Abstract
A curriculum redesign rooted in a funds of knowledge framework breaks down the power dynamics among all participants, creating a flow of information and value for parents, students, and teachers. This research is centered on a teacher educator who is part of a curriculum redesign for a teacher education program, and examines how she navigates her identity through the second year of involvement in the redesign. The Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, in which this research is situated, has four principles that guide all coursework and fieldwork. Traditional teacher education programs struggle with bridging the gap between students and their mentor teachers, and developing strong cooperative relationships with teacher educators in the classroom. The results suggest that some teacher educators seek to maintain the existing divisions between the classroom and the university, thus affecting the teacher candidates’ ability to embody new teaching strategies and redirect the larger macro-level discourse regarding teaching and teacher education.
Introduction
Learning is not an activity that happens in isolation. It is a social activity in which learners who want to grow in knowledge or skill participate. Learning to teach is a complex process that requires learning not only for the teacher candidates, but also for the teacher educators. This research was conducted within a grant-funded program titled the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education, which aimed to redesign a field-based early childhood education program to focus on community, culture, and story as the center of the curriculum. This redesign was not intended to focus on one course, but instead on the entire initial teacher preparation program. The initial teacher education program is situated within a larger urban public university in the south-west area of the USA. The early childhood initial teacher education leads to certification to teach children aged from birth through to eight. The Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project brings together university and classroom teacher educators and teacher candidates, and serves to encourage interaction between families and the community (Robbins et al., 2017). The community that these teachers serve is culturally and linguistically diverse and is situated approximately 70 miles (112 kilometers) from the border of Sonora, Mexico. This case study is part of a larger longitudinal research project focused on all the stakeholders—which ranged from 23 to 33 participants per year over the span of the project—involved in the curriculum redesign. In order to understand the experience of involvement in such a large-scale project, this article is centered on a teacher educator who was part of a curriculum redesign, and examines how she navigated her identity through the second year of involvement in the redesign.
The Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project had four principles that guide all coursework and fieldwork: (1) valuing the funds of knowledge within diverse cultural communities; (2) encouraging story as a meaning-making process to understand self and the world; (3) celebrating the significance of family literacies in literacy learning; and (4) providing professional learning opportunities for educators across community, school, and university settings (Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, n.d.). These guiding principles were critical to the generative nature of the project’s work, as each year the project coordinators evaluated progress in order to provide appropriate opportunities for the stakeholder to embrace the conceptual and philosophical shift this work required (Robbins et al., 2017). A curriculum redesign based on these principles breaks down the power dynamics among all participants, creating a flow of information and value for parents, students, and teachers. Through preparation guided by these principles, it is envisioned that teachers empower their own cultural capital and that of the students and families they serve (Bourdieu, 2008: 287). Traditional teacher education programs struggle with bridging the gap between students and their mentor teachers, and developing strong cooperative relationships with teacher educators in the classroom. Based on this analysis, some teacher educators seek to maintain the existing divisions between the classroom and the university, thus affecting the teacher candidates’ ability to embody new teaching strategies that draw on children’s rich cultural heritage and redirect the larger macro-level discourse regarding teaching and teacher education.
This article focuses on the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s first principle, which is based on the work of Norma González and Luis Moll (González et al., 2006), and is the foundation for the curriculum redesign. Through the framework of membership in a developing community of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991), and critical discourse analysis (Fairclough, 1989; Van Dijk, 2011), I analyze an interview with one teacher educator who worked with the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project for the first two years of its implementation. This participant was selected for analysis because her role as a teacher educator, who taught the teacher candidates in the field, and site coordinator, who supervised the placement of the teacher candidates in the early childhood setting, positioned her at the intersection between the university-based teacher educators and the teacher candidates. This analysis addresses how a teacher educator took a didactic position, creating an identity for herself that rejected membership and socialization into the community of practice focused on funds of knowledge, and instead remaining entrenched in a deficit perspective while highlighting her separation from the project team.
Literature review
Framed within critical discourse analysis, teaching can essentially be viewed as control of the mind. This represents an enormous level of power over the future of discourse. Teachers frame what a person is thinking and shape how the person is going to see the world; therefore, the principles of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, using a funds of knowledge approach, were intended to better shape the future practice of teacher candidates by providing a framework for understanding families and communities as part of their classroom teaching.
Aligned with the first project principle, previous teacher education research addressing relationships between schools and communities shows that by placing the community at the core of the teacher preparation program, families, teachers, the school site, and community activities blend to create a collaborative circle of resources for teaching and learning. Teachers prepared with a community-based curriculum develop a child’s culture as part of the formal and informal learning environments, thus better serving each child. A goal of the program redesign is to make an impact on early childhood teacher preparation by finding ways to foster authentic and lasting relationships between its teacher candidates and the community that they serve.
Funds of knowledge are defined by González et al. (2006: 169) as “historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being.” Their funds of knowledge research provides a foundation for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project to bridge the gap between communities, families, and the school. The project curriculum establishes home visits throughout its coursework to give the teacher candidates structured ethnographic experiences with the families’ funds of knowledge. These experiences are woven throughout the coursework in the program; therefore, it is imperative that all of the teacher educators understand and can incorporate funds of knowledge as a foundational concept of the “communities as resources in early childhood education” principles.
Within a community of practice Lave and Wenger (1991: 29 ) posit that learners' “intentions to learn are engaged and the meaning of learning is configured through the process of becoming a full particpant in a sociocultural practice.” Learning in a community of practice is based on the idea that we are social beings, and that engaging and participating in our lived world is the fundamental way that people learn (Wenger, 1998). In a community of practice, “the process of being an active participant in the practices of social communities and constructing identities in relation to these communities” is how members learn (Wenger, 1998: 4); for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, this learning provided the vision for the implementation of the guiding principles. Communities of practice develop naturally, in all aspects of our lives as social beings. Within the context of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, the guiding principles set forth a framework for the community of practice that should ideally develop, although simply being a teacher educator involved in the program does not make a person part of the community of practice, and, indeed, participation in or resistance against the community of practice was a decision each participant made. The desire to learn together, to share funds of knowledge across the boundaries of one’s role, does signify the development of a community of practice.
Using Van Dijk’s (1993: 263) theories of power and critical discourse analysis as a framework for analysis provides a lens to examine participants’ views of the enactment of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s principles and the tacit “US and THEM” power dynamic. Although Van Dijk primarily applies critical discourse analysis to reveal racism within power struggles, the lens of his work illuminates the separation of self within role groups and is important to understand the impact of the change effort intended with the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project and, more importantly, identify struggles of enactment across the participants. Van Dijk (1993: 259) explains that “the core of critical discourse analysis [is] a detailed description, explanation and critique of the ways dominant discourses (indirectly) influence such societally shared knowledge, attitudes and ideologies, namely through their role in the manufacture of concrete models.” It is also important to note the implications of the use of discourse as a means to position oneself as an agent or opponent of change. Van Dijk explains: The crucial implication of this correlation is not merely that discourse control is a form of social action control, but also and primarily that it implies the conditions of control over the minds of other people, that is, the management of social representations. More control over more properties of text and context, involving more people, is thus generally (though not always) associated with more influence, and hence with hegemony. (Van Dijk, 1993: 253) the first goal of the analyst is to describe the relationships among certain texts, interactions, and social practices … a second goal is to interpret the configuration of discourse practices … the analysis of the text involves the study of the language structures produced in a discursive event. An analysis of the discursive practice involves examining the production, consumption, and reproduction of the texts. (Rogers et al., 2005: 371)
Research design
This case study uses a qualitative research design focused on the phenomenological interpretations of how a teacher educator who works with the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project establishes her identity and takes a stance toward the curriculum redesign. The research design employed an interview process for data collection, and the scope of the data collected encompassed all of the university-affiliated stakeholders. The interviews were conducted at the end of each academic year. For this research, classroom teachers at the school sites and teacher candidates enrolled in the program were not included. Those role groups are involved in research in other lines of inquiry on the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project.
The participant
From the stakeholders involved in the project, the selected case was a participant who overtly shared her struggles enacting the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s principles; the analysis in this study only focused on the data collected from one teacher educator whose role was teaching and supervising the placement of the teacher candidates. Although the project has many other stakeholders, this analysis focuses on this instructor since she is the primary contact between the university program and the teacher candidates for whom the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project is designing the new curriculum. This positions her as instrumental in implementing the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s principles and, as with all of the instructors, understanding and recognition of funds of knowledge is pivotal in the success or failure of this implementation.
The participant was selected from a larger longitudinal study of the teacher educators within the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. In total, the larger research project involves 30 participants; the goal of the larger line of inquiry is to trace the changing nature of each participant’s role throughout the curriculum redesign. Using this data and applying a critical discourse framework better informed the development of resources for the teacher educators in the instructor position. By illuminating the discourse of “US and THEM,” the primary investigators for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project situated learning for the instructors that incorporated their voice in the process of redesign, strengthening the developing community of practice.
Data sources
As part of the larger research agenda of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, the author was directly involved with research about the experiences of the stakeholders in the project. This included the co-principal investigators, interviewers, graduate assistants, administrators, instructors, coordinators, university supervisors, and teaching assistants. The goal of this research was to reveal levels of enactment across the role groups in order to inform the leadership team’s decision process during the revision. The interview protocol was developed by the author and revised in collaboration with a graduate assistant and a co-principal investigator for the project. The interviews were held at the university at the end of the academic year, and each lasted between 35 and 65 minutes. All of the participants signed consent forms in accordance with the institutional review board of the university. The interviews were transcribed by the researchers and provided to each participant for review and edits. All of the transcripts were emailed to the participants and none were returned with edits.
The primary tool for data collection was a phenomenological interview (Merriam, 2009: 25). The purpose of this type of interview is to elicit how a participant perceives herself in a situation; it is a study of experience. My goal is to understand the ways in which the teacher educator develops her community of practice membership and her identity in relation to the project principles, and to use critical discourse analysis with this interview to better inform the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project for future induction of members into the community of practice.
Based on the findings from the first year of interviews, which did not elicit many direct references to funds of knowledge, the protocol for this data specifically asked participants about their understanding of funds of knowledge. Previously, the protocol questions asked about the essential features of the project; in the second year, the participants were asked: “What is your understanding of funds of knowledge within diverse cultural communities?” This direct question regarding funds of knowledge encouraged the teacher educators to reflect on the first principle of the project.
Data analysis
On receipt of the reviewed transcripts, the researcher began analysis using Dedoose, which is a qualitative, mixed-methods software program. Since this was the second year of analysis, the analysis began with the final codes that were established the previous year, while adding additional codes based on emergent themes expressed during this year of interviews (Robbins et al., 2017).
Positionality
As a researcher for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, the author was involved with the project from its inception. The interview protocols were revised annually by the author, who also conducted the yearly interviews with the stakeholders of the project. The interview themes and challenges revealed by the participants were shared with the leadership team.
The author was positioned uniquely because she did not work directly with the teacher candidates or classroom teachers in the project; therefore, she did not have a familiarity with the school sites or teacher candidates, and does not bring their familiar history into this research. This allows for objectivity toward the experiences the participant shared during the interview process. As a member of the community of practice, the researcher did not embody “what [is] referred to as ‘members resources,’ or what Gee (1999) refers to as ‘cultural models’ around participation in school that includes beliefs, assumptions and values within these contexts” (Rogers et al., 2005: 382).
In order to be reflexive about the process, the author acknowledged the power dynamic between herself and the interviewees as similar to that of the teacher–student or doctor–patient type of power structure. As an interviewer, the author held a dominant position over the direction of the talk and resulting text, which is structured around an interview protocol developed by the author; therefore, the author tacitly controlled the participants’ ability to share information. Although the author held the position as interviewer, the stakeholders interviewed held various levels of power over her. With these dynamics in mind, the researcher carefully encouraged the participants to share any additional information at the end of the interview or in a follow-up email.
Findings
A funds of knowledge approach to early childhood education shifts the understanding of teacher educators to incorporate children’s and families’ diverse knowledge as a base for building the curriculum and transforming practice. This may not happen if the teacher educators themselves do not understand or practice a funds of knowledge approach. This approach, which privileges the reproduction of culture in equitable ways, is critical to changing the discourse in teacher education. Funds of knowledge give agency to the community and the family relationships that children bring to the classroom, providing new forms of equitable discourse in which the students contribute to the learning environment and disrupt the existing hegemonic structures.
The participant in this study held the position of teacher-in-residence and was at the end of her two-year commitment to teaching for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. She was looking forward to returning to her classroom teaching. Although she had been with the project for two years, she shared a reluctant understanding of the funds of knowledge approach and how the mentor teachers should deliver it as an integrated part of the classroom curriculum.
Enacting funds of knowledge in teacher education
She shared her own innate deficit perspective about what communities can offer to classroom instruction when sharing this understanding of the “funds” that can be brought into the classroom: One of my communities is a very high-income community, and all the parents are doctors, and one of my students was telling me about all these great parents, there’s a heart surgeon in there, and like they could have brought in some interesting things, but there’s no opportunity, because we have to meet the curriculum … So, they never had the opportunity to use it, and then in the preschools, it was like, because the, um, my preschools were not particularly strong, and so, if they were supposed to use it, they didn’t know how.
Even with two years of experience on the project, she was still unable to define funds of knowledge as it relates to her experiences with the cohort of teacher candidates. The participant defined funds of knowledge as: getting to know the students in their home life, and being able to look at what’s important to them, what their understanding is, what their knowledge and their base, and the things that they’re passionate about, and making it an essential piece of who they are within the classroom.
Membership in a community of practice
The instructor, who worked exclusively with the first-year cohort of teacher candidates, positioned herself outside of the community of practice of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project when describing her experiences with funds of knowledge: “What they come down and tell us are the essential features are communication, connection with home and family” (author emphasis). Here she describes a distance between her work at the school site and the work that happens at the university. The distance is not only measured between these two places, but by “they come down” she implies that the university-based team is located in the traditional ivory tower of academia.
From her responses, it is evident that the instructor found herself frustrated and isolated. During that first year, many of the “educate” and “support” structures for the community of practice were established, and by year two, the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project was ready to “get going” (Wenger et al., 2002). By this point, the instructor seemed reluctant to grow within the project, and instead was prepared to move back into her own classroom practice.
The power of discourse
Evaluating the discourse from a textual analysis position, the instructor described a conversation about the incorporation of funds of knowledge between herself, a teacher candidate (student teacher), and a cooperating teacher as follows: Every time it came up, I would kind of give my little halted explanation, and the student teacher would sit there and sigh, and the cooperating teacher, sometimes the cooperating teacher would say, “Oh well, we try to do things with the community,” and I would say, “Well, that’s kind of it … .”
This instructor, ultimately, has control over the dialogue at the school site, and therefore the power to structure it in a positive or negative way. Here, it is clear that she has made the choice to maintain the top-down hegemonic structure with which she is comfortable. She positioned herself in such a way that she is the intermediary and can share or not share the information with the students regarding the principles of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project.
Growing in her position of negative representation, during her interview the instructor responded in various ways that solidify her didactic position. When asked about the essential features of the project, she responds: “What essential features—I mean, what they are telling us? … What they come down and tell us are the essential features are communication, connection with home and family.” She continues: “How they are restructuring things, that is really important to me, because I don’t want anyone to go through this hell again”—referring to the curriculum redesign. She concedes that the redesign is a good thing, but still frames the dialogue by calling it “their ideas” and “what they want to accomplish,” marginalizing herself in the process of the development of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. Finally, she actually names the problem: “There needs to be a lot more actual input, involvement, because I mean, we have this complete, you know, separation of people, the ones who create the program and the ones who are implementing it.” Van Dijk (1993: 263) explains that: “If such 'polarized' models are consistent with negative attitudes or ideologies, they may be used to sustain existing attitudes or form new negative attitudes.” This is counterproductive to the principles of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, as well as crippling for the development of culturally responsive pedagogy for the teacher candidates.
Discussion
This section is organized to focus on the data from three perspectives. First, it considers the teacher educators’ understanding of funds of knowledge. Second, it addresses how the participant positions herself within the community of practice of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. Finally, a critical discourse analysis framework is used to analyze the text of the interview and incorporate Van Dijk’s theories of power and discourse, and address the first two tiers of Fairclough’s framework for critical discourse analysis. The evidence points to a didactic perception of membership in the community of practice. I argue that the participant in this study maintains the dominant discourse of the “US and THEM” status quo in teacher education, which reflects her lack of active participation as a member of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s community of practice. Her perceived alienation and lack of engagement have implications on a micro level for the teacher candidates, but also on a macro level for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project.
Funds of knowledge as curriculum
The instructor’s role within the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s implementation rests on interaction with the teacher candidates and is pivotal to the overall success of the curriculum redesign. The impact of funds of knowledge as a base for the teacher education curriculum should change teacher candidates’ perspectives regarding the assets that families and the community bring to the classroom, and should change their belief about collaborating with families to integrate their experience into the classroom—and this pivot in mindset must be fostered by those who are teaching them to teach.
Communities of practice in curriculum enactment
Using the work of Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theory of communities of practice was appropriate for the work within the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project because one of the principles of “communities as resources in early childhood education” was to “[p]rovide prospective and practicing teachers and teacher educators with opportunities to work and reflect together in community and school settings”—which is a goal of a community of practice (CREATE, n.d.). The teacher educators involved in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s community of practice have a goal of gaining and sharing knowledge related to educational practices that meet the diverse needs of all students.
By examining how Wenger et al. (2002) recommend a community of practice establish itself, I argue that the participant did not join the community of practice fully. During year one of the project, the principles had been established, but, due to its design-based approach, many of the strategic elements of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project were still growing. The “education” aspects of the community of practice were still developing with the guidance of the primary investigators for the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. Because people need to understand how they fit into the work of a community of practice, the instructor’s understanding of her fit in this development reflects tension. The participant said: “I am not really invited to the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project team meetings, and so I really don’t know all of the visions.” Although she recognized that the redesign meant that there would be change, she seemed reluctant to embrace the changes, saying: “you know, it was so different from what they had ever had before.” Her frustration with the changes was not something she was willing to elaborate on. When I asked if there was anything else she would like to add about the changes in her responsibilities or the changes that happened over the year, she simply responded: “I don’t.”
Discourse and power
The critical discourse analysis focuses first on the power relations present in the discourse of the participant (Van Dijk, 1993). I used two of Fairclough’s tiers within his framework of critical discourse analysis to evaluate the text and consider the discursive practices of the participant. The analysis of this interview pointed toward the need to better incorporate the instructors in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project into the curriculum redesign in order to build the community of practice and incorporate funds of knowledge as a base for teaching teacher candidates. The use of critical discourse analysis linked the participant’s choice of non-membership to her intent to maintain the dominant discourse regarding the changing relationship between the teacher educators and their university counterparts.
Through the examination of the discourse, it is clear that the participant has chosen to reproduce the dominant, traditional relationship between university and site-based teacher educators, in which she positions herself as having a lack of agency. She does not recognize the principles of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project in ways that can change this reproduction of a separation between the two stakeholders. Van Dijk (1993: 259) posits that we “distinguish between the enactment, expression or legitimation of dominance in the production of the various structures of talk and text … and the functions, consequences or results of such structures for the social minds of recipients.” As previously discussed, her talk about the project and its reception among the teachers is negative. Through this discursive process, she is developing the divide between the university and the school sites not only for herself, but also for the teachers she is working with. Her power to influence the minds of the teacher candidates results in their acceptance of funds of knowledge as a construct for their future teaching practice.
The participant develops herself as what Van Dijk (1993: 265) calls a “symbolic elite” while maintaining a deficit perspective on her membership in the larger system of the university program. This position of “US and THEM” is nested inside the macro view of the project for which she is, regardless of her positioning, a key member. Van Dijk rationalizes that “the justification of inequality involves … the positive representation of the own group, and the negative representation of the Others … Thus, models are being expressed and pervasively conveyed that contrast US with THEM” (265).
As evidenced in this analysis, the participant’s understanding of funds of knowledge as a basis for the teacher education curriculum is “halted” and she has opted to maintain a position outside the growing community of practice in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. Through the lens of critical discourse analysis, the text reveals her intent to maintain the status quo, which is a separation between the school and the university. Her discursive practices embolden her position as she is able to shape the discourse negatively, not allowing the new curriculum to become an integrated fiber of her teaching practice. Finally, her positionality regarding “US and THEM” clearly intends to exasperate the division between the university program and the work in classrooms, as her language indicates a devaluing of the principles, characterizing them as something developed out of practice. The participant does all of this while still marginalizing herself in the process of implementation of the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project at her school site.
Conclusion
The Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project was designed to be a program change with guiding principles to root teacher preparation in a funds of knowledge mindset. It was intended that through the development of this key theoretical stance toward the education of early childhood children, the teacher candidates would be better equipped to meet the needs of their students and the communities in which they live. An analysis of interviews with key stakeholders was used to inform the project development and provide support to develop these essential theoretical underpinnings in the teacher educators. While most recognized their own deficit perspective, not all of the stakeholders were able to translate the project’s principles into action.
Implications
The implications of this analysis are threefold. First, the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project program must address the hegemonic views of the instructors in the program. If they do not understand and value the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s principles, they cannot and, as evidenced here, may not share these views with the teacher candidates. Second, the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project program must participate in the flow of discourse on all levels. The representation of cultural models within the project that are negative may impact the success of the project. And, finally, each participant in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project must become reflective on their own funds of knowledge. Not only do we need to emphasize this approach to the teacher candidates, but we also need to grow this principle among the teacher educators involved in the project.
At its core, a funds of knowledge approach is about understanding the value of our lived experiences and provides a basis for a person to explore their own understanding of the world; however, it is difficult to inspire a position of learning and understanding, since one’s understanding of lived experiences is personal. Simply reciting the Communities as Resources in Eearly Childhood Teacher Education Project’s principles does not break down cultural barriers. It must become a practice within the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project’s community of practice and an ongoing reflective process for deep growth and rich learning experiences.
The overall impact of a funds of knowledge framework as a base for a teacher education curriculum changes pre-service teachers’ perspectives regarding the assets that families and the community bring to the classroom. Teacher candidates can challenge their beliefs about collaborating with families to integrate their experience into the classroom if the discourse involved in this shift of mindset is structured in ways that value the cultural capital existing in the classroom. If the teacher educators in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project do not embrace the principles in practice, no change can occur. The instructors working with the pre-service teachers control the power to plant this seed of change. We must remember that, as Wenger (1998: 10) shares, “[o]ur institutions are designs and that our designs are hostage to our understanding, perspectives, and theories.”
Limitations
This study is limited to the partner schools involved with the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project. Although the larger research sample spans three different school sites, the participants represent only the early childhood education level of the educational system. This case study is limited to one participant involved in the Communities as Resources in Early Childhood Teacher Education Project, who is in the role of instructor. This case study does not include the perspectives of participants in other roles within the project who possess a stronger understanding of the funds of knowledge principles. Additionally, the school sites are all located in linguistically rich and culturally diverse urban settings, which are not a representation of all urban settings. The results do not include data from more affluent school districts, which could pose altogether different challenges for stakeholders.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.