them and respond in the appropriate language. Students were also asked to post their posters at the school and hand out brochures during school events to raise awareness. This allows for students to interact with people with varying language abilities. Students were asked to take the Spanish and English language posters and brochures to churches, grocery stories, and other public places and discuss their campaign with members of the public. By completing this part of their homework, the students will practice their target language in various places outside the school environment.