Development and Validation of the Mathematics Teachers Beliefs About

English Language Learners Survey (MTBELL)

Linda Gann Emily P. Bonner
Boerne ISD University of Texas at San Antonio

Christine Moseley
University of Texas at San Antonio

Given the increasing number of English Language Learners (ELLs) in secondary mathematics classrooms, it is
imperative that mathematics teacher educators develop measures for determining how and why secondary mathematics
teachers (SMTs) understand and respond instructionally to these students. This paper reports on the initial development
and validation of the Mathematics Teachers Beliefs about English Language Learners survey, an instrument that
measures SMTs beliefs, attitudes, knowledge base, and instructional practices in relation to meeting the academic and
language needs of ELLs. Through piloting processes, the instrument was refined for a research study through which
reliability and validity were established. The five constructs identified from exploratory factor analysis illustrate
perceived opportunities and barriers in meeting ELLs academic and language needs among SMTs.

Student populations in the United States are becoming
more diverse (Contreras, 2011; United States Census
Bureau, 2009, 2013) and the number of early elementary
children speaking a language at home other than English
has nearly doubled since 1970 (United States Census
Bureau, 2013). School structures, however, have mini-
mally changed to meet the needs of students from cultur-
ally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (Goldenberg &
Coleman, 2010; Muhammad, 2009). The Brown Paradox,
as described by Contreras (2011), represents this incon-
gruity, particularly between the rising number of school-
aged Latino children and the significant gap they
experience in educational achievement, access, and inte-
gration into the social and economic fabric of the United
States (p. 2). The resulting challenges that all English
language learners (ELLs) face prevent their attainment of
the same level of secondary and post-secondary success as
other populations (Menken, 2010; Menken & Kleyn,
2010; Ruiz-de-Velasco, Fix, & Chu Clewell, 2000; United
States Census Bureau, 2009). Consequently, the issue of
preparing teachers for diverse classrooms, especially
working with ELLs, is relevant and imperative
(Echevarris, Frey, & Fisher, 2015).
Secondary ELLs, particularly those in schools with
small ELL populations, typically spend the majority of the
school day in mainstream classes and attend ESL classes
for one or two class periods. Yet, teachers in those main-
stream classrooms are largely untrained to work with
ELLs (Reeves, 2006); only 12.5% of U.S. teachers have
received eight or more hours of recent training to teach
School Science and Mathematics
students of limited English proficiency (National Center
for Education Statistics, 2002). Data shared by the
National Center for Education Statistics (Synder & Dillow,
2013) convey an alarming disparity of success with math-
ematics assessments and graduation from high school
based upon parameters of ethnicity, English proficiency,
and socioeconomic status. Further, research indicates that
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and the level of English
proficiency do impact academic achievement (Lubienski,
2002; Tate, 1997). These factors do not necessarily corre-
late with student ability to learn and understand mathemat-
ics; rather, these factors mediate student access to
mathematical content. Ladson-Billings (2011) has
extended this line of thought, expressing concerns for
other external factors influencing students academic
achievement, such as teacher quality and effectiveness,
school structures, and availability of needed resources. As
such, the popular, dominant assumption that all students
can learn at the same level of mastery and on the same
timetable, regardless of these external factors, perpetuates
deficit views of students from diverse backgrounds
(Woodrow, 2003). This presents a challenge for mathemat-
ics teachers, particularly in geographic areas where pre-
dominantly white, middle class mathematics teachers are
teaching students with limited English proficiency. These
mathematics teachers need the skills and knowledge to
bridge the cultural gaps that are inherent in the mathemat-
ics classroom.
For teachers to meet the academic and language needs
of ELLs, the educational focus must go beyond some
83
 MTBELL Validation
initial instruction in the students first language or more
effective teaching of English (Cummins, 1995, p. 64).
Rather, the association between teachers beliefs and
instructional practices related to ELLs must be under-
stood. Because student populations are experiencing lin-
guistic shifts across the nation, numerous researchers have
explored the perspectives of teachers of ELLs (Cummins,
2000; Fu, 1995; Harklau, 1994, 1999, 2000; Lucas, 1997;
Lucas, Henze, & Donato, 1990; Mace-Matluck,
Alexander-Kasparik, & Queen, 1998; Valdes, 2001;
Walqui, 2000) and English-as-a-second-language (ESL)
students (Creese, 2002; Johnson, 1999; Johnson &
Golombek, 2002). However, there has been limited
research regarding mainstream teacher perspectives on
ELL inclusion, and the experiences of secondary teachers,
in particular, have received little research attention
(Reeves, 2006). In contrast, there is abundant research on
supporting science and reading teachers in acquisition of
knowledge and instructional strategies for supporting
ELLs (Janzen, 2008; Slavin & Cheung, 2005; Stoddart,
Pinal, Latzke, & Canaday, 2002). Mathematics is a some-
what under-researched discipline, perhaps because of a
misguided belief that math is less difficult for ELLs
because it is based on a language of numbers (p. 1017).
The underlying belief that mathematics is a universal lan-
guage void of cultural influences can be most readily
addressed through support of mathematics teachers
efforts in understanding and meeting the needs of ELLs.
In general, classroom practices among teachers are
impacted by many interrelated factors (i.e., school struc-
tures, curriculum, time) with teacher beliefs about particu-
lar groups of students among the most significant of these
factors (Agudelo-Valderrama, 2008; Aguirre & Speer,
1999; Beswick, 2007). Researchers have probed into the
many facets of teacher beliefs, how beliefs impact instruc-
tional practice, and common challenges in negotiating
teacher beliefs and best practices (Beswick, 2006; Bolden
& Newton, 2008; Cahnmann & Remillard, 2002; Tan,
2011). Research studies in these areas have focused on
understanding the power of teachers beliefs on teaching
mathematics (Agudelo-Valderrama, 2008; Gregg, 1995;
Perry, Howard, & Tracey, 1999; Schutz, Cross, Hong, &
Osbon, 2007) and teaching ELLs (Dekutoski, 2011; Flores
& Smith, 2007; Goldstein, 2011; Mantero & McVicker,
2006; Reeves, 2006), particularly at the elementary school
level. Findings indicate that a teachers native language,
age, and assigned teaching discipline to be particularly
influential on beliefs about inter-culturalism and second
language acquisition (Llurda & Lasagabaster, 2010).
Further, studies of elementary mathematics teachers have
84
found that teacher ethnicity, experiences, and education
influence beliefs, which in turn impact work with ELLs
(Cahnmann & Remillard, 2002; McLeman & Fernandes,
2012). Sociocultural factors also influence preservice
teachers evolving beliefs and practices (Flores,
2001).
Ultimately, teachers instructional decisions are influ-
enced by their beliefs, which are framed by their experi-
ences (Gay, 2010). Subsequently, instructional decisions
influence the effectiveness of instruction in meeting the
academic and language needs of ELLs. There is limited
research, however, that explicitly investigates secondary
mathematics teachers (SMTs) attitudes and beliefs about
ELLs learning secondary-level mathematics content and
how these beliefs translate into practice (Fernandes &
McLeman, 2012). In order to explore the complex forces
impacting ELLs success, a baseline understanding of sec-
ondary mathematics teachers beliefs, attitudes, and
instructional practices regarding the academic and lan-
guage needs of ELLs is needed. This knowledge would
contribute to the improvement of the effectiveness of pro-
fessional learning opportunities in shifting beliefs and atti-
tudes of SMTs, while enhancing their instructional
practices in order to increase the educational achievements
of ELLs. As such, the authors sought to gain a better
understanding of SMT beliefs and practices in relation to
teaching ELLs based on the emerging constructs derived
from a literature review. An instrument that focuses spe-
cifically on measuring SMTs beliefs and attitudes about
teaching ELLs was not found in the literature. As such, the
purpose of this study was to develop such an instrument,
the Mathematics Teachers Beliefs about English Lan-
guage Learners (MTBELL) survey, to measure secondary
mathematics teachers beliefs, attitudes, knowledge base,
and instructional practices in relation to meeting the aca-
demic and language needs of ELLs.
Theoretical Framework
This research study is grounded in the idea that teach-
ing behavior cannot be understood apart from the thought
processes of the teacher (Au, 1990, p. 27), and knowl-
edge is socially produced, bound up with social values
and socially regulated (Pepin, 1999, p. 132). More spe-
cifically, mathematics instruction is viewed through a
Vygotskian lens where social construction of knowing
evolves into actions (Vygotsky, 1986). According to
Vygotsky, all learning exists within a social setting, inter-
nalized by the individual and transmitted back to society,
and requires the use of cultural tools, both physical and
abstract, which are inseparable from the individual. This
Volume 116 (2)
 MTBELL Validation
sociocultural framework allowed us, as researchers, to
consider cultural, economic, historical, political, and
social factors, which in turn influence the actions and
beliefs of teachers in relation to educational practices.
Teachers are situated in the social and cultural context of
resources and events, past and present. Thus, once teachers
understand the social, cultural, and political nature of
schooling ELLs, there are professional knowledge, skills,
and dispositions that teachers need to know in order to
optimize the learning of both content and language by
ELLs (Nilles, lvarez, & Rios, 2006, p. 45). Through
social interactions within group practices and surround-
ings, teachers have learned and internalized thoughts
regarding their beliefs (Lave & Wenger, 1991). A
Vygotskian lens exposes the complexity of teachers
assimilation and internalization of knowledge and
instructional practices and their appropriation of these
practices.
Socially and culturally defined experiences shape teach-
ers beliefs, attitudes, and instructional practices (Flores,
Hernndez, Trevio Garca, & Claeys, 2011). Based on
these experiences, teachers actions and interactions rep-
resent the social and cultural practices within their
schools domain. When teachers interact with each other,
they can either perpetuate the established norms or unite to
change practices. It is important to consider that teachers
develop their craft on a continuum as they progress
through a complex multidimensional experience
grounded not only in academic, personal, or professional
interactions, but also in engaging them as members of a
community of practice (Flores et al., 2011, p. 368).
Teachers derive their dispositions about teaching math-
ematics, instructional practices, and who they are as math-
ematics teachers from their social interactions and
practices among members of their mathematics colleagues
(Adler, 1998). This sociocultural influence extends from
teachers to a community of educators as they are inducted
into established practices and expectations. Teachers who
believe that the study of mathematics is less difficult for
ELLs because it is based on a language of numbers
ignore their students diversity and language needs
(Janzen, 2008, p. 1017). Educators one-size-fits-all
instructional practices, regardless of students academic
and background differences, maintain the achievement
gap between ELLs and other students (Abedi & Lord,
2001). Based on the existing gap in academic achievement
between ELLs and general populations in mathematics,
and research acknowledging a lack of teacher preparation
regarding ELLs (Echevarria, Short, & Powers, 2006), it
may be assumed, from a sociocultural perspective, that
School Science and Mathematics
culturally responsive mathematics teaching is lacking in
todays schools. Given these frames, this study includes a
focus on items that address teacher beliefs relevant to
cultural factors. Further, we relied on items that situate
teachers and students in a sociocultural context based in
culture, language, and norms.
Methodology
Very limited published research that specifically focuses
on secondary mathematics teachers beliefs, attitudes, and
knowledge base regarding ELLs was found. Thus, the
proposed MTBELL survey was developed from items on
several related, vetted instruments, including the Self-
Efficacy Beliefs about Equitable Mathematics Teaching
(SEBEMT) survey, which addresses language minority
students, the Mathematics Education of English Learners
Scale (MEELS) that addresses mathematics as a cultural
practice, and the English as a Second Language (ESL) in
Mainstream Classrooms survey, which focuses on the
inclusion of English learners, the impact of inclusion, pro-
fessional development, and teacher support (Reeves,
2006). It is important to note that the development of the
MTBELL was necessary as none of these surveys (or
others found in the literature) focused specifically on sec-
ondary mathematics teachers and ELLs. Other surveys
may have included secondary mathematics teachers, but
also spanned K-12 education in general. As such, this
instrument was designed with a unique population in
mind. Face and content validity of this survey were estab-
lished through five questions at the end of a pilot survey
given to 30 middle school mathematics teachers. Univari-
ate analyses of the survey data included percentages, mea-
sures of central tendency, and standard deviations.
The SEBEMT survey (Flores, Claeys, Gist, Clark, &
Villarreal, 2015), an adapted version of the Self-Efficacy
Beliefs about Equitable Science Teaching (SEBEST)
survey by Ritter, Boone, and Rubba (2001b), contains
items that addresses language minority students. The
Cronbachs alpha reliability coefficient for the overall
SEBEMT was .966 (n = 28). High reliability was observed
on the SEBEMTs two constructs: Personal Mathematics
Teaching Efficacy ( = .95) and Mathematics Teaching
Outcome Expectancy ( = .954) subscales. The SEBEST
was found to have a reliability coefficient of .87 on the
34-item SEBEST, with reliability coefficients of .83 and
.78 on its two subscales (Ritter, Boone, & Rubba, 2001a).
The MEELS by Fernandes and McLeman (2012) con-
tains 26 items that addresses teaching, language in school
context, fairness, language and mathematics, and culture.
Face validity of the MEELS was established through three
85
 MTBELL Validation
questions at the end of the pilot survey that determined the
readability and clarity of the survey, content validity was
established by consulting 10 experts in mathematics edu-
cation, and principal component factor analysis along with
varimax rotation was used to determine the construct
validity. Cronbachs coefficient alphas were determined
for each of the five constructs in the survey: Beliefs about
teaching (.79), Beliefs about language in the school
context (.73), Beliefs about fairness (.66), Beliefs about
the interconnection of language and mathematics (.59),
and Beliefs about culture (.48). The researchers carefully
looked at each item on the three aforementioned surveys.
The items were next clustered by construct and labeled
accordingly. The first two clusters of items are related to
the ideology of Teaching ELLs and ELLs and Mathemat-
ics, respectively. The third cluster of items focuses on the
construct of Language and Mathematics, asking the SMTs
to reflect upon the ideology of mathematics as a language.
The fourth cluster focuses on Language in School Context,
and the four final constructs include Inclusion and Impact
of Inclusion, Fairness, Culture and Professional Develop-
ment and Teacher Support.
These particular constructs were developed using a two-
pronged approach. First, the researchers created a list of
constructs (Nardi, 2006) that was deemed important
regarding secondary mathematics teachers beliefs, atti-
tudes, and knowledge base. Second, the researchers gener-
ated a list of vetted instruments with validity and reliability
aligned with the study. When the two prongs merged,
survey items were compiled from published studies.
In particular, understanding teachers attitudes toward
the inclusion of ELLs and the impact teachers felt about
meeting the needs of ELLs were believed essential for the
research. These survey items, listed under the construct
title Inclusion and Impact of Inclusion, were taken from
Reevess (2006) survey, English as a Second Language
(ESL) in Mainstream Classrooms. Another construct from
the Reeves survey, Professional Development and
Teacher Support, was included due to its potential contri-
bution to understanding secondary mathematics teachers
attitudes toward effective professional, school, and district
support. Reliability data were not available for Reeves
survey.
Another perspective of understanding secondary math-
ematics teachers beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge base
regarding ELLs in general was deemed critical. The
survey, The SEBEMT by Ritter et al. (2001b) addressed
the construct of ELLs and Mathematics regarding lan-
guage minority students specifically in terms of mathemat-
ics teachers beliefs.
86
Additionally, two constructs that centered on language
and mathematics and language in the context of school and
classroom were determined to be critical in relevance to
teachers meeting the language acquisition needs of ELLs.
Survey items from the MEELS by Fernandes and
McLeman (2012) contains items that addressed Language
in School Context and Language and Mathematics. Since
there is a difference between social language and the lan-
guage of mathematics studies, it was necessary to investi-
gate both aspects of language.
Addressing underpinnings of culturally responsive
teaching, the construct of Professional Development and
Teaching ELLs, aspects of Culture, and the concept of
Fairness when teaching ELLs, drawn from the MEELS,
were also included in the MTBELL survey. Gay (2010)
stressed the critical importance of teachers knowledge of
diverse cultures, caring for culturally and linguistically
diverse students, and the congruency of instruction in
meeting the needs of these students.
The instrument development process involved the use of
practitioner and content expert feedback with respect to
content and language of items within the survey and the
use of appropriate reliability and factor analyses to
examine the structure of the survey. Following standard
measurement criteria for developing valid and reliable
measures, the items on the MTBELL were subjected to
multiple cycles of development, expert reviews, pilot
testing, validation, and revision.
A seven-point Likert scale (Strongly Agree, Agree,
Somewhat Agree, Uncertain, Somewhat Disagree, Dis-
agree, and Strongly Disagree) was used in the design of
the MTBELL survey in order to allow respondents to
express finer differences in judgment and therefore gives a
better chance of discriminating between groups
(Sapsford, 2007, pp. 22627). Following the 40 Likert-
based survey items, there are two open-ended questions
for SMTs to list or describe specific aspects regarding
teaching secondary mathematics to ELLs.
Initially, a panel of three practitioner experts with exper-
tise in both mathematics and bilingual education pedagogy
reviewed the items on the MTBELL to assess content and
face validity for instrument clarity and offer concrete
suggestions for improving the measure (Rubio,
Berg-Weger, Tebb, Lee, & Rauch, 2003, p. 95). The panel
consisted of a K12 mathematics specialist for a large
public school district, a bilingual K5 mathematics cur-
riculum and instruction specialist, and a bilingual second-
ary instructional support teacher. Each panel expert was
asked to review each item for clarity and relevance to the
research and provide any additional feedback regarding
Volume 116 (2)
 MTBELL Validation
how to improve items and the overall instrument. Based
upon their comments and suggestions, several minor
changes were made. For example, the survey item, I can
do a great deal as a teacher to increase the math achieve-
ment of children who do not speak English as their first
language was modified by excluding the phrase, can do
a great deal as a teacher to. The survey item, If there
were ELLs in my classroom, I would focus on language
skills specific to math in addition to the content was also
modified to increase clarity by restating the item as If
there were ELLs in my classroom, I would focus on math
vocabulary in addition to the content. Once revised, the
survey was then sent to a panel of content experts for
review.
The second panel of mathematics and bilingual educa-
tion content and research experts re-evaluated the revised
items. The five experts included faculty from two univer-
sities with expertise in the fields of mathematics, math-
ematics education, teacher education, and bicultural
studies. Based upon comments and suggestions from this
panel, revisions were made prior to the first administration
of the instrument. These changes established consistency
of syntax and vocabulary. For example, the wording lan-
guage minority students and English language learners
were both initially used across survey items. Following the
expert feedback, the wording of English Language Learn-
ers was consistently used on all survey items. Another
change included using only numbers one through seven
instead of labeling categories as strongly disagree to
strongly agree. The expert reviewers also carefully
checked for verbiage that made a survey item inconsistent
with secondary mathematics teachers professional dis-
course and a few changes.
To further determine content, face, and construct valid-
ity and reliability, a pilot of the MTBELL survey was
administered to 51 secondary mathematics teachers
attending an annual mathematics teachers conference.
The recorded length of time for teachers to complete the
survey spanned from 15 to 46 minutes. The mean time of
24.3 minutes and median time of 23.5 minutes were deter-
mined to be reasonable for future participants to complete
the survey. Face validity was established through four
open-ended questions at the end of the survey that deter-
mined the readability and clarity of the survey. These
questions asked teachers for feedback about any aspect of
the instrument, including the clarity of instructions,
wording of items, time devoted to completing the inven-
tory, response format, and content. The feedback obtained
from this pilot study resulted in additional revisions to the
final version of the instrument.
School Science and Mathematics
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to
assess reliability and ensure the validity of the constructs
(Bryant & Yarnold, 1995). The survey items initially
included items clustered into eight constructs from previ-
ously vetted surveys: Teaching ELLs; ELLs and Math-
ematics; Language and Mathematics; Language in School
Context; Inclusion and Impact of Inclusion; Fairness;
Culture, and Professional Development and Teacher
Support.
The researchers used the KaiserMeyerOlkin (KMO)
measure to assess the sample size adequacy. An initial
concern regarding a low KMO measure of .339 was attrib-
uted to a small sample size (n = 51). However, this
measure increased significantly with the subsequent
research study surveying 283 additional secondary math-
ematics teachers. The Bartletts Test of Sphericity of .000
indicated the survey items stood alone and contributed to
the constructs and analysis of the responses based on the
pilot data. Using a principal components factor analysis
with varimax rotation, the factor solution was determined
using a scree plot method. It was first decided that the
factors extracted would only comprise items with a factor
load eigenvalues greater than one. The factor solution
composed of 40 items initially grouped into 12 factors and
accounted for 74.884% of the cumulative total sums of
squared loadings. When the researchers restricted the
factors to eight, the cumulative total sums of squared load-
ings dropped to 54.632%. This result indicated a strong
explanation of variability in the analysis.
Data Collection
Next, the instrument was administered to secondary
mathematics teachers from a large suburban school district
in a metropolitan area in southern United States. The
research study was based on self-reported survey results of
283 participating secondary mathematics teachers, utiliz-
ing the revised MTBELL from the pilot study. The major-
ity of the participating teachers completed the online
survey during work hours with the mode completion time
of 14 minutes.
Participants
The school districts diverse demographics and measur-
able student outcomes mirrored the ethnic diversity and
overall student outcomes of the state. The selected school
districts bilingual programs, restricted to Spanish speak-
ers, are located only at designated elementary campuses
and none are offered at any middle or high schools.
Elementary students whose home campus did not offer a
bilingual program are bused to the nearest bilingual
campus. For children who speak languages other than
Spanish, the district has designated elementary ESL
87
 MTBELL Validation

staff at campuses where children are pulled out for ESL were analyzed using a constant comparison method
classes. (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). A compiled list of codes from
Of the 283 responding secondary mathematics teachers an open coding process enabled the researchers to refer-
who completed the entire survey, 53% of these respon- ence and compare subsequent expressions in order to use
dents represented middle school teachers and 47% of the repeated codes or to craft new codes. This open and axial
respondents were high schools teachers. These participat- coding was a complimentary process for an inductive
ing teachers were comprised of 31% males and 69% analysis of data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). After sorting the
females. Approximately 38% of the participants indicated coded phrases into formulated categories, the researchers
their ethnicity as being Hispanic. Additionally, partici- analyzed the connections among the categories for
pants were asked to indicate their race with the majority overarching themes.
identifying as white (n = 145; 51%). Other categories
included Asian (n = 3; 1%), and Black/African American Results
(n = 1; .4%). Also, five (2%) chose the category of other The mean and standard deviations of the 40 survey
and 21 (7%) indicated diverse backgrounds. items, in the original order of the survey, are located in
All secondary mathematics teachers in this study had a Table 1.
primary teaching assignment that included students in The responses for all but one survey item ranged from
grade 6 through grade 12, enrolled in a grade level math- Strongly Agree (1) to Strongly Disagree (7). The research-
ematics or supplemental mathematics course. Supplemen- ers utilized an EFA process to assess parsimony of factors
tal mathematics courses included classes in State and each factors reliability. Using a principal components
Compensatory Education in middle grades or Advanced factor analysis with varimax rotation, the EFA rotated
Placement Computer Science I as an optional fourth-year component matrix at eight constructs had a total explained
high school mathematics course. variance of 54.632%. The eigenvalues for each component
Data Analysis and corresponding cumulative explained variance are in
The analysis of the survey items includes descriptive Table 2. The Cronbachs alphas of the eight constructs
statistics, exploratory factor analysis, and inductive analy- ranged from .348 to .847 with four of the eight variables
sis using constant comparison of teachers responses. All having a Cronbachs alpha below .600.
data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for The researchers analyzed the scree plot (Figure 1) and
Windows, Version 21.0 (released 2012). Exploratory determined to further fix the EFA at five constructs.
factor analysis was conducted to assess each construct and
survey reliability. Table 1
The KMO measure was used to assess the sample size Mean and Standard Deviation for Each Survey Item
adequacy for the survey. The Bartletts Test of Sphericity Survey Mean Std Dev Survey Mean Std Dev
was conducted to indicate if the survey items stood alone Item Item
and contributed sufficiently to the constructs. Using a prin-
8 2.15 1.098 28 2.22 1.122
cipal components factor analysis with varimax rotation, 9 3.22 1.227 29 5.12 1.374
the factor solution was visually assessed against its scree 10 2.90 1.164 30 3.28 1.607
plot. Factor solutions extracted with a factor load eigen- 11 2.05 .979 31 4.34 1.723
values greater than one were kept or a fixed factor analysis 12 2.16 1.046 32 3.04 1.381
13 2.13 1.107 33 3.43 1.513
was used dependent upon the scree plot indications. Using 14 3.54 1.514 34 3.62 1.479
the loaded factors, the researcher aimed at having cumu- 15 2.90 1.135 35 4.81 1.385
lative total sums of squared loadings exceeding 60% 16 2.85 1.029 36 2.67 1.177
17 2.68 .974 37 4.16 1.462
for a strong explanation of variability in the analysis. 18 3.88 1.626 38 5.81 1.162
Cronbachs alpha measures of the coefficient of reliability 19 2.80 1.080 39 3.84 1.619
within an exploratory factor analysis were used to 20 6.03 1.136 40 4.01 1.512
access the internal consistency among survey items mea- 21 1.91 1.015 41 2.33 1.291
22 3.22 1.338 42 3.85 1.683
suring the same construct. The researchers sought 23 4.66 1.505 43 4.11 1.603
Cronbachs alpha measures of .70 or higher for each 24 5.86 1.166 44 2.66 1.328
construct. 25 2.67 1.464 45 3.84 1.537
26 4.69 1.793 46 3.63 1.682
The researchers used an inductive analysis to explore 27 4.48 1.585 47 3.81 1.760
the open response comments from survey items. The data
88 Volume 116 (2)

Table 2
Eigenvalues and Cumulative Percent of Explained Variance
Component Eigenvalue Cumulative Percent
1 7.122
2 3.144
3 2.481
4 1.781
5 1.568
6 1.488
7 1.362
8 1.268
Adequate sampling with fixed five constructs was assessed
based on a KMO at .820. The significance of the Bartletts
Test of Sphericity of .000 maintained that survey items
stood alone and contributed to the constructs of the EFA.
The total explained variance moved to 43.501% with all
five defined constructs having Cronbachs alphas greater
than .60.
After reflection upon the survey items within each con-
struct, the researchers concluded that the five constructs,
as identified by data analysis, and respective items, were
sound. The original eight constructs were collapsed into
the five constructs of Culturally Responsive Teaching
(CRT) Beliefs and Practices, Subtractive Affects Against
Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT), ELLs Learning
Mathematics and Language, Challenges to ELLs Learning
Mathematics and Language, and Teacher Support needed
to integrate CRT practices. Sample items for each con-
struct are provided in the Appendix.
Consisting of 10 survey items, the first construct, Cul-
turally Responsive Teaching Beliefs and Practices, had a
Cronbachs alpha measure of reliability of .841. These
items remained consistent in indicating teachers cultur-
ally responsive teaching beliefs and practices aimed at
meeting the academic and language needs of ELLs. A
sample item from this construct was item 46: I have
adequate training to work with ELLs.
Using nine of the survey items, the second construct,
Subtractive Affects Against Culturally Responsive Teach-
ing (CRT), had a Cronbachs alpha reliability measure of
.732 and represented the believed barriers by secondary
mathematics teachers in meeting ELLs needs. The sub-
tractive affects against culturally responsive teaching
included issues of time and negative tensions that teachers
believe increased their challenges in an already demand-
ing job to educate all students. One example from this
construct is survey item 33: The inclusion of ELLs in my
classes increases my workload.
The third clustering of eight survey items, ELLs Learn-
ing Mathematics and Language, had a Cronbachs alpha
School Science and Mathematics
MTBELL Validation
reliability coefficient measure of .649, represented the
underlying beliefs supporting culturally responsive teach-
ing of mathematics to ELLs. Teachers beliefs and prac-
19.248 tices regarding mathematics and language as assets toward
27.744 ELLs learning resonated from this third construct. An
34.450 example of a survey item from this construct was reversed
39.263 for the analysis: Allowing beginning ELLs to speak their
43.501
47.523 native language in the mathematics classroom will [not]
51.204 hamper their learning of English.
54.632 The fourth construct, Challenges to ELLs Learning
Mathematics and Language, consisting of eight survey
items and having a Cronbachs alpha reliability coefficient
measure of .633, included the beliefs and practices that
challenge culturally responsive teaching ideology. From
this construct, survey item 26 stated English should be
the only language of instruction in all U.S. schools.
The final construct, Teacher Support, clustered two
survey items which consistently had a Cronbachs alpha
measure of reliability of .796. Although a minimum of
three or more items are expected when forming a con-
struct (Suhr & Shay, 2009), Williams, Onsman, and
Brown (2010) support a minimum of two items if the
construct can be given a meaningful interpretation (p.
9). Based on the Cronbachs alpha measure and the con-
sistent pairing of these two items with repeated runs of
EFA, the researchers deemed it necessary to keep the
construct. District and campus support of secondary
mathematics teachers represented the teachers needs in
their efforts to meet the needs of ELLs. From the fifth
construct, survey item 45 stated I receive adequate
support from school administration when ELLs are
enrolled in my classes.
The five constructs identified from data analysis illus-
trate the opportunities and perceived barriers in meeting
ELLs academic and language needs by secondary math-
ematics teachers (Figure 2). On the left side of the model
are the two constructs that represent the barriers against
culturally responsive teaching practices and ideologies
(Construct II: Subtractive Affects against CRT) along with
beliefs as to why ELLs do not learn language and math-
ematics (Construct IV: Challenges to ELLs Learning
Mathematics and Language). On the right side are the
three constructs that indicate the support secondary math-
ematics teachers need (Construct V: Teacher Support) and
the culturally responsive beliefs and practices teachers
need to ensure that ELLs learn mathematics and language
(Construct I: Culturally Responsive Teaching Beliefs and
Practices and Construct III: ELLs Learning Mathematics
and Language). As opposing forces generate tensions,
there exists a balancing act for teachers to create a positive
89
 MTBELL Validation
Figure 1. Scree plot for exploratory factor analysis.
Figure 2. Balancing act of barriers and opportunities based on Secondary
Mathematics Teachers survey item responses.
learning environment that meets the diverse needs of all
learners. It was determined from survey data analysis that
SMTs in the research study were knowledgeable about
culturally responsive beliefs and practices to meet the
needs of ELLs but were hindered by perceived barriers
over which they may or may not have control.
Two open response questions were included on the
survey. The first survey statement, Please list or describe
what you consider to be the greatest benefits of including
90
English learners in your mathematics classes, produced a
variety of responses regarding several aspects to the ben-
efits of ELLs in math classrooms.
Each statement was analyzed for themes by highlight-
ing key information and summarizing the teachers intent
of their statements. These intended big ideas were com-
pared to other statements until small clusters of state-
ments sharing a defined commonality were formulated.
Continuation with comparing and contrasting the small
clusters, the researchers defined larger clusters of
overarching ideas from the secondary mathematics teach-
ers responses. After repeating the inductive analysis for
both sets of open responses, the results were later used in
a mixed methods approach merging quantitative and
qualitative data. The recurring and consistent teacher
responses were components that were encapsulated by
the intervening sociocultural factors, such as teachers
misconceptions regarding ELLs and the time necessary
to learn English.
Instrument Summary
Results of the instrument development of the MTBELL
revealed that the final version of the new instrument con-
sists of five constructs. The survey items aligned to each
construct as denoted in Table 3. The letter R represents
survey items reversed for the analysis.
Volume 116 (2)
 MTBELL Validation

Table 3 survey can be used by district leaders and researchers for

MTBELL Constructs
baseline information of teachers beliefs. This information
Construct Survey Items can then be used to plan and implement effective profes-
CRT Beliefs and Practices 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, sional development around issues of culturally responsive
43 beliefs and practices.
Subtractive Affects Against 18, 31, 32R, 33, 34, 35, 39R, The last tenet refers to the balancing act as indicated in
CRT 40, 41 this research study when implementing all of the prior
ELLs Learning Mathematics 8, 13, 20R, 21, 25, 29R, 30, 36
and Language tenets of culturally responsive teaching. Gay (2009)
Challenges to ELLs Learning 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 37, 38, 44R states [m]any teachers still struggle with creating a
Mathematics and Language workable balance between cultural diversity and cultural
Teacher Support 45, 46
unity among the diverse learners in classrooms (p. 201).
Secondary mathematics teachers could easily ignore the
language differences among ELLs by using instructional
Discussion practices that require students to compute mathematics in
The five tenets of culturally responsive teaching easily silence. Instead, culturally responsive secondary math-
align to mathematics, not because culturally responsive ematics teachers will implement diverse teaching
teaching ignores the content, but because its principles strategies, such as peer tutoring, think-pair-share, and
embrace learners and teachers in the common goal of small group projects that integrate both learning math-
learning. An initial tenet of culturally responsive teaching ematics and language development (Echevarria, Vogt,
centers on the fact that culture and language cannot be & Short, 2004; Kersaint, Thompson, & Petkova,
separated from teaching and learning (Gay, 2009, 2010). 2013).
This understanding of culture is essential for culturally Given the lack of literature specifically related to the
responsive teaching. A critical starting point for teachers is beliefs and practices of SMTs with ELLs, we believe the
to conduct a self-reflective analysis of their own beliefs development of this instrument adds to the literature in
and understandings of cultures and language of ELLs. The mathematics education and this work supports prior
development of the MTBELL survey allows for this studies that have indicated that sociocultural factors influ-
important first step of self-reflection toward understanding ence preservice teachers evolving beliefs and practices
personal beliefs regarding culturally responsive teaching. (Flores, 2001). Further, we believe this work provides evi-
A second tenet of culturally responsive teaching is that dence that instructional decisions in mathematics class-
all knowledge is socially constructed and that teachers room specifically are influenced by teacher beliefs,
need to understand how math is a cultural construction, experiences, and norms (Gay, 2010). As Frankestein
and how this construction, and its related teacher prefer- (1997) stated: Knowledge is not created and recreated in
ences, privilege some students while disadvantaging and the fragmented forms in which most school subjects are
marginalizing others (Gay, 2009, p. 198). Culturally presented. Mathematics occurs in contexts, integrated with
responsive teachers view the use of native language as a other knowledge of the world (p. 13).
tool for learning, and in particular, for learning mathemat-
ics. Respectful communication, coupled with mutual Conclusions
caring dispositions, is necessary for culturally responsive The goal of the research study was to establish a base-
teaching and learning. line understanding of secondary mathematics teachers
Teachers who purposively change curriculum so that not beliefs and practices regarding meeting the academic and
one group is emphasized over another align to the third language needs of ELLs. An initial review of the literature
tenet of culturally responsive teaching of inclusivity (Gay, did not yield an established survey instrument to
2009). Teaching mathematics that incorporates ELLs adequately address this goal. Our experiences in searching
funds of knowledge leverage[s] familiar cultural contexts the literature were similar to Fernandes and McLeman
and students home and community-based knowledge and (2012) who also did not find a survey that measured
experiences (Celedn-Pattichis & Ramirez, 2012, p. discipline-specific beliefs with respect to the mathematics
213). Another tenet of culturally responsive teaching education of ELLs. This lack of research regarding ELLs
expects teachers to ensure diverse learners are knowledge- in mathematics, as compared to other subjects, might exist
able of school norms and academic expectations that may because secondary teachers may assume that language
be different from those previously learned. The MTBELL plays a minimal role in the teaching and learning of
School Science and Mathematics 91
 MTBELL Validation
mathematics, despite evidence to the contrary (e.g.,
Moschkovich, 2010). Thus, a new instrument, the
MTBELL survey, was developed by modifying existing
surveys and piloted prior to the research study. Practitio-
ner, content, and research experts in the fields of math-
ematics and bilingual education contributed to the
development of an effective survey that aligned well with
secondary mathematics teachers. All of their feedback
merged to create an interdisciplinary perspective for this
research study.
This study reflects the initial development and valida-
tion of the overall MTBELL scale. Further reliability and
validity research needs to be conducted including statis-
tical analyses of each subscale. A long-term study is
recommended to establish predictive validity of the
MTBELL survey. This would require tracking of the sec-
ondary mathematics teachers over time to establish a
relationship between the secondary mathematics teach-
ers performance on the MTBELL and their teaching of
ELLs in their mathematics classes. Additionally, a test
retest reliability study needs to be done to ensure that the
instrument has stability over time. The MTBELL survey
should be administered to a group of secondary math-
ematics teachers at least twice a few weeks apart to
determine if there is a high correlation between their
scores at each point.
To evaluate the effectiveness of assessing secondary
mathematics teachers of ELLs, researchers should evalu-
ate the MTBELL survey in varying geographical areas,
school settings, and sizes. Researchers may find that the
final five constructs remain true or morph into new con-
structs given the sociocultural aspects of the new sur-
roundings. A re-analysis of the existing data by specific
teacher groups also needs to be conducted. The first
endeavor should be to conduct an exploratory factor analy-
sis filtered by whether teachers were assigned to teach at a
middle school or high school. Subsequently, the corre-
sponding survey responses regarding benefits and chal-
lenges could be re-analyzed for new patterns. Other
factors that may produce interesting results would be to
filter analysis through years of teaching experience or by
assigned campus goals for an academic year.
The MTBELL survey used in the research study was
statistically demonstrated to be a reliable and valid instru-
ment to assess the beliefs, attitudes, and instructional prac-
tices of secondary mathematics teachers regarding the
needs of ELLs. It assesses culturally responsive teaching
beliefs and practices, subtractive affects against culturally
responsive teaching, reasons why ELLs learn or do not
learn mathematics and language, and the support teachers
92
need to meet the needs of ELLs in their classrooms. The
goal of the research study, utilizing the MTBELL survey,
was to better understand secondary mathematics teachers
dispositions regarding meeting the needs of ELLs and the
factors that impact teachers decision making and prac-
tices. Gradual and lasting change can come from collabo-
rating with secondary mathematics teachers in an ongoing
method so underlying beliefs become visible and align with
effective instructional practices. As the ELL population in
the nation continues to grow, there is a definite need to
explore secondary mathematics teacher attitudes and prac-
tices toward the inclusion of ELLs in the mainstream class-
room. As stated by Ernst-Slavit and Slavit (2007), the
incorporation of language and culture into the teaching of
mathematics is a complex process, requiring, among other
things, a self-examination of pedagogical and mathemati-
cal beliefs, a desire to utilize students backgrounds in
instructional planning and process, and insight into a
variety of knowledge sets and dispositions related to spe-
cific aspects of language and culture (p. 26).
A Research to Practice article based on this paper
can be found alongside the electronic version at http://
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ssm.
References
Abedi, J., & Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics tests.
Applied Measurement In Education, 14(3), 219234.
Adler, J. (1998). Lights and limits: Recontextualising Lave and Wenger to
theorise knowledge of teaching and of learning school mathematics. In A.
Watson (Ed.), Situated cognition and the learning of mathematics (pp.
161177). Oxford: Centre for Mathematics Education Research, Univer-
sity of Oxford Department of Educational Studies.
Agudelo-Valderrama, C. (2008). The power of Colombian mathematics teach-
ers conceptions of social/institutional factors of teaching. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 68(1), 3754. doi: 10.1007/s10649-007-9107-z
Aguirre, J., & Speer, N. M. (1999). Examining the relationship between
beliefs and goals in teacher practice. The Journal of Mathematical Behav-
ior, 18(3), 327356. doi: 10.1016/s0732-3123(99)00034-6
Au, K. H. (1990). Changes in a teachers view of interactive comprehension
instruction. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Impli-
cations and Applications of Socihistorical Psychology (pp. 271286). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Beswick, K. (2006). The importance of mathematics teachers beliefs. Aus-
tralian Mathematics Teacher, 62(4), 1722.
Beswick, K. (2007). Teachers beliefs that matter in secondary mathematics
classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(1), 95120.
Bolden, D. S., & Newton, L. D. (2008). Primary teachers epistemological
beliefs: Some perceived barriers to investigative teaching in primary math-
ematics. Educational Studies (03055698), 34(5), 419432. doi: 10.1080/
03055690802287595
Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and
exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R.
Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp.
99136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Volume 116 (2)
 MTBELL Validation
Cahnmann, M. S., & Remillard, J. T. (2002). What counts and how: Math-
ematics teaching in culturally, linguistically, and socioeconomically
diverse urban settings. Urban Review, 34(3), 179204.
Celedn-Pattichis, S., & Ramirez, N. (2012). Beyond Good teaching: Advanc-
ing mathematics education for ELLs. Reston, VA: The National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
Contreras, F. (2011). Achieving equity for latino students: Expanding the
pathway to higher education through public policy. New York: Teachers
College, Columbia University.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques
and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Creese, A. (2002). The discursive construction of power in teacher partner-
ships: Language and subject specialists in mainstream schools. TESOL
Quarterly, 36, 597616.
Cummins, J. (1995). Bilingual education and anti-racist education. In O.
Garca & C. Baker (Eds.), Policy and practice in bilingual education: A
reader extending the foundations (pp. 6369). Bristol, PA: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.
Cummins, J. (2000). This place nurtures my spirit: creating contexts of
empowerment in linguistically-diverse schools. In R. Phillipson (Ed.),
Rights to language: Equity, power, and education (pp. 249258). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Dekutoski, C. G. (2011). Mainstream teacher attitudes toward English lan-
guage learners. Ph.D., Wayne State University, United StatesMichigan.
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2004). Making content comprehensible
for English learners: The SIOP model (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Echevarria, J., Short, D., & Powers, K. (2006). School reform and standards-
based education: A model for English language learner. The Journal of
Educational Research, 99(4), 195210.
Echevarris, J., Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2015). What it takes for English lan-
guage learners to succeed. Educational Leadership, 72(6), 2226.
Ernst-Slavit, G., & Slavit, D. (2007). Educational reform, mathematics, &
diverse learners: Meeting the needs of all students. Multicultural Educa-
tion, 14(4), 2027.
Fernandes, A., & McLeman, L. (2012, November). Developing the mathemat-
ics education of English Learners scale (MEELS). Paper presented at the
North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education, Radisson Hotel, Kalamazoo.
Flores, B. B. (2001). Bilingual education teachers beliefs and their relation to
self-reported practices. Bilingual Research Journal, 25(3), 275299.
Flores, B. B., & Smith, H. L. (2007). Teachers characteristics and attitudinal
beliefs about linguistic and cultural diversity. Bilingual Research Journal,
31(1/2), 323358.
Flores, B. B., Hernndez, A., Trevio Garca, C., & Claeys, L. (2011). Teacher
Academy Induction Learning Community: Guiding teachers through their
zone of proximal development. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in
Learning, 19(3), 365389.
Flores, B. B., Claeys, L., Gist, C., Clark, E. R., & Villarreal, A. (revise and
resubmit, Spring 2015). Culturally Efficacious Mathematics and Science
Teacher Preparation for Working with English Learners.
Frankestein, M. (1997). In addition to the mathematics: Including equity
issues in the curriculum. In J. Tentacosta (Ed.), Multicultural and gender
equity in the mathematics classroom: The gift of diversity (pp. 1022).
Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Fu, D. (1995). My trouble is my english: Asian students and the American
dream. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Gay, G. (2009). Preparing culturally responsive mathematics teachers. In B.
Greer, S. Mukhopadhyay, A. Powell, & S. Nelson-Barber (Eds.), Culturally
responsive mathematics education (pp. 189205). New York:
Routledge.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and prac-
tice (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
School Science and Mathematics
Goldenberg, C., & Coleman, R. (2010). Promoting academic achievement
among English learners: A guide to the research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin.
Goldstein, C. K. (2011). Exploring high school mainstream teachers percep-
tions of ESOL students. Fairfax, VA: Doctoral of Philosophy, George
Mason University.
Gregg, J. (1995). The tensions and contradictions of the school mathematics
tradition. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(5), 442466.
Harklau, L. (1994). Tracking and linguistic minority students: Consequences
of ability grouping for second language learners. Linguistics and Educa-
tion, 6, 217244.
Harklau, L. (1999). The ESL learning environment in secondary school. In C.
J. Faltis & P. M. Wolfe (Eds.), So much to say: Adolescents, bilingualism,
and ESL in the secondary school (pp. 4260). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Harklau, L. (2000). From the good kids to the worst: Representations of
English language learners across educational settings. TESOL Quarterly,
34, 3567.
Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas.
Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 10101038.
Johnson, K. E. (1999). Understanding language teaching. Toronto, Ontario,
Canada: Heinle & Heinle.
Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. R. (2002). Teachers narrative inquiry as
professional development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kersaint, G., Thompson, D. R., & Petkova, M. (2013). Teaching mathematics
to English language learners (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2011). Is meeting the diverse needs of all students
possible? Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48(1), 1315.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral par-
ticipation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Llurda, E., & Lasagabaster, D. (2010). Factors affecting teachers beliefs
about interculturalism. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(3),
327353.
Lubienski, S. T. (2002). Research, reform, and equity in U.S. mathematics
education. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 4(2/3), 103125.
Lucas, T. (1997). Into, through, and beyond secondary school: Critical tran-
sitions for immigrant youth. McHenry, Ill.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Lucas, T., Henze, R., & Donato, R. (1990). Promoting the success of Latino
language-minority students: An exploratory study of six high schools.
Harvard Educational Review, 60, 315340.
Mace-Matluck, B. J., Alexander-Kasparik, R., & Queen, R. M. (1998).
Through the golden door: Instructional approaches for immigrant adoles-
cents with limited schooling. McHenry, Ill.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Mantero, M., & McVicker, P. (2006). The impact of experience and course-
work: Perceptions of secondary language learners in the mainstream class-
room. Radical Pedagogy, 8(1). Retrieved from http://radicalpedagogy
.icaap.org/content/issue8_1/mantero.html
McLeman, L., & Fernandes, A. (2012). Unpacking preservice teachers
beliefs: A look at language and culture in the context of the mathematics
education of English learners. Journal of Mathematics Education, 5(1),
121135.
Menken, K. (2010). NCLB and English language learners: Challenges and
consequences. Theory Into Practice, 49(2), 121128.
Menken, K., & Kleyn, T. (2010). The long-term impact of subtractive school-
ing in the educational experiences of secondary English language learners.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13(4),
399417.
Moschkovich, J. N. (2010). Language(s) and learning for mathematics:
Resources, challenges, and issues for research. In J. N. Moschkovich (Ed.),
Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and direc-
tions for research (pp. 128). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Muhammad, A. (2009). Transforming school culture: How to overcome staff
division. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
93
 MTBELL Validation
Nardi, P. M. (2006). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative methods
(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). School and Staffing Survey
1999-2000: Overview of the Data for Public, Private, Public Charter and
Bureau of Indian Affairs Elementary and Secondary Schools. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
Nilles, V., lvarez, L., & Rios, F. (2006). Preparing teachers to work with
second-language learners. In E. W. Ross & V. O. Pang (Eds.), Race, eth-
nicity, and education (Vol. 1, pp. 3954). Wesport: Praeger
Publishers.
Pepin, B. (1999). Epistemologies, beliefs and conceptions of mathematics
teaching and learning: The theory, and what is manifested in mathematics
teachers work in England, France and Germany. TNTEE Publication, 2(1),
127146.
Perry, B., Howard, P., & Tracey, D. (1999). Head mathematics teachers
beliefs about the learning and teaching of mathematics. Mathematics Edu-
cation Research Journal, 11(1), 3953.
Reeves, J. (2006). Secondary teacher attitudes toward including English-
language learners in mainstream classrooms. The Journal of Educational
Research, 99(3), 131142.
Ritter, J., Boone, W., & Rubba, P. (2001a). Development of an instrument to
assess prospective elementary teacher self-efficacy beliefs about equitable
science teaching and learning (SEBEST). Journal of Science Teacher Edu-
cation, 12(3), 175198.
Ritter, J., Boone, W., & Rubba, P. (2001b). An extension analysis on self-
efficacy beliefs about equitable science teaching and learning instrument
for prospective elementary teachers. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Costa
Mesa, CA.
Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., Lee, E. S., & Rauch, S. (2003).
Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social
work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94104.
Ruiz-de-Velasco, J., Fix, M., & Chu Clewell, B. (2000). Overlooked and
underserved immigrant students in U.S. secondary schools: Core findings
and conclusions. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID
=310022
Sapsford, R. (2007). Survey research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks. California:
Sage Publications.
Schutz, P. A., Cross, D. I., Hong, J. Y., & Osbon, J. N. (2007). Teacher
identities, beliefs and goals related to emotions in the classroom. In P. A.
Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 223241). San
Diego, CA: Elsevier, Inc.
Slavin, R. E., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of
reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational
Research, 75(2), 247284.
Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry
science and language development for English language learners. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 664687. doi: 10.1002/tea.10040
Suhr, D., & Shay, M. (2009). Guidelines for reliability, confirmatory and
exploratory factor analysis. Paper presented at the Western Users of SAS
Software conference, San Jose.
Synder, T. D., & Dillow, S. A. (2013). Digest of education statistics 2012
(NCES 20142015). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
Tan, M. (2011). Mathematics and science teachers beliefs and practices
regarding the teaching of language in content learning. Language Teaching
Research, 15(3), 325342.
Tate, W. F. (1997). Race-ethnicity, SES, gender, and language proficiency
trends in mathematics achievement: An update. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 28(6), 652679.
United States Census Bureau. (2009). United States: Educational attainment
of the population 25 years and over: 1940 to 2000. Retrieved from http://
www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/census/index.html
94
United States Census Bureau. (2013). School Enrollment. Washington, D.C.:
Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/school/data/cps/2013/tables
.html
Valdes, G. (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in
American Schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: The Massa-
chusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Walqui, A. (2000). Access and Engagement: Program Design and Instruc-
tional Approaches for Immigrant Students in Secondary Schools.
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A
five-step guide for novices. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care,
8(3), 113.
Woodrow, D. (2003). Mathematics, mathematics education and economic
conditions. In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick & F. K.
S. Leung (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Mathematics Educa-
tion, Part One (pp. 930). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Appendix: Sample Items
Construct I: Culturally Responsive Teaching Beliefs and
Practices
Item 9 I integrate ELLs background and experiences
in mathematics lessons.
Item 15 I am able to effectively teach mathematics to
ELLs.
Construct II: Subtractive Affects against CRT
Item 33 The inclusion of ELLs in my classes increases
my workload.
Item 40 Some ELLs home culture negatively impacts
their mathematics learning.
Construct III: ELLs Learning Mathematics and Language
Item 13 I accept alternative mathematics algorithms
learned by ELLs in their home countries.
Item 21 Students who are ELLs can be successful in
learning mathematics if the teaching is
effective.
Construct IV: Challenges to ELLs Learning Mathematics and
Language
Item 37 I teach ELLs mathematics in the exact same
way I teach non-ELLs.
Construct V: Teacher Support
Item 46 I receive adequate support from our ESL staff
when ELLs are enrolled in my classes.
Volume 116 (2)