History of Education at UW Tacoma
The University of Washington Tacoma opened its doors in 1990. The Master of Education (M.Ed.) degree program began in 1992, and the Teacher Certification Program (TCP) in 1994 with 22 candidates.
In 2001, we added an Educational Administrator’s (Ed Admin) certificate program.
In 2006, we expanded our TCP program to include an endorsement in K-8 and Special Education. Once again, in winter 2007, we expanded our TCP program to include an endorsement in Science, Earth and Space Science and/or Biology for grades 5-12. In summer 2007, we changed our TCP Science program to a cohort model with admission in the summer quarter. We started our first cohort for our Residency Certificate with an endorsement in Mathematics for grades 5-12 in summer 2011. In summer 2012, we created a second dual endorsement of K-8 and Teaching English Language Learners (TELL). As of summer 2012, our TCP program expanded to include all of the following areas: Secondary Education certification with endorsements in Mathematics and/or Science, and K-8 certification with endorsements in Special Education or Teaching English Learners.
In fall 2016, we obtained full-fledged school status, and that same year, the doctorate in educational leadership (Ed.D.) program was moved into the School of Education. The Ed.D. program started and is still a collaborative offering with UW Tacoma’s Nursing Program.
In summer 2017, Rachel Endo was hired as the founding dean of the School of Education.
School of Education Meetings 2018-2019
SoE Faculty & Staff Meeting Dates: 2018-2019
|Tuesday||October 2, 2018||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||November 6, 2018||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||December 4, 2018||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||January 8, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||February 9, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||March 5, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||April 2, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||May 7, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||June 4, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||October 1, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Tentative: Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||November 5, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Tentative: Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
|Tuesday||December 3, 2019||9:00am - 12:00pm||Tentative: Garretson Woodruff & Pratt (GWP) 320|
Mission, vision and values
The mission of the University of Washington Tacoma School of Education is to prepare ethical and reflective educators who transform learning, contribute to the community, exemplify professionalism and promote diversity.
Educate, Empower, Excel.
School of Education faculty and staff exhibit integrity by upholding the values of:
Our discovery, development, and dissemination of scholarship that informs theory and practice
Our beneficial contribution to the community
- Professional excellence
Our dedication to helping teachers and leaders to help children as we advance the profession of education
Our ability to create and advance economic, social and educational opportunities
Our commitment to understand and respectfully engage the complexity, multidimensionality, and strength of race, ethnicity, class, culture, language, gender, sexuality, age, intellectual ability, physical ability, and religion.
Goals and Student Learning Outcomes
School of Education Goals:
Education faculty and staff will:
- Promote and support social justice
- Promote and support diversity
- Engage in outstanding faculty scholarship
- Provide innovative and high quality teaching
- Collaborate with communities and schools and provide service in the field
- Provide educational offerings that meet professional and regional needs for high quality, rigorous, and accessible educational programs
- Support interdisciplinary education
School of Education Student Learning Outcomes:
Upon graduation, students in all education program will be able to:
- Integrate theory, research, ethics, and experience to implement best practices in assessment, instruction and classroom management
- Develop an integrated philosophical framework that clarifies and guides educational practices
- Develop the dispositions, knowledge and skills to collaborate in professional learning communities
- Demonstrate strategic decision making for the betterment of the students, classrooms, families, schools and communities
- Develop a reflective practice that addresses the complexity and strength of race/ethnicity, class, culture, language, genders, sexualities, age, mental/physical ability and religion
Program Conceptual Framework
Download the Conceptual Framework document
The mission of the University of Washington Tacoma School of Education is to prepare ethical and reflective educators who transform learning, contribute to the community, exemplify professionalism and promote diversity.
The conceptual framework for preparing ethical and reflective educators who transform learning, engage with communities, exemplify professionalism, and promote diversity establishes the shared vision of the University of Washington Tacoma School of Education. This vision draws from our core values of knowledge, collaboration, professional excellence, reflection, diversity, and justice. It provides direction for our efforts to prepare culturally responsive and inclusive educators to effectively advocate for and educate youth in P-12 schools. The framework guides the development of the curriculum in our programs leading to initial certification, advanced preparation of teachers, and the licensure of school administrators and superintendents.
The conceptual framework of the School of Education is consistent with the campus mission UWT educates diverse learners and transforms communities by expanding the boundaries of knowledge and discovery. We embrace the UWT core values of excellence, community, diversity, and innovation as we review, reflect upon and revise our various program offerings to meet our mission of preparing ethical and reflective educators. Our collaboration among faculty, staff, candidates, and our local education and community partners (e.g. PEAB members, advisory board members, classroom teachers, educational administrators, etc.) informs and validates our framework.
Philosophies, Purpose and Goals
We believe that teaching and leadership are processes informed by empirical research, theory, professional codes of ethics, and a philosophy of advocacy and social action. As such, to implement the conceptual framework we considered the relations among the knowledge, dispositions, and skills identified by scholarship and supported by professional organizations as essential for the effective educator and leader. Our programs reflect the national standards including The Next Generation Science Standards, Common Core State Standards, TESOL Pre-K-12 English Language Proficiency Standards, Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium standards, Washington State Professional Educators Standards Board standards, American Association of School Administrators standards and the Standards for Preparation and Certification of Special Education Personnel as advanced by the Council for Exceptional Children. We promote our program values through rigorous, coherent curricula that address the standards, skills, and knowledge needed by professionals to eradicate institutional inequities and transform schooling environments that partner with communities and families to strengthen student academic and socio-emotional learning. University coursework is thoughtfully delivered in line with carefully sequenced field and classroom experiences. Reflection on the interconnection of university coursework and public school experience supports the intent of our mission of preparing ethical and reflective educators.
School of Education faculty have defined specific objectives to be met by all graduates of the University of Washington Tacoma School of Education. These objectives articulate our core values regarding knowledge, service, professional excellence, reflection, diversity, and justice. We seek to create educators who are able to
- Integrate theory, research, ethics, and experience to implement best practices in leadership, assessment, instruction, and classroom management;
- Develop an integrated philosophical framework that clarifies and guides educational practices;
- Develop the dispositions, knowledge, and skills to collaborate in professional learning communities;
- Demonstrate strategic decision making for the betterment of the students, classrooms, families, schools, and communities;
- Develop reflective practice that addresses the complexity and strength of race/ethnicity, class, culture, language, genders, sexualities, age, mental/physical ability, and religion.
Our framework draws on theory, research, professional norms, and practical wisdom to guide our practices.
At the core of our work is the value of producing and engaging with scholarship. Our embrace of knowledge as a component of our values means we view our candidates, and guide our education professionals to view themselves, as intellectuals. The knowledgeable educator is informed by philosophy, ethics, empirical research, and theory. We model practices informed by research and theory in our university classrooms for candidates so that they, in turn, demonstrate these connections in their educational practice. Candidates are engaged in university classes that model multiple instructional strategies, incorporate a range of assessment procedures, and effectively use technology. We utilize research-based teaching strategies including equity pedagogy that support and connect to the needs of a diverse society and methods that provide for a safe anti-bias learning environment.
In our preparation of teachers and educational leaders, we emphasize strong content knowledge, a range of effective pedagogical and leadership practices, knowledge of leadership and multiple methods of assessment. We emphasize developing inclusive environments that meet the instructional, cultural, linguistic, and social/emotional needs of all learners. We demonstrate instructional design methods that are standards-based and multidisciplinary across content areas of social sciences, mathematical, scientific, aesthetic reasoning and leadership. We model culturally responsive instruction and leadership that facilitate candidates’ abilities to affirm and leverage students’ funds of knowledge (i.e., personal, cultural, and community assets) in schooling policies and practices.
In fostering an ethic of collaboration that eradicates inequities and promotes diversity we guide our candidates to conceive education as a broader and more engaged praxis. Collaborative educators partner with families and community members, respond to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilize community resources to promote a more just and equitable education. These educators build connections to the broader school site as well as to community agencies and community organizations in a collective effort to advocate for justice and solve problems. We support educational leaders in in thinking systemically and demonstrating effective, ecologically framed problem solving skills in working with multiple constituencies to address current issues, eradicate institutional inequities, advocate for justice, and to plan for the future.
We seek to develop educators who embody professional excellence which encompasses attitudes, communication, and behaviors, maintaining high-standards for themselves and their students. Faculty and candidates value knowledge and embrace a commitment to ongoing growth and learning. This growth is shaped by research, theory, community engagement, and professional organizations. Beyond this, professional excellence means we view our teaching and leadership as an ethical act. Finally, in our own organization we seek to make strategic decisions for the betterment of communities and classrooms based on our understanding of challenges in the classrooms and evidence gathered in the schools.
Reflective educators revise their practice based on experience, theory, assessment, diversity, justice, professional ethics, and legal and policy issues. To reflect means to see practice through the lenses of knowledge of the historical, economic, sociological, philosophical, and psychological foundations of education. Reflection is examining assumptions, engaging in self-questioning and critique, and analyzing actions as a means to improve professional practice. We train educators both to draw on research and to conduct research to guide their professional practices and create a continuous cycle of improvement. We strive to position educators in a complex cycle of knowledge production: their work informing our own at the university, and our work (and the work of our respective fields) informing daily educational practice.
Educators who value diversity are effective in creating all-inclusive learning environments, in which diverse students and their families are valued and respected. Within our program, diversity encompasses, but is not limited to: culture, race, gender, class, language, abilities, socioeconomic status, religion, and sexual orientation and family structures. Through coursework and field experiences, candidates are encouraged to engage in personal and professional reflections in order to identify, understand, and strategize around the differences in intersections of their own upbringing and beliefs, as compared to their professional experiences as educators working with diverse populations. In line with precepts of equity pedagogy, candidates are taught to learn about and from their students and their families, as well as engage in continued professional growth, as approaches towards developing culturally responsive pedagogy and leadership. Candidates are taught to examine and dismantle power relationships that marginalize youth and families as well as develop the communication and relationship skills necessary to cultivate strong family engagement based on trust and respect within and beyond the school community.
Finally, we value justice in our own work and the work of our candidates. Educators who embrace justice value and enact systems of inclusion, participation, and fairness. This means that candidates understand the ways that historical and emergent disenfranchisement affects schools, and the ways that schools can act to further such exclusions and oppressive structures. These oppressive structures are both historical as well as emergent, organized around ethnicity, race, culture, class, gender, citizenship, cognition, and corporality as well as deriving from degraded ecologies, asymmetric globalization, and hierarchic socio-technical systems. Our educational work is integrally about eradicating oppressive practices and fighting for more fair social, political, economic, and ecological systems. We assist candidates in maintaining current knowledge of educational law and policy. Candidates learn to become political advocates for bettering the education students including engaging in teaching and leadership practices that advance fairness and improve the lives of students in and out of schools.
Alignment with Standards and Candidate Assessment
We draw on state and national standards and professional organizations to define proficiencies that our candidates will possess at program completion. We use our core values of knowledge, service, professional excellence, reflection, diversity, and justice to interpret and specify the meaning of these standards. We assess these proficiencies in a variety of ways, including portfolio assessments aligned with state and national standards, field observations aligned with state standards, and coursework. This permits continuous feedback to the school and to the candidate.
Banilower, E., Cohen, K., Pasley. J. & Weiss, I. (2010). Effective science instruction: What does research tell us? (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Bateman, B. D., & Linden, M.A. (2012). Better IEPs: How to develop legally correct and educationally useful programs (5th ed.). Verona, WI: Attainment Company.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carnine, D., Silbert, J., Kame’enui, E., & Tarver, S. (2010). Direct instruction reading (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Chall, J.S. (2000). The academic achievement challenge: What really works in the classroom? New York: Guilford Press.
Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Driver, R. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children's ideas. London; New York: Routledge.
DuFour, R., & Marzano, R. J. (2011). Leaders of learning: How district, school, and classroom leaders improve student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Englemann, S., & Carnine, D. (1991). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc.
Friend, M. (2011). Special education: Contemporary perspectives for school professionals (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge.
Haysom, J., & Bowen, M. (2010). Predict, observe, explain: Activities enhancing scientific understanding. Arlington, Va.: National Science Teachers Association.
Helman, L. (2012). Literacy instruction in multilingual classrooms engaging English language learners in the elementary school. New York: Teachers College Press.
Henderson, J. G., Hawthorne, R. D., & Stollenwerk, D. A. (2000). Transformative curriculum leadership (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.
Jordan-Meier, J. (2011). The four stages of highly effective crisis management: How to manage the media in the digital age. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor and Francis.
Kauffman, J. M., Pullen, P. L., Mostert, M. P., & Trent, S. C. (2011). Managing classroom behavior: A reflective case-based approach. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2008). The leadership challenge. (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
McDavid, J. C., Huse, I., & Hawthorn, L. R. L. (2013). Program evaluation & performance measurement: An introduction to practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N.E. (2013) Measurement and assessment in teaching (11th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Murphy, J. (2004). Leadership for literacy: Research-based practice PreK-3. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Overton, T. (2016). Assessing learners with special needs. (8th ed.) Boston: Pearson.
Philippakos, Z.A., MacArthur, C.A., & Coker, D.L. (2015). Developing strategic writers through genre instruction. NY: Gilford Press.
Reeves, D. (2009). Leading change in your school. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Stein, M., Kinder, D., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D.W. (2006). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach. (4th ed.) Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson.
Stronge, J. H. (2007). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2013) Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.) Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Feuerborn, L. & Chinn, D. (2012). Teacher perceptions of student needs: Implications for positive behavior supports. Behavior Disorders, 37(4), 219-231.
Ginsberg, R., & Rhodes, L. K. (2003). University faculty in partner schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(2) 150-162.
Katzenbach, J.R., & Smith, D.K. (2003). The wisdom of teams. New York: Harvard Business Review Press.
O’Grady, C. R. (Ed.) (2000). Integrating service learning and multicultural education in colleges and universities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wrigley, T., Thomson, Pl, & Lingard, R. (Eds.) (2011). Changing schools: Alternative ways to make a world of difference. London, NY: Routledge.
Caffarella, R. S., Daffron, S.R., & Cervero, R. M. (2013). Planning programs for adult learners: A practical guide for educators, trainers, and staff developers (3rd ed.), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gewirtz, S., Mahony, P., Hextall, I., & Cribb, A. (Eds.) (2009). Changing teacher professionalism: International trends, challenges and ways forward. London: Routledge
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The adult learner. (8th ed.).New York: Routledge.
TESOL/Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2010). Standards for the recognition of initial TESOL programs in P-12 ESL teacher preparation. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Press.
Danielson, L. M. (2008). Making reflective practice more concrete through reflective decision making. The Educational Forum, 72, 129–137.
Danielson, L.M. (February 2009). Fostering reflection. Educational Leadership, 66 (5).
Etscheidt, S., Curran, C. M., & Sawyer, C. M. (2012). Promoting reflection in teacher preparation: A multilevel model. Teacher and Special Education, 35 (1), 7-26.
Feuerborn, L., Tyre, A., & King, J. (2015). The staff perceptions of behavior and discipline (SPBD) Survey: A tool to help achieve systemic change through schoolwide positive behavior supports. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 17, 116-126.
Zeichner, K.M., & Liston, D.P. (Eds.) (2013). Reflective teaching: An introduction (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Aguirre, J. M., & Zavala, M. (2013). Making culturally responsive mathematics teaching explicit: a lesson analysis tool, Pedagogies: An International Journal, 8 (2), pp. 163-190.doi:10.1080/1554480X.2013.768518
Aguirre, J.M., Zavala, M. & Katanyoutanant, T. (2012). Developing robust forms of pre-service teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through culturally responsive mathematics teaching analysis. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 14 (2), 113-136.
Aguirre, J.M., Turner, E.E., Bartell, T., Kalinec-Craig, C., Foote, M.Q., Roth McDuffie, A., & Drake, C. (2012). Making connections in practice: How prospective elementary teachers connect children’s mathematics thinking and community funds of knowledge in mathematics instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 64 (2), 178-192.
Achinstein, B., & Ogawa, R.T. (2011). Change(d) agents: New teachers of color in urban schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
Amos, Y. T. (2011). Teacher dispositions for cultural competence: How should we prepare white teacher candidates for moral responsibility? Teacher Education Yearbook XX, 33 (5-6), 481.
Anderson, K.J., & Smith, G. (2005). Students’ preconceptions of professors: Benefits and barriers according to ethnicity and gender. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 184-201. doi: http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.1177/0739986304273707
Antonio, A.L., Chang, M., Hakuta, K., Kenny, D., Levin, S., & Milem, J. (2004). Effects of racial diversity on complex thinking in college students. Psychological Science, 15 (8), 507-510. .
Banks, J., Cochran-Smith, M., Moll, L., Richert, A., Zeichner, K., LePage, P., & McDonald, M. (2005). Teaching diverse learners. In L. Darling-Hammond, & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baumgartner, L.M., & Johnson-Bailey, J. (2010). Racism and white privilege in adult education graduate programs: Admissions, retention, and curricula. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. (125), 27-40. doi: 10.1002/ace.360
Darder, A. (1993). How does the culture of the teacher shape the classroom experience of Latino students? The unexamined question in critical pedagogy. In S.W. Rothstein (Ed.), Handbook of schooling in urban America (pp. 95-121). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Dlamini, S.N. (2002). From the other side of the desk: Notes on teaching about race when racialized. Race Ethnicity and Education 5 (1), 51-66. doi: 10.1080/13613320120117199
Edwards, S. (2011). Developing diversity dispositions for white culturally responsive teachers. Action in Teacher Education. 33(5-6) 493-508.
Epstein, K. (2005). The whitening of the American teaching force: A problem of recruitment or a problem of racism? Social Justice, 32 (3), 89-102.
Gay, G. (2010). Acting on beliefs in teacher education for cultural diversity. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 143-152. doi: 10.1177/0022487109347320
Gurin, P., Dey, E.L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72 (3), 330.
Han, K.T. (2012). Experiences of faculty of color teaching in a predominantly white university: fostering interracial relationships among faculty of color and white preservice teachers. International Journal of Progressive Education. 8 (2) 25-48.
Hollins, E. (2011). Teacher preparation for quality teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 62 (4), 395. doi:10.1177/0022487111409415
Ingersoll, R.M., & May, H. (2011). The minority teacher shortage: Fact or fable? Phi Delta Kappan, 93 (1), 62-65. doi: 10.1177/003172171109300111
Jeynes, W. (2003). A meta-analysis: The effects of parental involvement on minority children’s academic achievement. Education and Urban Society 35: 202-18.
Kumar, R., & Hamer, L., (2012). Preservice teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward student diversity and proposed instructional practices: a sequential design study. Journal of Teacher Education, 64 (2), 162-177.
Lowenstein, K.L. (2009). The work of multicultural teacher education: Reconceptualizing white teacher candidates as learners. Review of Educational Research, 79 (1), 163-196. doi:10.3102/0034654308326161
McLean, C.A. (2007). Establishing credibility in the multicultural classroom: When the instructor speaks with an accent. In K.G. Hendrix (Ed.), Neither White Nor Male: Female Faculty of Color (pp. 15-24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Mills, C. (2008). Making a difference: Moving beyond the superficial treatment of diversity. Asia- Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36 (4), 261-275.
Milner, H.R. (2006). The promise of black teachers’ success with black students. Educational Foundations, 20 (3-4), 89-104.
Milner IV, H.R. (2010). What does teacher education have to do with teaching? Implications for diversity studies. Journal of Teacher Education, 61 (1-2), 118. doi:10:1177/0022487109347670
Poloma, A.W. (2014). Why teaching faculty diversity (still) matters. Peabody Journal of Education, 89 (3), 336-346. doi: 10.1080/0161956X.2014.913447
Quaye, S.J. (2012) White educators facilitating discussions about racial realities. Equity & Excellence in Education. 45 (1), 100-119.
Quiocho, A., & Rios, F. (2000). The power of their presence: Minority group teachers and schooling. Review of Educational Research, 70 (4), 485-528.
Reynolds, A.L., & Rivera, L.M. (2012). The relationship between personal characteristics, multicultural attitudes, and self-reported multicultural competence of graduate students. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 6 (3), 167-173.
Schmitz, S., Nourse, S.W., & Ross, M.E. (2012). Increasing teacher diversity: Growing your own through partnerships. Education, 133 (1), 181-187.
Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press, Inc.
Slay, J. (2011). Being, becoming and belonging: Some thoughts on academic disciplinary effects. Cultural Studies of Science Education 6 (4), 841-843.
Sleeter, C. E., & Owuor, J. (2011). Research on the impact of teacher preparation to teach diverse students: The research we have and the research we need. Teacher Education Yearbook XX, 33(5-6), 524.
Smith, G. & Anderson, K.J., (2005). Students’ ratings of professors: The teaching style contingency for Latino/a professors. Journal of Latinos and Education, 4, 115-136.
Sule, V.T. (2011). Restructuring the master’s tools: Black female and Latina faculty navigating and contributing in classrooms through oppositional positions. Equity & Excellence in Education, 44 (2) 169-187.
Villegas, A. M, & Irvine, J.J. (2010) Diversifying the teaching force: An examination of major arguments. Urban Review 42, 175-192. doi: 10.1007/s11256-010-0150-1
Villegas, A.M., Strom, K., & Lucas, T. (2012). Closing the racial/ethnic gap between students of color and their teachers: An elusive goal. Equity & Excellence in Education 45 (2), 283-301.
Williams, A. (2011). A call for change: Narrowing the achievement gap between white and minority students. The Clearing House 84: 65-71. doi: 10:1080/00098655.2010.511308
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage Publications.
Bourdieu, P., & Passerson, J. C. (1977). Reproduction: In education, society and culture. London: Sage.
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Castells, M. (1999). Critical education in the new information age. Lanham, MD., Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
De los Reyes, E., & Gozemba, P. A. (2002). Pockets of hope: how students and teachers change the world. Westport, CT, London: Bergin & Garvey.
Ferguson, A. A. (2000). Bad boys: Public schools in the making of Black masculinity. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Fortun, K. (2001). Advocacy after Bhopal: Environmentalism, disaster, new global orders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Freire, P. (1968). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Seabury Press.
Hirsch, E.D. (2006). The knowledge deficit: Closing the shocking education gap for American children. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
Kraemer, H. M. (2011). From values to action: The four principles of values-based leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Paley, V. G. (1992). You can't say you can't play. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Pierce, C. (2013). Education in the age of biocapitalism: Optimizing educational life for a flat world (1st ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rawls, J., & Kelly, E. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.
The University of Washington Tacoma is accredited as a unit of the University of Washington by the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges.
Approved by the Professional Educators Standards Board (PESB) under the auspices of Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI).