top of page

students to feel validated in schools.  The tools in this chapter add the critical layer of CRRP, providing a window of opportunity (Bishop, 1990) for educational stakeholders to grow in their culturally relevant practices.  The classroom environment and the curriculum can serve as a mirror where students can look at and see themselves reflected.  It should also serve as a window where students can look through and see cultures and people who are different from themselves. The Diverse Classroom Voices and Perspectives Checklist is a tool designed to be used by classroom teachers to examine their classroom library and ensure the library is diverse (Bishop, 1990).  It is important for teachers to take current educational practices and materials and move them to be inclusive and equitable.

Assessing CRRP:  A Rationale for Adapting the InTASC Standards

A primary goal of this handbook is to provide educators and teacher preparation programs tools for assessing practices that impact teacher quality and student learning.  Any salient set of assessment tools must also include CRRP. 
One of the most prevalent and influential frameworks for evaluating teacher quality is the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards. However, a critique of the InTASC standards and corresponding frameworks pertains to the development from the dominant American culture without considering multiple cultural perspectives on the interpretation of true observables.  As such, they are not reflective of our racially, linguistically, and culturally diverse world.  These rubrics have a potential to lead to stereotyping of cultural communities, or worse, low scores because the observer is not culturally responsive and has not addressed how their biases impact their observations.

This culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy (CRRP) framework is authored by Elizabeth Finsness and Nanette Missaghi (2018).  It is built upon the national standards established by InTASC.  The standards, originally developed in 1992 by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), are commonly used in education programs across the country.  InTASC standards “model core teaching standards that outline what teachers should know and be able to do to ensure every K-12 student reaches the goal of being ready to enter college or the workforce in today’s 
world” (CCSSO, 2013).  InTASC standards are not presented in a traditional rubric, but rather in a progression.  This may be used as an evaluative tool, or a mechanism to provide coaching on performance.  InTASC recognizes that a number of quality evaluation frameworks already exist in the marketplace and they did not want to duplicate their efforts.

This current version begins to address some of the CRRP focus that was lacking in the earlier version.  Since the InTASC standards are used by many states and by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), we found it to be a suitable example to overlay additional CRRP language.  We are not aware of an adequate rubric that fully incorporates the CRRP language, behaviors, and provides the progression of observable evidence of an educator using CRRP.


In describing the revised InTASC standards, the Council of Chief State School Officers states this revised version “maintains the delineation of knowledge, dispositions, and performances as a way to probe a teacher’s practice.” However, performance is put first, as an aspect that can be observed and assessed in teaching practice.  It is with this cue, we have adapted the InTASC standard progression to create a mechanism for measuring culturally responsive and relevant pedagogy.

NDSU 171003_Interior Design-214.jpg

How the InTASC Standard Progression was Adapted

Elizabeth Finsness and Nanette Missaghi, the authors of this CRRP rubric, enhanced the InTASC progression by adding CRRP language, definitions, and “Look Fors.”  Personal development of the teacher is not addressed within InTASC, yet understanding one’s personal cultural identity is essential to culturally responsive teaching (Missaghi, 2017).  To address this omission, we added the following standard:

1.  A   The teacher understands culture, their personal cultural identity, and how it impacts their teaching.

Additional Adaptations Include:

  • Additions throughout the original InTASC progressions are highlighted in italic boldface.  These additions and clarifications highlight CRRP language and clarify what is coded language.

bottom of page