Section 1: Systematic Breakdown

Note: for this study the researcher will also be the teacher implementing the social justice-oriented
project based learning

1. System goal: Define the goal of this system. How do you think your influence on the
inputs will impact the system meeting the goal? How do you think your influence on the
process will impact the system meeting the goal? What does the literature say about how
the inputs and process impact the system meeting the intended goal?
The goal of this system is to increase student engagement. I think my influence
will impact the system meeting the goal because I am motivated, dedicated, and
passionate. I will spend the time to research, grow, and plan. I will build Social Justice
Project-Based Learning units that will engage students and have them actively
participating in their learning. My influence will impact the system meeting this goal
because I will develop culturally relevant and engaging learning units, which will
motivate students’ interests and participation, thus promoting student engagement.
As mentioned below in Section 2, the literature tells us current school systems are
not working. Students are not motivated or engaged and do not find the curriculum
relevant to them or their futures. By creating Social Justice Project-Based Learning units
students will be more engaged in authentic learning processes where they will have
choice and voice in their learning, be more hands on in their learning experience, and
become more connected to the community.

2. System inputs: Define all 7 Inputs. Thoroughly defining the inputs may require you to
think about each input as a system itself that is made up of other subsystems. Which
inputs can you influence? Which inputs are you trying to influence? What does the
literature say about these inputs?
People: Teacher, students, possibly admin (if we are talking about affecting systematic
change)
Materials: Information, training, scaffolding
Tool/Machines: Normal classroom equipment
Energy: Teacher(me), students, and personal energy
Information: Social Justice Project-Based Learning information
Capital: Money needed to purchase material. Student buy in. Admin buy in. Once this is
proposed on a larger scale will need other teachers to buy in.
Time: Yearlong class. Professional development and collaboration time for teacher(me).

The only input that I have direct influence over is myself and the actions I take. I am
trying to influence students (to be more engaged in learning and more active members of
their communities), which may indirectly influence their parents/guardians/family
members to also become more involved. I am also hoping to influence other teachers (to
implement this pedagogy based on my results) and at a higher-level, administration and
district officials (to encourage implementation of this pedagogy on a wider and more
systematic scale) based on my results.
The literature says that schools are not working four our students. The factory-model of
education that we are still operating off of : (1) the factory-model is inequitable and
reproduces social stratification based on race and class through its use of tracking; (2) the
curriculum is standardized, based on a white-upper middle class worldview that supports
the banking theory and denies funds of knowledge that our students have; and (3) the
factory-model is based on compliance rather than social transformation with a primary
focus placed on test scores; and (4) is not preparing students for the jobs of the future
(Sleeter, 2015; Van Duzer, 2006; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019).

The literature also tells us that students are disengaged from learning because they do not
see themselves in the curriculum, especially students of color (Sleeter, 2015). Several
studies with students of color have shown that students start to become disengaged from
the curriculum as early as elementary school and that this rate of disengagement grows as
they move to middle school and again when they move to high school (Epstein 2001,
2009; Ford & Harris, 2000; Martinez 2010; Wiggan, 2007).

The literature also tells us there are severe repercussions for a lack of student
engagement. Lack of student engagement and a lack of seeing that what they are learning
is relevant contributes to high school dropout rates as well as behavioral problems
(Appleton et. al, 2006). The High School Survey of Student Engagement (HSSSE) in
2006 polled 81,499 students in 110 schools from 26 states and found that 3/4ths of
students were bored in class because the “material wasn’t interesting”, 39% of students
were not interested because they didn’t find the material relevant; white and Asian
students reported being more engaged than students of other races; and 22% of students
have considered dropping out of school (of those, 73% said they did not like school, 61%
said they did not like the teachers, and 60% did not see the value in the work they were
being asked to do) (Yazzie-Mintz, 2007). According to U.S. Deputy Secretary Tony
Miller, 1.2 million students in the U.S. drop out of high school every year (Miller, 2011).
DoSomething.Org reported that high school dropouts commit about 75% of the crimes
we see in the United States. According to a study by Lance Lochner and Enrico Moretti,
schooling significantly reduces criminal behavior, and thus, arrest and incarceration
(Lochner & Moretti, 2004).

The literature also tells us that Social Justice Project-Based Learning might just be a
solution to these problems. Project-based learning provides students the ability to make
connections between content knowledge and 21st century skills, examine an authentic and
relevant real-world challenge/problem/need/concern, learn through inquiry, use their
voice and have choice in their learning, collaborate with others, partner with members of
the community, work through a process of feedback and revision, create and present an
authentic project to a real audience, and reflect on their learning and the process (Grant,
2011; Hmelo-Silver, 2004). By adding in a social justice focus it allows students to
critically examine themselves, others, and institutions in evaluating patterns of inequality
and discrimination and explore possible solutions to these problems (Dover, 2013).
Teaching for social justice helps to provide a more equitable education to address the
academic achievement gap among racial, cultural, and socioeconomically disadvantaged
students that is exacerbated by a lack of resources, opportunities, and qualified educators
 (Lee, 2011). Students begin to act upon the issues they see in society and become
contributing members of their community (Farnsworth, 2010).

3. System process: Define the process. What does the process look like? How does the
process function? What is the role that each input plays in the process? How are inputs
connected/used together during the process? What does the literature say about the
process?
The process a case study in taking a yearlong class and breaking it into Project-Based
Learning units that focus on social justice. For this study, it will be a high school social
science class. I will design the framework for the class and the units. Students will be the
ones participating in the Project-Based Learning. Administration will hopefully see the
benefit of this pedagogy and support it and encourage other teachers to use it as well.
Information on Project-Based Learning and Social Justice will need to be gathered by the
teacher in order to build the learning units for students as well as how to provide proper
scaffolding for students as they learn to be more independent learners. The process will
use normal classroom materials but may also use things like art supplies, technology,
social media, and whatever other materials students deem necessary in creating their
products for the learning units. It will take energy from the teacher to learn how to best
set up, scaffold, and implement these learning units. It will also take energy from the
students as they are the ones participating in this learning. It will take buy in from the
students to be successful and eventually buy in from other teachers to implement it
outside of just my own classroom. I already have buy-in as I have seen that this is
effective through personal experience but I want to demonstrate it so it can be utilized on
a wider scale, which is crucial for systematic change. I will need to use my time to
research, attend professional development, build, and collaborate with other teachers.
The literature says that even teachers with a strong social justice orientation struggle in
building and integrating this type of pedagogy into their classrooms so it will take time,
energy, and experimentation to arrive at a successful process (Cochran-Smith et al., 2009;
Agarwal, Epstein, Oppenheim, Oyler, & Sonu, 2010; Agarwal, 2011; Dover, 2013;
Henning 2013).

The literature also says that with Project-Based Learning students are more invested in
their educational experience as it purposefully and continuously unifies students’ interests
with action in the world (Beyer, 1997). Throughout the process of Project-Based
Learning students focus on solving an essential question or authentic problem and during
the process they research, reflect, receive feedback, revise, document, and present their
solutions (BIE, 2015).

4. System output: Define the outputs. What are the outputs of the process above? Are the
outputs positive, negative, or both based on different perspectives? Are the outputs
unexpected desired, expected desired, unexpected undesired, and expected undesired?
What does the literature say about the outputs of this process?
The expected desired output would be my ability to successfully implement Social Justice
Project-Based Learning and an increase in student engagement through using Social
Justice Project-Based Learning. An expected undesired output would be pushback from
 teachers and/or students not wanting to do Social Justice Project-Based Learning because
it requires extra work or parents not wanting their child to partake in it. There could be
negative perceptions about social justice that will also create resistance/push back so the
way the curriculum is implemented will need to take this into consideration before
implementation. An unexpected undesired output would be no change in student
engagement, administration not supporting this teaching pedagogy, or the district in not
seeing the value of this pedagogy.

The literature says that Project-Based Learning contains all the necessary content, rigor,
and collaboration needed to ensure students are thriving in today’s classroom and are
prepared for the future (MacMartin, 2017). Students work harder and are more invested
with they have choice and voice in the selection of topics or products (Brewster & Fager,
2000) and when asked to present their product with a public audience it fosters a strong
connection between school and the community (Larmer & Mergendoller, 2015).

5. System feedback: Define the feedback. What will be the data that you collect to evaluate
the system? How is the data related to the inputs you influenced? How is the data related
to the process? How does the data inform your actions related to future inputs and
processes?
Data will be collected through open-ended surveys, semi-structured interviews,
observations, student projects, and student reflections. An open-ended survey at the
beginning and end of the year will shed light on students’ perceptions and attitudes
towards educational strategies, project-based learning, project-based learning with a
social justice focus, and engagement levels. Observations, projects, and reflections will
be collected continuously throughout the year. Semi-structured interviews and open-
ended surveys will provide the best data for this study because of the flexibility the
structures of these afford (Saldana, 2016). Data will be coded using descriptive coding
and values coding. Descriptive coding is useful to this study as it will help to document
and categorize the breadth of opinions from the numerous participants and values coding
is important in order to understand the participants’ values, attitudes, beliefs, and
perspectives in order to decipher how students feel about project-based learning and their
levels of engagement with this type of pedagogy versus others (Saldana, 2016). ). The
goal of this study is to understand the impact project-based learning with a social justice
focus has on student engagement. The data is related to the inputs I influenced because it
will demonstrate effect the process had on student engagement. The data will inform my
actions related to future inputs and processes because it will inform me as to what
worked, what did not work, and what needs to be refined.

Section 2: Problem Statement

Schools are not working for our students. Each generation sees a bigger divide in seeing

engagement and relevance in a broken educational system that was created to produce factory

workers during the Industrial Revolution. There are three major issues with the factory-model of
education that we still see permeating the system today: (1) the factory-model is inequitable and

reproduces social stratification based on race and class through its use of tracking; (2) the

curriculum is standardized, based on a white-upper middle class worldview that supports the

banking theory and denies funds of knowledge that our students have; and (3) the factory-model

is based on compliance rather than social transformation with a primary focus placed on test

scores (Sleeter, 2015). While the factory-model of education might have been beneficial for

some in the 18th and 19th centuries by providing basic literacy skills, the ability to follow

directions, and job specific skills such as working on an assembly line, being punctual, and

having respect for authority (Van Duzer, 2006), only about 8% of jobs today are in

manufacturing, and most of those jobs do not entail assembly line work or unskilled labor (U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019).

Students, especially students of color, are disengaged from the learning process,

especially because of the curriculum (Sleeter, 2015). Several studies with students of color have

shown that students start to become disengaged from the curriculum as early as elementary

school and that this rate of disengagement grows as they move to middle school and again when

they move to high school (Epstein 2001, 2009; Ford & Harris, 2000; Martinez 2010; Wiggan,

2007). In one study conducted with high achieving African American students, students

attributed teacher practices/engaging pedagogy as the most instrumental component to their

success (Wiggan, 2007). One reason students are so disengaged from the curriculum is that they

do not see themselves in it (Epstein, 2001). For example, if we examine the California History

and Social Studies Standards, of the 96 American historical figures who are included: 77% are

white, 18% are African American, 4% are Native American, 1% are Latin American, and 0% are

Asian American (California Department of Education, 2017). Contrast this with the
demographics of students and it is not hard to see why they would be disengaged. Wilmer Amina

Carter High School in Rialto, California for example is 75% Xicano, 15% African American,

5.2% Caucasian, 1.2% Asian American, and .4% American Indian (Ed Data, 2018). If almost

94% of the student population is comprised of students of color but only 23% of the content they

learn about is related to people of color, is it really hard to imagine they would not feel

connected to their learning?

This lack of student engagement and a lack of seeing that what they are learning is

relevant contributes to high school dropout rates as well as behavioral problems (Appleton et. al,

2006). The High School Survey of Student Engagement (HSSSE) in 2006 polled 81,499 students

in 110 schools from 26 states and found that 3/4ths of students were bored in class because the

“material wasn’t interesting”, 39% of students were not interested because they didn’t find the

material relevant; white and Asian students reported being more engaged than students of other

races; and 22% of students have considered dropping out of school (of those, 73% said they did

not like school, 61% said they did not like the teachers, and 60% did not see the value in the

work they were being asked to do) (Yazzie-Mintz, 2007). According to U.S. Deputy Secretary

Tony Miller, 1.2 million students in the U.S. drop out of high school every year (Miller, 2011).

DoSomething.Org reported that high school dropouts commit about 75% of the crimes we see in

the United States. According to a study by Lance Lochner and Enrico Moretti, schooling

significantly reduces criminal behavior, and thus, arrest and incarceration (Lochner & Moretti,

2004). Is it not essential then, for the betterment of students and society, that we address this

problem and work towards a solution?

Enter project-based learning with a social justice focus. Project-based learning provides

students the ability to make connections between content knowledge and 21st century skills,
examine an authentic and relevant real-world challenge/problem/need/concern, learn through

inquiry, use their voice and have choice in their learning, collaborate with others, partner with

members of the community, work through a process of feedback and revision, create and present

an authentic project to a real audience, and reflect on their learning and the process (Grant, 2011;

Hmelo-Silver, 2004). By adding in a social justice focus it allows students to critically examine

themselves, others, and institutions in evaluating patterns of inequality and discrimination and

explore possible solutions to these problems (Dover, 2013). Teaching for social justice helps to

provide a more equitable education to address the academic achievement gap among racial,

cultural, and socioeconomically disadvantaged students that is exacerbated by a lack of

resources, opportunities, and qualified educators (Lee, 2011). Students begin to act upon the

issues they see in society and become contributing members of their community (Farnsworth,

2010). They can use activist strategies such as social media campaigns, demonstrations, and

other means of raising awareness to build support for a positive change.

Section 3: Purpose Statement

The purpose of this study is to understand the impact social justice project-based learning

(PBL) has on student engagement. For this study, we will define student engagement as the

degree of attention, interest, passion, or motivation students show towards learning or being

involved in the learning process. Other concepts that can be evaluated in terms of student

engagement can include intellectual engagement, emotional engagement, behavioral

engagement, physical engagement, social engagement, and/or cultural engagement. The

objective is to demonstrate how social justice project-based learning increases student

engagement through empowerment.

Section 4: Evaluation, Assessment, and Measurement.

 Data will be collected through open-ended surveys, semi-structured interviews,

observations, student projects, and student reflections. An open-ended survey at the beginning

and end of the year will shed light on students’ perceptions and attitudes towards educational

strategies, project-based learning, project-based learning with a social justice focus, and

engagement levels. Observations, projects, and reflections will be collected continuously

throughout the year. Semi-structured interviews and open-ended surveys will provide the best

data for this study because of the flexibility the structures of these afford (Saldana, 2016). Data

will be coded using descriptive coding and values coding. Descriptive coding is useful to this

study as it will help to document and categorize the breadth of opinions from the numerous

participants and values coding is important in order to understand the participants’ values,

attitudes, beliefs, and perspectives in order to decipher how students feel about project-based

learning and their levels of engagement with this type of pedagogy versus others (Saldana,

2016). The goal of this study is to understand the impact project-based learning with a social

justice focus has on student engagement. The data will inform my actions because it will inform

me as to what worked, what did not work, and what needs to be refined or changed.

Section 5: Theory or Theories

From an Educational Leadership Position: CRT, Transformational Leadership and Applied
Critical Leadership
One of the biggest problems facing educational leadership programs is that while there is

a huge push to focus on Critical Race Theory and embody culturally responsive teaching, a lot of

it stays in the theoretical stage and people struggle with putting these theories into action, which

is where change actually comes from. In one study the researcher wanted to bridge the gap

between multiculturalism, CRT, and educational leadership by looking at practices that do just

that. She identifies nine common leadership characteristics and explains that any leader can use a
CRT lens when practicing equity and social justice in our diverse schools (Santamaria, 2013).

The nine characteristics of Applied Critical Leadership are critical conversations, a CRT lens,

group consensus, being conscious of stereotype threat, academic discourse, honoring

constituents, leading by example, building trust with the mainstream, and servant leadership. As

part of the mainstream of society, I cannot deny my privilege. However, I can use it to work with

leaders of color and others of marginalized circumstances to bring about the transformational

change our schools, and our society, so desperately need (Santamaria & Santamaria, 2012). My

pledge as an educational leader is to continue to fight for social justice and educational equity, no

matter my position within the system.

In a study by Theoharis (2007), he looked at specific examples of how educational

leaders (principals in his study) are guiding their schools in transformation to make them better

for marginalized students. These principals are working towards changing the culture,

curriculum, pedagogical practices, atmosphere, and school wide priorities that are under-serving

and oppressing their students of color. These principals make issues of race, class, gender,

disability, and sexual orientation key to their advocacy and practices as opposed to just sweeping

them under the rug like some educational leaders have and still do. Despite the resistance these

educational leaders are enacting against the marginalization of students, they are still receiving

resistance from educators and community members, however if we are to serve our students

justly, we need to keep fighting. 

From a Learning Position: Constructivism

The study is grounded in the constructivism paradigm because students are not blank

slates (as banking theory would have us believe), but rather they construct their understanding of

the world and their knowledge through experiences. In this instance, those experiences will be

provided through project-based learning (PBL) with a social justice focus. Constructivism “has
the greatest impact on instruction and curriculum design because they seem to be the most

conducive to integration into current educational approaches,” which is why it is the most

relevant for this study as I examine a shift in instruction and curriculum design (Jones & Brader-

Araje, 2002).

Section 6: Literature Review.

There has been a historic struggle for people of color in challenging racism,

discrimination, oppression, and the systems in place that perpetuate inequality. Even within these

communities we must consider the intersectionality of identity and realize that there has been a

struggle among people of color in terms of gender, class, sexuality, religion, and ability. Critical

Race Theory examines the persistence of these systems of inequity and racism in structures like

law, policies, education, and other institutions that have been designed to protect the

accumulation of white wealth. CRT allows us to critique racial injustice and begin to focus on

debunking the great myth that everything orbits around heterosexual white men. Authentic

equity does not prioritize race, gender, or sexuality but rather centralizes love and values the

knowledge and experience of all individuals. This is what diversity and equity mean. It is

systematic change and the seeking of justice for our diverse population, whether it is based on

external factors like race/ethnic background or internal factors like religion or sexuality. It is

through this analysis of Critical Race Theory that we can finally begin to embrace diversity and

equity and emancipate people from the chains that bind them. 

The educational system is one of the systems that has been set up to protect the

accumulation of white wealth, knowledge, and power. We have been operating in a state of

subtractive schooling where we have systematically stripped students of minority groups of their

language, culture, and academic well-being with the intentions of assimilating them into the

dominant group. You need look no further than Native American boarding schools to prove this
point. Children were torn from their families and thrust into these schools, their hair was cut, and

all traditional or tribal clothing, traditions, and language was banned. When they left these

schools, they were left in a state of limbo because they no longer fit into Native society nor did

they fit into the white man’s society. Steven Selden discusses the importance the eugenics

movement played in creating and perpetuating these educational systems and that these

ideologies were being spread publicly, at places like state fairs, and in schools as young as

kindergarten. (Selden, 1999) As a result we see generations of students from minority groups,

like those Native American children, growing up and inheriting shame, feeling like they do not

belong and that they are other and wrong. Subtractive schooling perpetuates the sustaining of

inequity by not valuing the experiences and differences of our students but brushing them to the

side and pretending like they do no matter.

As educational leaders we must reject these traditional ways of schooling and policy

making and fight for a critical pedagogy where we help to emancipate students from these social

injustices and awaken their critical consciousness. We must encourage other educators, leaders,

and our students to affect change in their world through social critique and political action. We

must examine the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within society and promote

inclusion and socially just organizations. According to the California Department of Education,

California is 74.8% ethnic minorities (CA Dept. of Ed, 2019). Yet 62% of teachers in California

are white and many are teaching the same curriculum, using the same pedagogies, and operating

under the same policies as they did when they themselves were students. A system that has been

perpetuated since the Industrial Revolution, where school was a way to keep children safe and

out of the workplace until they were old enough for monotonous factory jobs.
 A great example of subtractive schooling is in social science. Of the 96 American

historical figures who are included in the California History-Social Studies framework, the ones

listed for elementary and junior high are 77% are white, 18% are African American, 4% are

Native American, 1% is Hispanic, and 0% is Asian American. At the secondary level 79% are

white, most of which are either U.S. presidents or famous authors and artists. How do we

connect students to a curriculum that they cannot relate to? Children need to understand that they

are the children of indigenous people and not illegal immigrants on the lands of conquerors or

the leftovers of slavery. Their experiences, culture, and knowledge should be incorporated and

celebrated. Again, by not incorporating these we continue to perpetuate a system of inequity.

In a study by Theoharis (2007), looked at specific examples of how educational leaders

(principals in his study) are guiding their schools in transformation to make them better for

marginalized students (Theoharis, 2007). These principals are working towards changing the

culture, curriculum, pedagogical practices, atmosphere, and school wide priorities that are under-

serving and oppressing their students of color. These principals make issues of race, class,

gender, disability, and sexual orientation key to their advocacy and practices as opposed to just

sweeping them under the rug like some educational leaders have and still do. Despite the

resistance these educational leaders are enacting against the marginalization of students, they are

still receiving resistance from educators and community members, however if we are to serve

our students justly, we need to keep fighting. 

Another way that this issue is being addressed is through the development of ethnic

studies classes which examine what is being taught and how it is being taught. Even though these

types of classes had previously been banned in Arizona, several districts, including Rialto

Unified School District are looking to incorporate these programs into schools. Students from
marginalized groups have more negative experiences in the education system than white students

so it is important to create an environment where their lived experiences are valued and

celebrated. In “The Relevance of Critical Race Theory: Impact on Students of Color,” Monica

Allen identifies five key tenets to CRT that need to be understood in order for these classes to

develop a purpose and be successful (Allen, 2016). They are that racism is permanent, that we

need to challenge the dominant ideology, that we need to draw on the centrality of experiential

knowledge, that there needs to be a convergence of the interests of those in power, and that we

must also look at intersectionality as it is not just race that causes people of color to experience

oppression. In the article “Toward an Ethnic Studies Pedagogy: Implications for K-12 Schools

from the Research,” they identify that in order for these ethnic studies classes to be successful

there needs to be culturally responsive pedagogy (possibly more important than the content

itself), a community responsive pedagogy, and teacher racial identity development (Tintiangco-

Cubales, et al., 2015). 

It is imperative that changes be made for our marginalized students. We need to make

changes to the curriculum, the pedagogies, the policies, and the cultures of schools to serve our

under-represented students. We need to teach students that privilege is not necessarily a bad

thing, but it is all about how you use that privilege. We need to raise socially conscious

individuals who are prepared to be active members of society and help make the changes that

need to be made. By creating educational opportunities through Project Based Learning with a

social justice focus we can do just that. Students will not only be engaged but they will be

empowered as they investigate, report, and rally around the causes that concern them most.

According to an article by Michael Hernandez regarding the inclusion of social justice projects in

the classroom, he said, “One of the best ways to develop cultural literacy and help our students
understand these goals is through social justice processes and projects, activities that develop a

mindset of concern for our society’s inequity in wealth, education, and privilege. These projects

empower our students to effect change through awareness, advocacy, activism, and aid.”

Students should be learning about the problems that impact different populations’ quality of life

and how people have and can work to solve these problems. One of the ways this can be done is

through Project Based Learning.

Project Based Learning has become another buzz word in the world of education but not

a lot of teachers really understand what Project Based Learning is; they tend to think projects and

Project Based Learning are the same when in fact they are very different. Project Based Learning

is a sustained inquiry over a period that has students actively engaged in their learning by

looking at meaningful and real-world problems and creating a product or solution to that inquiry

that they present to a real audience. The Buck Institute for Education is at the forefront of

educating teachers about Project Based Learning and how to use it. They argue that Project

Based Learning, in and of itself, is a tool for social justice as we place education at the center of

the fight against injustice. In their article, “Sustained Inquiry in PBL as a Tool for Social

Justice,” they quote Professor Tabitha Dell’Angelo as saying,

“Social justice is not an "add on" for classrooms... Teachers can both maintain high-
quality content instruction and create a classroom with a social justice orientation. Also, a social
justice orientation is appropriate for all classrooms. This isn't something that just gets done in
diverse classrooms, or classrooms that lack diversity, or urban classrooms -- or any other special
category of school. It is a way of teaching and being that supports high-level thinking and
learning throughout our lives.”
One leader in social justice education is Youth-led Participatory Action Research

(YPAR). YPAR uses an approach that ties youth and community together to conduct systematic

research and take action to improve their lives, their communities, and the institutions that should

be doing a better job of serving them that are not. YPAR teaches youth that systems of
oppression are not natural and that they are produced by those in power and seeks to show them

how they can begin to make systemic changes. According to “Youth Participatory Action

research: A Pedagogy for Transformational Resistance,”

“What perhaps distinguishes young people engaged in YPAR from the standard
representations in critical youth studies is that their research is designed to contest and transform
systems and institutions to produce greater justice— distributive justice, procedural justice, and
what Iris Marion Young calls a justice of recognition, or respect. In short, YPAR is a formal
resistance that leads to transformation— systematic and institutional change to promote social
justice” (Cammarota and Fine p.14).

The key is building a curriculum that ties content mastery and learning targets together

with this type of social justice action. Maighread McHugh (2015) looked at how doing this

within mathematics worked. He conducted a case study exploring how five sixth grade girls used

project-based learning in math utilizing a social justice lens. He found that students flourished

not only in mastery of the content but also in rigorous learning as they chose real world social

issues to tie to their math learning targets. This is just one more case that shows the benefit and

importance of such a curriculum.

Section 7: Personal Beliefs. What are your personal beliefs about the system?
My personal belief is that the current model of school is not working for the students of

today. Students, especially students of color are struggling to make connections to material that

does not relate to them, that they do not see themselves in. Students will tell you quite candidly

that they do not like the education system and wish they could focus on the things they think are

important. How do we do that? By tying together content with the concerns and passions of our

students and helping them find and share their voice on these issues. The best way to create a

change that will impact the lives of students and the educational system is through project-based

learning with a social justice focus.

 I believe social justice project-based learning increases student engagement. I have seen

it in my own class. To give you an idea of what that looks like I will give you a couple examples

as they pertain to social science classes. In Government students looked at how change is made

in the government at the federal, state, and local levels. Students then conducted interviews with

women of color who had made an impact in their communities through politics or activism

because it is important to highlight the everyday people that make a difference, not just the

exceptional people who make it into history books. In Economics students created viable small

businesses where they had to create a business plan and a pitch to get a real ten-dollar investment

with the goal of turning that ten dollars into as much profit as possible. The original goal was to

donate the profits to Pencils of Promise, which builds schools in third world countries, but after

learning about a senior at our school being diagnosed with cancer I asked if students would be

willing to donate the money to his family during this hard time and they emphatically supported

that decision. In World History after learning about different genocides past and present around

the world, students created a human rights campaign and chose a human rights violation to

research and bring attention to. They had to use at least three mediums in their campaign which

included things like social media polls and posts, videos, flyers, posters, and speaking in front of

their other classes on things like human trafficking, equality, women’s rights, and child soldiers.

In U.S. History in conjunction with learning about the Great Depression and the photographers

of that time like Dorothea Lange and Walker Evans, who used photography to raise awareness

about what was happening, students created their own art installations around a social issue they

wanted to raise awareness about. Students were allowed to use any medium they wanted and the

mediums they chose ranged from drawing to painting to photography to sculpture to creating
original scores of music and brought awareness to issues like violence against women, global

warming, pollution, Black Lives Matter, police brutality, and child abuse.

By incorporating project-based learning with a social justice focus we can open access to

all students and include previously ignored or discouraged topics. We will help students find and

share their voices by inspiring them to act, to use different learning modalities, and by giving

them a platform. We can create critically conscious students who will see they can make an

impact now, which will empower them to keep trying to make an impact as they enter the world

as adults. This type of curriculum will not treat students as unknowing and uncaring children but

as agents of change that have valuable insight, lived experiences, and passions. They will be able

to integrate their perspective and their culture into their education which will make them feel as

if they are a part of their education and not just bystanders of it.

I have started this process with my own students and have seen the remarkable changes in

them as well as in myself as an educator and a member of our community. I have been sharing

out what I have been doing with my colleagues as well as through social media to help inspire

other teachers to follow suit. I have presented at several conferences and am hoping the district

will adopt some of my ideas, especially regarding ethnic studies classes they have started to

implement. While this process will take time, I have no doubts that it will help make systemic

changes in education for the betterment of our students and our communities and it will help

students to attain equitable outcomes in their education.

Section 8: Conceptual Model

 References
Agarwal, R. (2011). Negotiating visions of teaching: Teaching social studies for social justice.
Social Studies Research and Practice, 6(3), 52-64.
Argawal, R., Epstein, S., Oppenheim, R., Oyler, C., & Sonu, D. (2010). From ideal to practice
and back again: Beginning teachers teaching for social justice. Journal of Teacher
Education, 61(3), 237-247.
Allen, M. (2016) The Relevance of Critical Race Theory: Impact on Students of Color. UERPA
Education Research and Policy Annuals, 5(1), 33-44.
https://journals.uncc.edu/urbaned/article/view/575 

Appleton, J., Christenson, S., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. (2006) Measuring cognitive and
psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of
School Psychology, 44, 427-445.

Cammarota, J. and Fine, M. (2008) Revolutionizing Education: Youth Participatory Action

Research in Motion. New York, NY: Routledge

Cochran-Smith, M., Shakman, K., Jong, C., Terrell, D.G., Barnatt, J., & McQuillan, P. (2009).
Good and just teaching: The case for social justice in teacher education. American
Journal of Education, 115(3), 347-377.

DoSomething.Org. (Accessed 2020). 11 facts about high school dropout rates. Retrieved from:
https://www.dosomething.org/us/facts/11-facts-about-high-school-dropout-rates#fnref11

Dover, A. (2013). Teaching for social justice: From conceptual frameworks to classroom
practices. Multicultural Perspectives, 15(1), 3-11. DOI 10.1080/15210960.2013.754285
Epstein, T. (2001). Racial identity and young people’s perspectives on social education. Theory
into Practice, 40(1), 42-47. Retrieved from: https://www-jstor-
org.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/stable/1477217

Epstein,T. (2009). Interpreting national history. New York: Routledge.

Farnsworth, V. (2010). Conceptualizing identity, learning and social justice in community-based

learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(7), 1481-89. Retrieved from:
https://www-sciencedirect-
com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/science/article/pii/S0742051X10000867

Ford, D. Y., & Harris III, J. J. (2000). A framework for infusing multicultural curriculum into
gifted education. Roeper Review, 23(1), 4-10. Retrieved from:
http://libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/docview/62317300?accountid=10359

Grant, M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students' perspectives with project-based
learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 37-69. Retrieved
from: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1254&context=ijpbl
Hernandez, M. (2016) Social Justice Projects in the Classroom. Edutopia.
https://www.edutopia.org/blog/social-justice-projects-in-classroom-michael-hernandez

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?.

Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. Retrieved from: https://link-springer-
com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/article/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

Jones, M. & Brader-Araje, L. (2002). The Impact of Constructivism on Education: Language,

Discourse, and Meaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3).

Lee, Y. (2011). What does teaching for social justice mean to teacher candidates? The
Professional Educator, 35(2) 1-20. Retrieved from http://libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/login?
url=https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/docview/1312425211?
accountid=10359

Lochner, L. and Moretti, E. (2004). The effect of education on crime: Evidence from prison
inmates, arrests, and self reports. The American Economic Review, 94(1), 155-189.
Retrieved from: https://www-jstor-org.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/stable/3592774

Martinez, G. (2010). Native pride. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

McHugh, M. (2015). Project-based social justice mathematics: A case study of five 6th grade
students. New Mexico State University, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved
from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1772398261/?pq-origsite=primo

Miller, T. (2011). Partnering for education reform: Remarks by U.S. Deputy Secretary Tony
Miller. U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from:
https://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/partnering-education-reform

Moran Parsons, C. (2018) Sustained Inquiry in PBL as a Tool for Social Justice. Buck Institute
For Education PBL Works. https://www.pblworks.org/blog/sustained-inquiry-pbl-tool-social-
justice

Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications, Inc.

Santamaria, L. & Santamaria, A. (2012) Applied Critical Leadership in Education: Choosing

Change. New York, NY: Routledge.

Santamaria, L. (2013) Critical Change for the Greater Good: Multicultural Perceptions in
Educational Leadership Toward Social Justice and Equity. Educational Administration
Quarterly, XX (X), 1-45. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013161X13505287

Selden, S. (1999) Inheriting Shame: The Story of Eugenics and Racism in America. New York, 
NY: Teachers College Press.
Sleeter, C. E. (2015). Multicultural education vs. factory model schooling. In H. P. Baptiste, A.
Ryan, B. Arajuo, & R. Duhon-Sells (Eds). Multicultural education: A renewed paradigm
of transformation and call to action (pp. 115-136). Retrieved from:
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/39013869/14sleeter.pdf?1444063881=&response-
content-disposition=inline%3B+filename
%3DMulticultural_Education_vs._Factory_Mode.pdf&Expires=1591469140&Signature
=WmVvVwpGwqkSEy86H4DegbwWtB0q~8cSZCczeyA5jBu4SrVpNgU1eJm2QEUCH
snGw9HNxKtIV4rLCGUhk04YcxQvBV5r~iTd--
21d03hj319iNndhY8KA2n45L9enKu5Rd4sa4~NGNO6SZl7OnxwyETBCNHvBQ-
4ISKjvnP~fQxedCjHKc7twBokbXSY5p~MbHtWgDUjd~dwwNV1VUOgPgyEYh2FCE
WdyRfy8YkpDC9j7qZGrmSRgkwQioTXwQSQC0bkgf6ViT~DjXEEjBAPOP3dkWCX
~~nCUq7kuSOqRwU3QS2lYW8BKbMMAQZd-
x48tgWYceB6gRyPxdUskAkYRQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

Theoharis, G. (2007) Social Justice Educational Leaders and Resistance: Toward a Theory of
Social Justice Leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(2), 221-258.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013161x06293717

Tintiangco-Cubales, A., Kohil, R., Sacramento, J., Henning, N., Agarwal-Rangnath, R., &
Sleeter, C. (2015) Toward an Ethnic Studies Pedagogy: Implications for K-12 Schools from the
Research. The Urban Review, 47, 104-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0280-y

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). Employment by major industry sector. Retrieved from:
https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-sector.htm
Van Duzer, E. (2006). Overcoming the limitations of the factory system of education. Retrieved
from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490530.pdf
Wiggan,G. (2007). From opposition to engagement: Lessons from high achieving African
American students. The Urban Review, 40(4), 317-349. Retrieved from: https://link-
springer-com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/content/pdf/10.1007/s11256-007-0067-5.pdf