Pre-service teachers' evaluation of belief relevant information on a controversial issue in Āotearoa, New Zealand: Should te reo Māori be compulsory in New Zealand schools?

The purpose of this mixed methods study was to investigate the influence beliefs have on pre-service teachers' evaluations of belief-relevant arguments and belief change on a controversial issue. In the quantitative phase, pre-service teachers (n = 23) at a university in New Zealand completed a topic belief-scale on a controversial issue in Āotearoa/New Zealand (i.e., Should te reo Māori be compulsory in New Zealand schools?). Then they read a text that included arguments for and against compulsory Te reo Māori while they thought-aloud (i.e., verbalized their thoughts as they read). After they read, they completed the topic-belief scale again. The quantitative results showed that participants tended to make refutational comments when they read belief-incompatible arguments, whereas they tended to make supportive comments when the read belief-compatible arguments. Further, their beliefs became stronger after they read. In the qualitative phase, interviews were conducted and analysed to explain why some participants' beliefs became stronger, whereas other participants' beliefs did not change. The interview data revealed individual and contextual factors influenced how participants evaluated the text and were related to their beliefs after they read. These data provide important information about the role of individual experiences in preservice teacher beliefs about a controversial topic on cultural responsiveness.