It takes a group to design but a larger community to implement:

Social justice language education-oriented framework in Costa Rica

Se necesita un grupo para diseñar, pero una comunidad más grande para
implementar: Marco orientado a la educación en lenguaje de justicia social en
Costa Rica

Abstract
While social justice education (SJE) is increasingly recognized as educationally
essential for students’ academic and personal success, its full integration into K-12
education continues to face barriers, including resistance to discussing certain SJE
topics. Using group interviews with five regional- and two national-level English-as-
a-foreign-language (EFL) advisers tasked with leadership and curriculum advocacy in
Costa Rica, this study explored their responses to proposed SJE-themed curriculum
materials for online and offline education. Findings include concerns around the
practical challenges of adding tasks to already-overburdened teachers’ workloads,
aligning curricula with mandated educational benchmarks, and apprehension about
introducing certain SJE topics, especially around sexuality, and socioeconomic status.
Recommendations include leadership support for focused SJE implementation and
increased stakeholder input around developing and navigating real or anticipated SJE
resistance in certain social sectors and refining proposed SJE materials to meet
educational mandates without adding to teacher workloads.

Keywords: social justice education, materials development, multilingual education.

 Resumen
Mientras que la educación para la justicia social (EJS) es cada vez más reconocida
como esencial para el éxito académico y personal de los estudiantes, su plena
integración en la educación K-12 sigue enfrentando obstáculos, incluida la resistencia
a la discusión de ciertos temas de EJS. Utilizando entrevistas grupales con cinco
asesores de inglés como lengua extranjera (ELE) a nivel regional y dos a nivel
nacional, encargados de liderar y defender el currículo en Costa Rica, este estudio
exploró sus respuestas respecto a materiales curriculares temáticos de EJS propuestos
para la educación en línea y presencial. Los hallazgos incluyen preocupaciones sobre
los desafíos prácticos de agregar tareas a la ya extenuante carga de trabajo de los
docentes, la alineación del currículo a las metas educativas establecidas y la aprensión
sobre la introducción de ciertos temas de EJS, especialmente en torno a la sexualidad
y el estatus socioeconómico. Entre las recomendaciones se incluyen el apoyo de las
autoridades para una implementación enfocada en la EJS y la retroalimentación
continua de las partes interesadas en torno al desarrollo al igual que la comprensión
de la resistencia existente o anticipada a la EJS en ciertos sectores sociales y la
adaptación de los materiales de EJS propuestos para cumplir con los requerimientos
educativos sin aumentar la carga de trabajo de los docentes.

Palabras clave: educación para la justicia social, desarrollo de materiales, educación

multilingüe.
1. Introduction

Social justice education (SJE)—defined as a “conscious and reflexive blend of

content and process intended to enhance equity across multiple social identity groups,

foster critical perspectives, and promote social action” (Carlisle, Jackson, y George,

2006, p. 57)—is becoming increasingly recognized as a priority and prerequisite for

academic and social-emotional successes for all students (Hymel y Katz, 2019). This

includes calls for SJE-sensitive professional development and changes to curriculum

and materials development for (1) pre-service teachers (Ankomah, 2020; Cirik, 2015;

Le Roux y Mdunge, 2012; Lucas y Milligan, 2019; Lynskey, 2015; McCoy, 2012;

Storms, 2013), (2) in service teachers (Brochin, 2019; Garran, Kang, y Fraser, 2014;

Hymel y Katz, 2019; Jacott, Maldonado, Sainz et al., 2014; Rowan, Bourke,

L’Estrange et al., 2021), and (3) school leaders (Huchting y Bickett, 2021; Mullen,

2008).

Classroom offerings specifically addressing social justice issues and diversity—

although at times challenging for educators and students alike (Murray, 2011; Ruffin,

2020)—can provide a brave space (Arao y Clemens, 2013) for all students, teachers

and others involved in the education process. Brave spaces afford discussions that

foster anti-racist, anti-bias, and anti-oppressive mindsets, challenge privilege and

power, and promote more just, equal, and inclusive environments where all people

thrive socially (p. 141) while still learning subject-specific content (Araujo y Strasser,

2003; Hymel y Katz, 2019; Woodley, Hernandez, Parra, y Negash, 2017).

Investing in SJE is necessary for change to occur despite challenges when

implementing such curricula (Carlisle et al., 2006, p. 57). These challenges include

enduring moments of discomfort, engaging in open discourse, advocating for SJE

(Murray, 2011), and practicing self-reflection (Araujo y Strasser, 2003). The idea that

the two goals of academic achievement and the development of social identity are

independent objectives in education is a misconception that must be actively resisted

(Rojas-Alfaro y Montenegro Sánchez, 2024). As Murray (2011) notes, a school-wide

discourse that seeks to inform social justice would benefit from focusing on “how

instructional practice, curricular decisions, materials, and classroom routines connect

to children’s family, community, and cultural roots” (p. 62). Providing teachers time

to engage these conversations can help unveil institutional practices that support or

undermine equity and impact children’s social identity development and academic

success.

Subject-specific teachers can contribute significantly to this goal by incorporating

SJE-oriented teaching and materials development (Glas, Catalán, Donner, y Donoso,

2021; McCoy, 2012). Anti-bias, culturally responsive teaching approaches across

disciplines are indispensable for teachers and educational leaders who seek social

justice in school systems (Ladson-Billings, 1994). Particularly in bilingual literacy

education for grades 1-6, regardless of student diversity levels, a crucial opportunity

exists for embedding social justice goals within young English-language learners’

(ELLs) reading instruction (Araujo y Strasser, 2003). This study aims at the goal of

developing and implementing SJE-oriented teaching materials in such classrooms.

Specifically, it explores how EFL advisers in Costa Rica can perceive SJE curricular

materials to support bilingual literacy development in grade 1-6 English-language

learners (ELLs). It uses qualitative group interviews to explore responses to proposed

storybook-format SJE-themed curriculum materials and suggestions for

improvement. This EFL demographic is important because of their role overseeing

EFL teachers, assessing and strategically implementing curricula, and doing

educational research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Social justice education in bilingual education programs

While SJE research in Costa started slowly from the 1990s onward (Locke, 2009;

Silva, Slater, Gorosave et al., 2017; Slater, Gorosave, Silva et al., 2017), recognition

of SJE as prerequisite for academic and socio-emotional success generally (Hymel y

Katz, 2019) now prompts calls for curricula that celebrate SJE-related diversity and

foster anti-bias classroom environments (Araujo y Strasser, 2003; Derman-Sparks y

Edwards, 2021; Hymel y Katz, 2019). This has redoubled significance when

culturally and linguistically diverse groups of students are present (Woodley et al.,

2017). While such environments can increase students’ self-esteem and feelings of

self-worth, promote the values of tolerance and respect for all, and thus potentially

grow closer as a community at large, they also increase the likelihood of academic,

especially in early K-12 EFL instruction (Tedick y Wesely, 2015). This again

demonstrates the co-implication of academic and identity attainment in education.

Grades 1 to 6 school teachers play a significant role in this task. Derman-Sparks y

Edwards (2021) highlight that children have already begun to develop their social

identity and discover other groups by age 4. For Araujo y Strasser (2003), “teachers

should move themselves and their children from a level of awareness to tolerance for

diversity to celebrating diversity” (p. 180). Brochin (2019) adds that “without

explicitly connecting more general issues of inequity and social justice to [for

example] gender expression and sexuality, bilingual and multicultural education can

potentially make the mistake of encouraging teachers to become advocates for some

marginalized groups while inadvertently silencing others” (pp. 81-82).

Teachers’ diversity commitments must include affirmation, solidarity, critique, and

continued exploration and discussion of students’ and teachers’ values as a regular

practice embedded within the curriculum (Araujo y Strasser, 2003). This is not some

set-aside period of the classroom (otherwise taking time away from other educational

activities) but an integrated and continuous activity that occurs ad hoc as occasions

arise. At root, this simply involves fostering mutual respect among everyone present,

but such conversations are especially relevant for confronting existing prejudices in

schools. Derman-Sparks y Edwards (2021) suggest that teachers actively attend to

children’s developing perceptions and feelings about their identities and those of

others to “foster their ability to gain accurate knowledge, … develop self-esteem,

[and] … counter misinformation, unease, or hurtful ideas about members of various

racialized groups” (p. 37). As they note, “Diversity does not cause prejudice, nor does

children noticing and talking about differences, as some adults fear” (p. 37; c.f.,
Crary, 1992). Solidarity and allyship between colleagues, school administrators, and

like-minded parents also is critical if social justice education is to move beyond

surface-level effects (Brochin, 2019; Murray, 2011; Ryan y Hermann-Wilmarth,

2018).

2.2. Storybooks as teaching resources

While teachers are not necessarily prepared, trained, or know how to approach

teachable moments that arise spontaneously and unplanned in classrooms, they also

do not need not wait for them to happen to include them in their everyday planning

(Derman-Sparks y Edwards, 2021). In particular, storybooks—i.e., digital or printed

media containing a story or collection of stories intended for children—afford a ready

resource for teachers to engage children in meaningful activities around critically

confronting prejudice and celebrating diversity. Araujo y Strasser (2003) advise

teachers to use a range of materials (including picture books) that reflect “children,

adults, and diverse family configurations of various racial and ethnic makeup

engaged in non-stereotypical gender activities … [and] … people doing jobs in and

out of home, and engaged in various recreational activities, depicting diversity in

family styles” (p. 181).

Derman-Sparks y Edwards (2021) suggest that teachers compose (and assess the

quality of) materials that make racial and cultural diversity visible. Introducing

children to literature that speaks to diversity in multiple ways at an early age can

allow them, for example, to “learn about gender diversity and … dismantle gender-

based bullying before it starts” (Brochin, 2019, p. 86). Composing storybooks that
facilitate content, promote social justice, and bring students’ stories to the core of the

curriculum allows teachers to draw from four sources for anti-bias stories: (1) issues

that emerge from children’s daily lives, (2) events that are currently happening in the

world, (3) information that the teacher wants children to have, and (4) history

(Derman-Sparks, 1989, in Araujo y Strasser, 2003, p. 182).

While such storytelling allows issues of diversity to be addressed directly or

indirectly (Araujo y Strasser, 2003), Hess (2021) also cautions against using

storytelling that “reduces humans to objects to accomplish an agenda” as this can re-

inscribe oppression for minoritized groups (p. 81) or majority groups as well. She

proposes using counter-stories, such as testimonies, which allow tellers (e.g.,

teachers) to question dominant understandings while facilitating “minoritized groups

[to] retain agency and control of the story” (p. 78). Such storybooks or testimonies

become not only a catalyst and “vehicle for the children to explore their ethnic

identity” (Araujo y Strasser, 2003, p. 182) but also a voice for teacher connections

with their students (regardless of background differences). Again, the fundamental

issue here is a presumably unobjectionable expectation of mutual respect around

identity for all present. As Derman-Sparks y Edwards (2021) put it, anti-bias teachers

should purposefully and enthusiastically “integrate the message into the daily life of

their classroom that people of every racialized identity [among others] are valuable

and deserve caring and fairness” (p. 38).

2.3. A social justice education-oriented framework

This study is grounded in the idea that SJE in school curricula helps educate all

students, but its advocacy requires stakeholders not to be afraid of seemingly difficult

conversations (Le Roux y Mdunge, 2012) that arise as teachable moments (Derman-

Sparks y Edwards, 2021) inside and outside of the classroom. Such situations have

their most substantial classroom effects where teachers—supported by a school

network of advisers, colleagues, parents, and administrators—can immediately

intervene for the well-being and education of students (both on- and offline),

especially those from marginalized groups (Hymel y Katz, 2019).

Toward this end, understanding the responses of EFL instructional stakeholders’

(including the regional and national advisers in this study) to the use of SJE-themed

materials becomes crucial because they serve as gatekeepers for reaching teachers

and students who eventually will benefit from these teaching materials and teacher

development opportunities that foster bilingual literacy skill development and SJE

mindsets. Accordingly, this study’s emphasis on curricular integration of SJE-related

issues around difference and identity has a particular urgency in a post-pandemic

time, when many students are being further marginalized (by limited access to online

participation and digital knowledge). By committing to SJE, education takes a step

forward when it unveils critical social justice issues that deserve (and require)

discussion in school settings at all levels.

Such discussions go beyond traditional social justice models in bilingual literacy

education and teacher education programs, where the benchmarks of tolerance and
cultural acceptance of others (Araujo y Strasser, 2003) can ignore, overlook, or

bracket out students’ intersectional identities (Brochin, 2019). To note this is not a

denigration of the values of tolerance and cultural acceptance but a recognition that

more is still required given that tolerance and acceptance alone have not yet

adequately secured social justice generally.

3. Method

3.1. The study

This case study (Yin, 2009) explored the research question: How do English-as-

foreign-language (EFL) advisers in Costa Rica perceive implementing SJE curricular

materials to support bilingual literacy development in grade 1-6 English-language

learners (ELLs)?

The SJE curricular materials were developed by the researchers as part of a pilot

study supported by a grant from the U.S. embassy in Costa Rica. These materials

were given to the EFL advisers for them to look over and offer their observations A

key focus of the grant call was to leverage technology and online education,

particularly under the impacts from COVID-19, which increased or created

prohibitive barriers to educational access, especially among demographics already at

risk or newly facing exclusion (Glas et al., 2021; Henry, 2010). Along with national

Ministry of Education objectives, the materials developed also incorporated the social

justice themes described in previous sections. In particular, storybooks portrayed

situations possibly relatable to Costa Rican children’s lives from during the pandemic

(see Table 1).

Table 1

Themes and Sample Digital Storybook Titles

Theme Storybook Title

Domestic violence Mommy’s Bruises

Remote work Arturo Stays Home

Air quality When the Earth Got its Breath Back

Heroism Doc and Nurse Crowley

Overconsumption Where did All the Toilet Paper Go?

Discrimination Yuki and Friends

Vulnerable Caring in a Crisis

individuals

3.2. Participants, selection, and settings

Snowball sampling (LeCompte, Tesch, y Preissle, 2003) was used to identify five

regional and two national EFL advisers (six women, one man) with an average

eighteen years of pertinent knowledge and teaching/leadership experience around this

study’s focus. EFL advisers are responsible for overseeing primary school EFL

teachers in their respective regional and national domains. Duties include assessing

and strategically implementing curricula, developing professional development

programs, conducting research to identify areas for improvement, and supporting

teachers’ practices by providing guidelines and teaching materials. This study’s

regional advisers specifically represent marginalized and under-resourced schools in

rural areas.

Participants were recruited individually via email and WhatsApp, with invitations to

join a WhatsApp group to coordinate and share meeting details ahead of group

interview sessions. The SJE curricular materials—including a Handbook for grade 1-

6 teacher professional development, storybooks, and sample lesson plans supporting

SJE, understanding by design (UbD), translanguaging, and using WhatsApp for

digital education delivery—were provided to participants for review in advance of the

group interviews.

Table 2

Participants’ pseudonyms and background information

Pseudonyms Work Experience School Region Served

(Years) (by general geographic location)

Seidy 18 Atlantic

Dayana 17 Pacific

Patricia 24 Central

Leila 21 Central

Melania 16 Pacific

Valencia 24 National

Arnoldo 18 National

3.3. Data collection

In Fall 2020 and Spring 2022, we separately conducted three two-hour group

interviews (Creswell y Poth, 2018; Spradley, 2016), first with the five participating

regional advisers and then with the two national advisers. Group interviews were

conducted in Spanish and English, recorded, transcribed verbatim, and translated as

needed by the research. The researchers also collected notes during the meetings to

help address participants’ comments, questions, and concerns (Spradley, 2016).

Interview transcripts were shared with participants for member-checking (Creswell y

Poth, 2018) and stored in a password-protected folder on OneDrive.

3.4. Data analysis

Interpretive case study was applied to “develop conceptual categories that would

either support, challenge, or illustrate prior theoretical assumptions based on the rich

and descriptive data gathered” (Merriam, 1998, p. 38). The researchers individually

and collaboratively revisited the field notes and group interview transcriptions

multiple times for coding and convened Zoom meetings to discuss our analyses and

ensure inter-rater agreement. In cases where coding differed, we conferenced to

understand one another’s perspectives and made necessary adjustments to the coding

to reach a consensus. Specific codes were merged or expanded to enhance clarity

whenever we encountered overlapping themes.

While we initially intended to implement member-checking (Carspecken, 1996)

through a follow-up group interview with the participants for data triangulation,

limited further access prevented us from pursuing this option. Instead, we relied on
data triangulation through the multiple available sources, which allowed us to

maintain consistency between the participants’ perspectives and our interpretations.

3.5. Positionality

As former primary and secondary school ELL and teacher education practitioners in

Costa Rica, we are committed to improving in-service teacher development to

increase awareness, acceptance, and celebration of difference. Our experiences

working with vulnerable student populations, usually discriminated against and

marginalized because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, social affiliation,

economic status, and cultural background, have inspired us to pursue transformational

education experiences for all, but especially those who need it most. We firmly

believe that it is important to make the experiences of marginalized groups,

particularly those that highlight social injustices, more visible and a central topic in

educational materials and teacher training. We believe, but have also seen how,

practicing this aim can allow ELL educators to implement SJE-oriented materials

suitably and ethically in the classroom and make SJE part of the school curriculum.

We believe that education must be accessible and work for all students in the

classroom, not simply those who align with a culturally dominant discourse or who

are most conveniently reached.

4. Findings

The following paragraphs present the findings from three group interviews conducted

with participants and facilitated by two researchers, encompassing initial and follow-
up meetings. Findings are divided into two sections, reflecting the flow of ideas as

they were openly shared and critically discussed among the participants.

4.1. Theme 1: Meeting educational mandates and goals

Initially, participants emphasized how the materials could address the needs of EFL

teachers in online and hybrid classrooms, for example, Seidy recognized the utility of

the materials for online teachers:

I appreciate the effort you are making to bring this material to the

classrooms, and it is an effort for which I am truly grateful because

amidst so much that teachers are experiencing, often their very

environment cuts off their creativity. The more materials we can

provide them with, the more we would be easing their lives, especially

in their work during these times, which the pandemic has made very

difficult (Seidy, group interview, November 6, 2020).

However, participants also stressed the urgent need for these materials to be suitable

to address students’ literacy skill development in light of increasing government

accountability requirements and teacher’s reporting workloads.

Right now, teachers are much more focused on completing reports and

other administrative work that is significant because of the number of

students in each group. They need to focus on reviewing work guides

and conducting summative assessments of students in English. They

are also required to submit a final report to their schools (Patricia,

group interview, November 6, 2020).

They also emphasized that most primary school EFL teachers have been

independently navigating online and hybrid teaching, often without sufficient

professional development, guidelines, or support. This situation detracts from the

already limited time for lesson planning and opportunities to create or adapt materials

for online and hybrid classrooms. Speaking from her adviser experience, Leila further

illustrated this challenge.

As part of my duties as an adviser, I conduct research. Recently, I

conducted a survey asking teachers if they would like to be provided

with opportunities to develop and share contextualized teaching

materials within their school districts, but it turns out that their

acceptance was negative. They explicitly said, “Look, we don’t have

time.” The complaint about time is always there (group interview,

Leila, November 6, 2020).

Advisers concurred that teachers would appreciate and use new materials if they

directly addressed assessment strategies and aligned with school curricular units.

Specifically, Valencia emphasized the importance of involving EFL teachers in

discussions about materials development and the necessity of these resources being

consistent with curricular objectives.

I think that this type of initiative demands teachers’ professional

development. We need to make teachers participate. As you suggested

in our first meeting, you said, “Teachers will be the writers. Teachers
 will be developers.” I think that’s great because, as I said at that time,

it creates ownership (Valencia, group interview, April 1, 2022).

Valencia further emphasized the importance of conversations with EFL teachers

about materials development beyond mere professional development.

I wouldn’t say training, but it would be nice to have a conversation

with teachers about this to create awareness from this perspective. This

is a major issue if we are going to use these resources. How are these

resources aligned with the elements of our curriculum? (Valencia,

group interview, April 1, 2022).

Arnoldo highlighted the disparities in educational resources and access between rural

and urban areas, underscoring the need for professional development tailored to the

unique challenges and contexts of EFL teachers in various regions of Costa Rica and

how access to information can be particularly limited in rural areas:

There can be communication between different populations who live

in two different settings and have different struggles. Or even within

San Jose [an urban city in Costa Rica], we have places that have a lot

of difficulties in terms of all that you have been describing. And

people who live in other geographic areas where those struggles don’t

exist (Arnoldo, group interview, February 18, 2022).

Participants stressed that materials be tailor-made to minimize the need for significant

adaptations or modifications before use. Melania explained that teachers’ time for

engaging with materials development has become increasingly limited; “What is the
timeframe you have for us to distribute this material? How much time is estimated for

this project?” (Melania, group interview, November 6, 2020). Dayana added:

We have received a memorandum stating that we are not authorized to

schedule meetings, workshops, or any activity of this sort with

teachers after November 19. Teachers will have to invest their time

grading student assignments and tests. Additionally, they will have to

submit a final report. Teachers are working on that right now, so I

believe it is not a good time for us to provide them with new material

(Dayana, group interview, November 6, 2020).

4.2. Theme 2: Inclusion of social justice issues in the school curriculum

The participants affirmed support for SJE, with Arnoldo noting that it is already a

core value in Costa Rican national education. Valencia elaborated that existing

curricula aim to develop a new form of citizenship through three learning dimensions:

to know, to do, and learn to live and be in the world:

[SJE] brings this idea of equal participation, and it’s part of the

educational policy of this country, aiming to bring equality and social

justice into the classroom and beyond, for everybody and for future

citizenship (Valencia, group interview, February 18, 2022).

Both recognized this as beginning from early childhood education, with Valencia

characterizing social justice as a big umbrella appropriate for early childhood

development (Valencia, group interview, February 18, 2022).

However, participants also anticipated reactions from some teachers, students, and

parents about bringing certain topics rarely discussed so openly into the EFL

classroom. Specifically, participants argued that showcasing social justice issues

related to difference (e.g., socioeconomic status) and identity (e.g., sexual orientation)

could pose challenges to teachers (and other advisers, like themselves) and lead to

disagreements with parents.

When I was going through the materials, I noticed they touch on some

sensitive topics that might stir the pot – conflict might not be the right

word, since it’s more about the feelings it might bring up. And there’s

stuff about a homosexual couple that I’m totally okay with (Seidy,

group interview, November 6, 2020).

Patricia interjected during Seidy’s comment to suggest controversy rather than

conflict might be a more accurate way to describe a difference in perception (rather

than a difficult situation) between teachers and parents on social justice issues

addressed in storybooks. Then Melania added her impression in agreement with

Seidy about possibly introducing social justice issues in teaching materials.

There’s a lot of sensitive content in the material which might just stir

up a lot of controversy — controversy that’s going to land on us as

advisers as well as the teachers. I’m with Seidy on this one. But you

know, these issues are different for every family. In my family, we

accept them as normal. But then, you’ve got families that are okay
 with it and some that just aren’t (Melania, group interview, November

6, 2020).

Participants offered rationales for not using storybooks addressing differences and

identity with children. For example, Seidy had no problem talking about gay marriage

or gay couples, but objected to a contrast with a heterosexual couple experiencing

domestic violence:

There’s a reading that portrays a heterosexual couple as problematic

and violent, right? The reading presents an issue of domestic violence,

I believe is in the storybook Mommy’s Bruises. And it also features

another family, right? A lesbian family. So, the abused lady and her

daughter leave their home. Then the reading presents an idyllic family,

right? Two ladies, a lesbian couple, in a household where everything is

love and peace (Seidy, group interview, November 6, 2020).

Seidy also objected to a storyline portraying “people with money” as greedy or

hoarders of essential items during COVID-19 and “far from reality” (Seidy, group

interview, November 6, 2020):

I think [the storybook Where Did All the Toilet Paper Go?] casts

wealthy people in a negative light by labeling them as hoarders.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, this proved to be far from reality. It

wasn’t just wealthy people who were hoarding, but everyone in the

resulting panic. This was especially evident in the United States, as

seen in the news. It seems to me that the reading might cast wealthy
 people in a negative light, at times suggesting they were hoarders or

selfish. Maybe it was the reading itself, but it certainly left me with a

particular feeling. I get that there are cultural aspects in these stories

that are important, and I grasp the intended purpose behind the reading

— obviously, it’s about social justice, about being aware that we can’t

just go and buy everything. Yet, that was the initial impression the

reading gave me (Seidy, group interview, November 6, 2020).

Leila argued against openly addressing certain social justice issues developmentally

“inappropriate for children’s current understanding” (Leila, group interview,

November 6, 2020). Melania emphasized certain communities culturally, especially

in the countryside, hold strong religious beliefs that make addressing these issues

difficult for teachers.

I’ve come across a community here in the region, about 15 kilometers

from the city, where families don’t even consider dancing as a form of

entertainment because their religion forbids it. So, you can imagine the

stir that presenting stories like these to school children might cause.

From that perspective, I agree with avoiding certain sensitive topics,

especially because we’re dealing with children. We must be careful

with how public institutions manage these subjects, as other programs,

such as Sexuality and Affection, have sparked too much controversy

in schools. Now, just imagine dealing with an even wider range of

topics like these (Melania, group interview, November 6, 2020).

Leila and Melania agreed that addressing these issues with adolescents might be more

suitable, since “these topics are usually taught jointly in Science and Biology classes

[in high school]” (Leila, group interview, November 6, 2020). Patricia countered that

children in primary schools are bombarded with information on such topics from

Sexuality and Affectivity, a program that aims from grade 1 to address aspects of

sexuality fully, equipping young people with the skills to recognize and assert their

sexual and reproductive rights, and guiding them to make informed decisions for a

satisfying and responsible sexual life (Valverde Cerros, Sánchez Calvo, Sevilla

Solano, Campos Quesada, y Parra Jiménez, 2017)—meaning that even young

students do have some understanding on these subjects.

For Melania, another concern was how well- or poorly equipped teachers are

prepared with the required expertise and professional development to discuss such

matters; “There is a lot of sensitive content that perhaps is not up to an English

teacher to address and that rather can cause a lot of controversy” (Melania, group

interview, November 6, 2020). Arnoldo said: “After reading Arturo Stays Home,

yeah, I found myself wondering: “Are we ready to talk about this? Are we prepared

to depict this kind of family openly in a story?” (Arnoldo, group interview, February

18, 2022).

Supporting Melania’s opinion, Leila suggested revising such materials in light of

participants’ feedback (as well as input from government authorities who oversee

educational policies) (Leila, group interview, November 6, 2020). While Seidy

agreed with this incorporation of feedback, she added, “Culturally speaking, I may
have been shocked, but I believe that addressing these issues in the classroom is also

an EFL teacher’s responsibility. I believe in it. It is everyone’s commitment” (Seidy,

group interview, November 6, 2020).

Arnoldo and Valencia agreed a transformation around how EFL teachers introduce

and discuss social justice and injustice with students is crucial; actively addressing

these issues is “the only way to fight and create a change of mind... since kids are

young; they are beginning their lives” (Valencia, group interview, February 18,

2022).

We need to start this process at an early age, and as I mentioned

before, it’s already implicitly included in our curriculum. However, if

we could develop materials that make it more explicit and connect

with what’s already there, that would be excellent (Arnoldo, group

interview, February 18, 2022).

Valencia emphasized the importance of considering multiple and diverse identities

within the school curriculum:

We have a fundamental principle in our curriculum: learn to live and

be in the world. I believe that understanding the rights and needs of

others, fostering an awareness of different perspectives, is essential for

our society, especially in the face of the inequalities present in Costa

Rica (Valencia, group interview, February 18, 2022).

5. Discussion
The findings echo other research on teachers’ challenges and opportunities in online

and hybrid learning environments. For example, a lack of time greatly impacts

teachers’ practices, including lesson planning, materials, and teacher development

(Gandolfi, Ferdig, y Kratcoski, 2021; Glas et al., 2021). Compulsory and increasing

accountability measures mandated by educational authorities can also have school

teachers paying more attention to administrative work than their online or hybrid

teaching practices. Affording more manageable time for teachers is essential.

The digital divide presents another challenge, for teachers and students alike

(Gandolfi et al., 2021; Henry, 2010; Iivari, Sharma, y Ventä-Olkkonen, 2020),

whether limitations on access, a lack of familiarity with available online tools, and

learning strategies for success online. Readily available and low-cost digital tools not

conventionally used in education but well-known in the community, like WhatsApp

and others, afford opportunities to support teaching and foster in-classroom

innovation (Glas et al., 2021). Such tools require localized adaptations to ensure that

all students are reached.

Beyond time availability and the digital divide, another challenge is teachers’

learning curves and professional development when adopting or adapting new

materials (print or digital). This is not just a technical problem, as our study discloses

issues around teachers’ dispositions and motivation toward implementing certain new

materials. For time and practical reasons, all materials must align (or be perceived as

aligning) with curricular mandates. Any mismatch (whether content-related, thematic,

or potentially by opening disagreements around difference and identity social justice

issues) introduces the further risks of (1) exacerbating teacher workloads and

motivations, (2) decreasing use or refusal of such materials if they do not meet

accountability metrics, and (3) hindering long-term professional development in

teachers (including developing an online teaching repertoire) as they rationally

allocate their limited time to more short-term issues.

Nonetheless, these practical logistical concerns may mask sociological resistance to

SJE itself (either directly or as an anticipation of controversies arising from attempts

to address them). While the advisers themselves enthusiastically expressed support

for SJE, they also overtly expressed resistance to its concrete implementation and

imagining or anticipating resistance from some teachers, students, or parents,

especially in religious countryside settings. More generally, there was only mixed

support on whether the conflicts, controversies, or difficult situations possibly arising

from SJE curricula in grade 1-6 ELL storybooks were even appropriate to place on

teachers.

On this point, it is imperative to remember: while some of these imaginable difficult

situations arise from people already holding socially unjust opinions about difference

and identity, the silences around these issues are already creating difficult situations

for students in classrooms who do not align with any normative values presented in

existing educational materials. While EFL advisers can express concerns about the

depictions of wealthy people as inaccurate or slanted way (despite that some wealthy

people did act as depicted in the storybook), what justifies prioritizing this concern if

common discourse is not also questioned for the ways that it presents less wealthy
people in inaccurate or slanted ways? Equally, if EFL advisers are unsure if we are

ready for a discussion about homosexuality, then this side-lines any discourse that

LGBTQIA+ students, parents, and educational stakeholders might have about slanted

and inaccurate representations of them by religious conservatives. Or again, why is a

framework of concerns used to characterize acknowledging the existence of

LGBTQIA+ people as a controversy or a conflict Gay people are not a controversy or

do they represent a conflict in society; denigration of their humanity is. When these

concerns—which are certainly not unfamiliar—become an excuse for avoiding

seemingly difficult conversations, this elides the fact that some students

(LGBTQIA+, poor, marginalized) are experiencing difficult non-conversations and

silence about their existence every day. Avoiding imaginable conflicts that guarantee

the perpetuation of currently harmful conflicts must not be allowed to be called social

justice.

A challenge (and an opportunity) for all educational stakeholders involves the

foreseeable mixed feelings (anticipated by this study’s participants) around the

teaching of social justice issues of difference and identity. We do not propose that

teachers alone can accomplish this task—they are already too overburdened with

responsibilities—and are in solidarity with calls that teachers and local advisers

should work together to fight oppression (Le Roux & Mdunge, 2012). This

necessarily requires adequate support from administrations as well, to foster anti-bias

classroom environments toward social justice in education generally (Araujo y

Strasser, 2003; Brochin, 2019; Ladson-Billings, 1994).

Contrary to concerns about the ability of students to handle these conflicts or difficult

situations, our study discloses that social justice issues around difference and identity

are not brand-new to students and teachers in the classroom. In Costa Rica, issues

around diversity, ableism, sexual orientation, gender disparity, and identity are

informally present in classroom conversations already and formally offered in the

school curricula via the Affectivity and Sexuality program for grades 1 to 6. While

resistance from certain quarters of the school community can be expected, the

inclusion of specific social justice issues around difference and identity (e.g., sexual

orientation, gender disparity, socioeconomic struggles) demonstrates a potential for

raising awareness about those critical issues and laying a groundwork for

ameliorating their effects as they directly and indirectly affect teachers, children, and

their communities. Again, the argument for doing so is not only moral but also that

the academic success of all students economically benefits society generally (Tedick

y Wesely, 2015). It creates a more educated and, therefore, productive and wealthier

workforce and less demand for expenditures on social safety nets.

Using the proposed grade 1-6 SJE materials would also help supportive EFL advisers

and teachers already in solidarity with social justice commitments to challenge

socially unjust patterns and foster the continued exploration of students’ and teachers’

values, ultimately with social justice for everyone (Araujo y Strasser, 2003). We

agree with Araujo y Strasser (2003), who suggest that resistance to social justice

goals (and the perception that somehow the oppressed are going to replace the

dominant culture) can be ameliorated through discomfort appreciation, open

discussion, and self-reflection. As such, the participants’ counterarguments against

SJE in school curricula are illuminating and reveal a potential willingness to adopt

such materials provided that the approach addresses not only practical time-constraint

issues (both online and offline) but also offers support buffers (from administrations)

to shield them against likely backlash. For teachers more directly uncomfortable with

such social justice aims, administrative support structures and conversations in the

classroom can afford a measure of on-the-job professional development.

Finally, incorporating this research into the limited literature on social justice

research in Costa Rican education marks an important first step. While future

research might focus on student, parent, and local school administrator perceptions

and reactions to SJE curricular content, leadership from top-level curricular advisers

is indispensable. Although our proposed curriculum is intended to be adaptable, the

advisers’ concerns about teacher workloads and aligning curricula with educational

mandates seems to have overshadowed that capacity in our proposal. Nevertheless, if

participants can express uncertainty whether we are ready for a particular

conversation, what might they design instead? If a juxtaposition of (heterosexual)

domestic violence and (lesbian) domestic bliss is unsettling, how might one craft a

socially just local narrative addressing domestic violence and lesbian parenting—both

of which are already realities in the lives of some students in classrooms? The

adaptability of the curricular material expressly includes and anticipates the necessity

of local adaptation; in that way, one can wonder what locally adaptive storybooks

could be articulated by stakeholders in rural, conservative areas around poverty,

homosexuality, and even dancing. Again, future research is needed to explore this but

requires decision-making leadership to move forward rather than fall by the wayside

under a banner of not yet.

5.1. Recommendations

Two immediate ways to address some of the practical/logistical concerns expressed

by participants include (1) providing ready-to-use SJE materials or (2) flexible,

customizable templates useable in any online and hybrid learning context. Both

solutions have advantages and limitations. Ready-to-use materials are convenient but

afford little to no customization; as such, their content will offer a poor fit with the

total student demographics classroom to classroom and require additional in-

classroom discussion to navigate the gaps they miss. Alternatively, customizable

templates can be tailored to meet classroom demographics but require time to build

content (or will become an additional task for time-burdened teachers to complete).

This would require prioritizing SJE so that reallocating available resources (or

personnel) to tailor the materials appropriately is not opposed. In either case, any

solution adopted must fit with teachers’ overburdened time constraints and the

imperative to reach all students, not just those who historically have been reached

(Henry, 2010) and those who can be conveniently reached, online or offline, during

or after a pandemic.

Addressing perceived and actual resistance to SJE will typically be seen as risking

conflict or difficult situations such that conflict-averse persons and institutions can

prefer to allow on-going social injustices against marginalized and minoritized

peoples to continue. As such, further direct research is necessary to better understand

the roots of such resistance, e.g., the on-going normalization of the great replacement

theory (Cosentino, 2020; Linders, 2020) or religious/political opposition to perceived

liberal agendas (Carrus, Panno, y Leone, 2018; Levett-Olson, 2010).

At root, SJE seeks to secure a presumably unobjectionable call for mutual respect

among all people (e.g., personal dignity, support for families and individuals, and the

Costa Rican social justice principle to live and be in the world with others). When the

benefits of social justice education are understood as being for everyone, this already

begins to mitigate the potential for conflicts with those who perceive such efforts as

threats to their own differences and identities.

5.2. Limitations

Like all qualitative research, this study’s generalizability is limited by the

particularity of its time, place, and participants. In particular, the COVID-19’s

impacts on educational delivery, especially digitally/remotely, may leave out or

introduce themes characteristic of education in general. (For instance, can so-called

sensitive topics be introduced more easily in remote educational contexts?).

Additionally, the context of bilingual education (or even Spanish/English education

particularly) in Costa Rica may have culturally specific elements that limit the study’s

applicability to other online or offline bilingual education contexts.

Most importantly, the study did not directly involve other key educational

stakeholders, such as teachers, students, parents, and school administrators, whose

insights would provide an even more holistic understanding of the challenges and
potentials of SJE in education. This limited focus of stakeholder, however, is a

necessary first step to broader qualitative research around these issues. This is

because regional- and national-level advisers occupy key leadership positions with

respect to this action and are tasked with approving or advocating any curricula that

downstream stakeholders would encounter. Future research should aim to include

these perspectives for a more comprehensive view of the subject.

6. Conclusion

This study highlights the burgeoning enthusiasms and resistances among key

educational stakeholders for implementing curriculum to support social justice

education’s vital goals of fostering equity, critical perspectives, anti-bias mindsets,

and mutual respect for all people in Costa Rica’s educational system.

Key points of resistance include (1) hesitancy about addressing certain social justice

topics, particularly those pertaining to gender, sexuality, and socioeconomics, (2)

concerns about increases to already overburdened teacher workloads, (3) meeting

governmental mandates about content and standards, and (4) claims to have already

integrated specifically local/national SJE in curricula. These issues underscore the

need for a careful and thoughtful approach and leadership around further advocating

the integration of SJE into Costa Rican education. In particular, while the use of

digital storybooks was acknowledged as an innovative channel for promoting

bilingual literacy and social justice awareness, they also highlight critical access

problems due to a worsening digital divide and the necessity to make resources

accessible to all students, regardless of their socioeconomic background.

While this effort will necessarily involve system-wide collaborative effort—from

educators and curriculum designers and parents, students, and policymakers from the

wider community—successful integration of SJE especially hinges on leadership able

to find or adapt forms of curricula that are comprehensive, meet government

educational goals and content mandates, and resist the social reproduction of

prevailing inequities and prejudices in culture more widely. Finding what narratives

will work to support SJE goals, even in places where resistance is anticipated, is the

critical lynch-pin for success. Future research is needed toward this end, as Costa

Rican education navigates these challenges and draws on lessons learned to become a

beacon for other nations and make the social justice goals of mutual respect and

quality education for all students a reality.

7. References

Ankomah, William S. (2020). Diverse classrooms: Social justice, equity, and

diversity competencies for teacher candidates. World Journal of Education,

10(2), 15-26.

Arao, Brian, y Clemens, Kristi. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces. In LM

Landreman (Ed.), The art of effective facilitation: Reflections from social

justice educators (pp. 135-150). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Araujo, Luisa, y Strasser, Janis. (2003). Confronting prejudice in the early childhood

classroom. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 39(4), 178-182.

doi:10.1080/00228958.2003.10516402
Brochin, Carol. (2019). Queering bilingual teaching in elementary schools and in

bilingual teacher education. Theory Into Practice, 58(1), 80-88.

doi:10.1080/00405841.2018.1536917

Carlisle, Lenore Reilly, Jackson, Bailey W, y George, Alison. (2006). Principles of

social justice education: The social justice education in schools project.

Equity & Excellence in Education, 39(1), 55-64.

doi:10.1080/10665680500478809

Carrus, Giuseppe, Panno, Angelo, y Leone, Luigi. (2018). The moderating role of

interest in politics on the relations between conservative political orientation

and denial of climate change. Society & natural resources, 31(10), 1103-

1117.

Carspecken, Francis Phil. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A

theoretical and practical guide. New York City, ,NY: Routledge.

Cirik, Ilker. (2015). Psychometric characteristics of the social justice scale’s Turkish

form and a structural equation modeling. Eurasian Journal of Educational

Research, 15(61), 23-44. doi:10.14689/ejer.2015.61.2

Cosentino, Gabriele. (2020). From pizzagate to the great replacement: The

globalization of conspiracy theories Social media and the post-truth world

order (pp. 59-86). Cham, CH: Palgrave Pivot.

Creswell, John W., y Poth, Cheryl N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research

design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.
Derman-Sparks, Louise, y Edwards, Julie Olsen. (2021). Teaching about identity,

racism, and fairness: Engaging young children in anti-bias education.

American Educator, 44(4), 35-40.

Gandolfi, Enrico, Ferdig, Richard E, y Kratcoski, Annette. (2021). A new educational

normal an intersectionality-led exploration of education, learning

technologies, and diversity during COVID-19. Technology in Society, 66,

101637. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101637

Garran, Ann Marie, Kang, Hye-Kyung, y Fraser, Edith. (2014). Pedagogy and

diversity: Enrichment and support for social work instructors engaged in

social justice education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 34(5), 564-574.

doi:10.1080/08841233.2014.952868

Glas, Katharina, Catalán, Erica, Donner, Marcel, y Donoso, Carla. (2021). Designing

and providing inclusive ELT materials in times of the global pandemic: a

Chilean experience. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-16.

doi:10.1080/17501229.2021.1940187

Henry, Laurie A. (2010). Unpacking social inequalities: How a lack of technology

integration may impede the development of multiliteracies among middle

school students in the United States. In Darren Lee Pullen, Christina Gitsaki y

Margaret Baguley (Eds.), Technoliteracy, discourse, and social practice:

Frameworks and applications in the digital age: Frameworks and

applications in the digital age (pp. 55-79). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Hess, Juliet. (2021). "Putting a face on it": The trouble with storytelling for social

justice in music education. Philosophy of Music Education Review, 29(1), 67-

87. doi:10.2979/philmusieducrevi.29.1.05

Huchting, Karen, y Bickett, Jill. (2021). The need for career-long professional

learning for social justice leaders in affluent school contexts. Professional

Development in Education, 47(1), 50-62.

doi:10.1080/19415257.2020.1787194

Hymel, Shelley, y Katz, Jennifer. (2019). Designing classrooms for diversity:

Fostering social inclusion. Educational Psychologist, 54(4), 331-339.

doi:10.1080/00461520.2019.1652098

Iivari, Netta, Sharma, Sumita, y Ventä-Olkkonen, Leena. (2020). Digital

transformation of everyday life–How COVID-19 pandemic transformed the

basic education of the young generation and why information management

research should care? International Journal of Information Management, 55,

102183. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102183

Jacott, Liliana, Maldonado, Antonio, Sainz, Vanesa, Juanes, Almudena, García-

Vélez, Tatiana, y Seguro, Vanesa. (2014). Representations of social justice

amongst Spanish teachers and students. In P Cunningham y N Fretwell (Eds.),

Innovative practice and research trends in identity, citizenship and education

(pp. 122-139). London, UK: CiCe.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Le Roux, Adré, y Mdunge, Percy. (2012). Difficult conversations: Lessons learnt

from a diversity programme for pre-service teachers. Perspectives in

Education, 30(3), 78-87.

LeCompte, Margaret Diane, Tesch, Renata, y Preissle, Judith. (2003). Ethnography

and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA:

Academic Press.

Levett-Olson, Lee. (2010). Religion, worldview, and climate change. In Constance

Lever-Tracy (Ed.), Routledge Handbook Of Climate Change And Society (pp.

230-239). New York City, NY: Routledge.

Linders, Nik. (2020). Normalizing ‘The Great Replacement’ theory. (MA), Radboud

University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Locke, Steven. (2009). Environmental education for democracy and social justice in

Costa Rica. International Research in Geographical and Environmental

Education, 18(2), 97-110. doi:10.1080/10382040902861171

Lucas, Ashley G, y Milligan, Andrea. (2019). Muddying the waters: Studying

teaching for social justice in the midst of uncertainty. Studying Teacher

Education, 15(3), 317-333. doi:10.1080/17425964.2019.1669552

Lynskey, Angela Cartwright. (2015). Countering the dominant narrative: In defense

of critical coursework. Educational Foundations, 28(1-4), 73-86.

McCoy, Wanda Linnette. (2012). Assessing pre-service teacher's knowledge of and

attitudes towards incorporating Social Justice Education in elementary

 school mathematics classrooms. (Ph. D. Dissertation), University of

Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD.

Merriam, Sharan B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in

education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mullen, Carol A. (2008). Democratically accountable leader/ship: A social justice

perspective of educational quality and practice. Teacher Education Quarterly,

35(4), 137-153.

Murray, Olivia. (2011). A call for K-12 schools to invest in social justice education.

The Education Digest, 76(5), 60-64.

Rojas-Alfaro, Roberto Enrique, y Montenegro Sánchez, Ana Marcela. (2024).

Discussing a concept for an online learning platform with rural sixth-grade

students in mind: Evidence-based guidelines for designers, teachers, and

policy change. Innovaciones Educativas, 26(40), 26-49.

doi:10.22458/ie.v26i40.4890

Rowan, Leonie, Bourke, Terri, L’Estrange, Lyra, Lunn Brownlee, Jo, Ryan, Mary,

Walker, Susan, y Churchward, Peter. (2021). How does initial teacher

education research frame the challenge of preparing future teachers for

student diversity in schools? A systematic review of literature. Review of

Educational Research, 91(1), 112-158. doi:10.3102/0034654320979171

Ruffin, Jean Ferguson. (2020). Missed Opportunities: Reflections and Regrets of a

Brand-New Professor. Transformations, 30(2), 141-147.

doi:10.5325/trajincschped.30.2.0141
Ryan, Caitlin L, y Hermann-Wilmarth, Jill M. (2018). Reading the rainbow: LGBTQ-

inclusive literacy instruction in the elementary classroom. New York City,

NY: Teachers College Press.

Silva, Patricia, Slater, Charles L, Gorosave, Gema Lopez, Cerdas, Victoria, Torres,

Nancy, Antunez, Serafin, y Briceno, Fernando. (2017). Educational leadership

for social justice in Costa Rica, Mexico, and Spain. Journal of Educational

Administration, 55(3), 316-333. doi:10.1108/JEA-03-2016-0033

Slater, Charles L, Gorosave, Gema Lopez, Silva, Patricia, Torres, Nancy, Romero,

Adriana, y Antúnez, Serafín. (2017). Women becoming social justice leaders

with an inclusive view in Costa Rica, Mexico, and Spain. Research in

Educational Administration and Leadership, 2(1), 78-104.

doi:10.30828/real/2017.1.5

Spradley, James P. (2016). The ethnographic interview. Long Grove, IL: Waveland

Press.

Storms, Stephanie Burrell. (2013). Preparing teachers for social justice advocacy.

Multicultural Education, 20(2), 33-39.

Tedick, Diane J, y Wesely, Pamela M. (2015). A review of research on content-based

foreign/second language education in US K-12 contexts. Language, Culture

and Curriculum, 28(1), 25-40. doi:10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923

Valverde Cerros, Óscar, Sánchez Calvo, Laura, Sevilla Solano, Cecilia María,

Campos Quesada, Yeimy, y Parra Jiménez, Ana Cristina. (2017). Programa

 de estudio de afectividad y sexualidad integral. San Jose, CR: Ministerio de

Educación Pública.

Woodley, Xeturah, Hernandez, Cecilia, Parra, Julia, y Negash, Beyan. (2017).

Celebrating difference: Best practices in culturally responsive teaching online.

TechTrends, 61(5), 470-478. doi:10.1007/s11528-017-0207-z

Yin, Robert K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.