In 2007, Arizona voters passed House Bill (HB) 2064, a law that fundamentally restructured the Structured English Immersion (SEI) program, putting into place a 4-hour English language development (ELD) block for educating English language learners (ELLs). Under this new language policy, ELL students are segregated from their English-speaking peers to receive a minimum of four hours of instruction in discrete language skills with no contextual or native language support. Furthermore, ELD is separate from content-area instruction, meaning that language and mathematics are taught as two separate entities. While educators and researchers have begun to examine the organizational structure of the 4-hour block curriculum and implications for student learning, there is much to be understood about the extent to which this policy impacts ELLs opportunities to learn mathematics. Using ethnographic methods, this dissertation documents the beliefs and practices of four Arizona teachers in an effort to understand the relationship between language policy and teacher beliefs and practice and how together they coalesce to form learning environments for their ELL students, particularly in mathematics. The findings suggest that the 4-hour block created disparities in opportunities to learn mathematics for students in one Arizona district, depending on teachers' beliefs and the manner in which the policy was enacted, which was, in part, influenced by the State, district, and school. The contrast in cases exemplified the ways in which policy, which was enacted differently in the various classes, restricted teachers' practices, and in some cases resulted in inequitable opportunities to learn mathematics for ELLs.

A fundamental motivation for this study was the underrepresentation of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics careers. There is no doubt women and men can achieve at the same level in Mathematics, yet it is not clear why women are opting out. Adding race to the equation makes the underrepresentation more dramatic. Considering the important number of Latinos in the United States, especially in school age, it is relevant to find what reasons could be preventing them from participating in the careers mentioned. This study highlight the experiences young successful Latinas have in school Mathematics and how they shape their identities, to uncover potential conflicts that could later affect their participation in the field. In order to do so the author utilizes feminist approaches, Latino Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory to analyze the stories compiled. The participants were five successful Latinas in Mathematics, part of the honors track in a school in the Southwest of the United States. The theoretical lenses chosen allowed women of color to tell their story, highlighting the intersection of race, gender and socio-economical status as a factor shaping different schooling experiences. The author found that the participants distanced themselves from their home culture and from other girls at times to allow themselves to develop and maintain a successful identity as a Mathematics student. When talking about Latinos and their culture, the participants shared a view of themselves as proud Latinas who would prove others what Latinas can do. During other times while discussing the success of Latinos in Mathematics, they manifested Latinos were lazy and distance themselves from that stereotype. Similar examples about gender and Mathematics can be found in the study. The importance of the family as a motivator for their success was clear, despite the participants' concern that parents cannot offer certain types of help they feel they need. This was manifest in a tension regarding who owns the "right" Mathematics at home. Results showed that successful Latinas in the US may undergo a constant negotiation of conflicting discourses that force them to distance themselves from certain aspects of their culture, gender, and even their families, to maintain an identity of success in mathematics.