Conversations about Diversity with Undergraduate Students Context - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jennifer Green, Ed.D Teacher Education Department Weber State University / Ogden, Utah

Using Protocols to Facilitate Sensitive

Conversations about Diversity with Undergraduate Students

Context for this Study

• Historically, Weber State University served as:

○ Weber Stake Academy (1889

• 1933)

○ Weber State Junior College (1933

• 1964)

○ Weber State College (1964

• 1991)

○ Weber State University (1991

• present)

■ a comprehensive regional university with a community college mission ■ under LDS (Mormon) church ownership until it was turned

• ver to the state in 1933

https://www.weber.edu/AboutWSU/history.html https://www.uen.org/utah_history

Purpose of the Study:

...to examine the

effects

• f

protocols

• n

participants'

awareness and sensitivity to diversity issues

in American society and schools. Protocols are structured processes and guidelines for conversation that are recommended for the following uses in the field of education:

• o n p r a c tic e
• fo r c h a n g e
• with te xts

• to wa rd e q u ity

Why use protocols?

According to the National School Reform Faculty, protocols are “Like guardrails along a highway...under the leadership of a trained coach, (protocols) provide guidance and a safe place for honest and useful feedback.” (nsrfharmony.org) McDonald et al (2013) explain the ironic effects of protocols in this way: “Under the right circumstances, constraints are liberating.” (p. 1 ) According to Robin DiAngelo (2018), originator of the theory of White Fragility, “Refusing to engage in an authentic exploration of racial realities erases (and denies) alternate racial expression.” (p. 86)

Other quotes from DiAngelo to consider incorporating:

• While implicit bias is always at play because all human beings have bias, inequity can occur simply

through homogeneity; if I am not aware of the barriers you face, then I won’t see them, much less be motivated to remove them. Nor will I be motivated to remove the barriers if they provide an advantage to which I feel entitled (xiii)

Demographics

According to College Factual (2019), WSU is “on par” with the national average in terms of diversity in the student body.

Study Participants:

Students in two separate sections of my course, EDUC 3205: Culturally Responsive Teaching for Preservice Elementary School Teachers

N = 34 Female = 92% / Male = 8% Hispanic = 18% White = 82%

Matching the protocol to the task

• Protocols were used during most class meetings.
• Particular consideration needed to be given when

the conversation had potential to be complex.

• I needed to “constrain” the conversations with rules

so I could set their voices free.

• We will take a close look at three protocols in

particular and examine the results of the study.

• Other resources on handout.

Protocol #1: Marvin’s Model

• Prior experience:

Students took Harvard’s online IAT

• n skin tone (Project Implicit)
• Objective:

to debrief or facilitate rapid communication

• Procedure:

○ Form groups of 4

• 5 people

○ A question will be asked / 30 seconds to think. ○ Each person speaks for 20

• 30 seconds.

○ Others just listen; do not respond. ○ Next question. ○ All discuss: What have we learned? What do we need to unlearn?

Data from Marvin’s Model

• Alive Reading 1
• Whole class debriefing:

○ The Latinx students came to the realization that they do this WITHIN their own culture and families. ○ Other students talked openly about racist family members and how to deal with that in family gatherings. ○ We then discussed bias vs. prejudice and the importance of

self

• awareness.

○ The conversation segued well into watching a CNN report on the Doll Test from the 1940s and its relevance today.

Protocol #2: The Tuning Protoco

l

• Prior experience

: Most students attended the keynote speech at the WSU diversity conference by Jane Elliott, racial justice educator, who is well

• known for her brown eyes/blue eyes experiment in

the late 60s.

• Her aggressive style had offended many in the

audience; I decided to use the Tuning Protocol to debrief and explore her message.

The Tuning Protocol Procedure

Objective: to generate

honest, direct, and respectful feedback in

• rder to TUNE our

values and perspectives through listening to

• thers’ diverse and

candid perspectives.

Guiding Question: Was

Jane Elliott’s message communicated? Did she have an impact on the Weber community? How and why? Let’s reflect together, alternating WARM and

COOL comments.

First, we need to all gain an understanding of how she presents her message about power and prejudice. Please just watch, no commentary until we use the protocol.

Data from the Tuning Protocol

• Whole class debriefing:

Stu d e n ts a lt e r n a t e d wa r m a n d c o o l c o m m e n ts fo r th e m o s t p a r t , th o u g h o c c a s io n a lly th e y n e e d e d re m in d e rs . Le t ’ s lis te n to a fe w o f th e ir c o m m e n ts th a t d e m o n s t r a t e th e jo u r n e y th a t th e y a r e o n to wa r d u n d e r s t a n d in g .

Protocol #3: The Final Word

• Objective: to expand the interpretation of a text

by encouraging the emergence of diverse viewpoints and voices.

• Later in the day, we were going to critique social

studies textbooks.

• I needed them to consider the cultural bias and

lack of counter

• narratives in curricula.

The Final Word Procedure

• Read th e e xc e r p t fr o m Tr e vo r No a h ’

s m e m o ir . H ig h lig h t o n e o r two q u o te s th a t r e a lly r e s o n a t e with yo u .

• Pr e s e n t

e r A reads the phrase

• r s e n te n c e a lo u d a n d reflects o n it fo r

2-3 m in .

• Reflect back . Go a r o u n d th e c ir c le a n d e a c h lis t e n e r r e fle c t s b a c k fo r
• n e u n in te r r u p t e d m in u te . Do n o t in te r p r e t o r e va lu a t e (From what

you said… I can see that… I hear you saying that...I think you feel that

)

• Final

Word:

The presenter has one minute to react to what was said.

• Repeat with next person and different phrase.

\\ Rli to on e

"Ith

1

• ir ehildr n

t nu ht

>f

Ut Emplr

1 ·r ban •h g o r t h wl

In Soni h

t hut

U1 n

• r:

m 1..

,e1 · y n

n t

h l g J-. nnd o nd n \'tr _ 1e emotlo d fr ll.

Ll."l

n

Y n

Data from the Final Word

• Alive Re a d in g 2
• Wh o le c la s s d e b r ie fin g :
• Ma n y t h e m e s a r o s e , s u c h a s :

○ Th e p o lit ic iza t io n o f h is to r y; Am e r ic a a lwa ys h a s t o lo o k “ g r e a t ” ○ Th e t e n d e n c y t o s u g a r -c o a t th e fa c t s ○ O u r a b ilit y t o s tu d y th e t r a g ic h is to r ic a l e ve n ts in o th e r c o u n t r ie s (t h e H o lo c a u s t wa s m e n t io n e d ), b u t n o t th e h o r r o rs o f s la ve r y a n d we s twa r d e xp a n s io n

• O n e yo u n g s tu d e n t s u m m e d u p th e th in kin g o f

m a n y in th e c la s s ve r y we ll a n d in q u it e a p a s s io n a t e wa y, a s h e a r d h e r e :

Results of the Study

• Observational and anecdotal data demonstrated that

students had made progress in terms of self

• awareness and understanding.
• What did the hard data say?
• Paired sample t -tests compared individual responses on all

pre - and post -survey questions.

• A small p value (

≤ 0.05) on almost all questions led me to reject th e n u ll h yp o th e s is .

• In e s s e n c e , t h e c la s s (a n d o u r u s e o f p r o t o c o ls ) h e lp e d

t h e m t o g r o w in m a n y wa ys ...

What did the hard data say?

Statistically significant growth for these pre

• and

post -

survey questions:

• rate your

level of knowledge

about diversity

• your opinion of the

importance of the content of this course

• your level of preparedness

to teach children who are culturally and linguistically diverse from you

• how comfortable are you talking about issues

related to cultural, linguistic, ethnic, and religious diversity

The one question that resulted in a decreased mean:

• how open -

minded do you consider yourself to be

Lessons Learned

• We le a r n e d a lo t fr o m o n e a n o th e r .
• It ’

s n o t th e d e s t in a t io n th a t m a tte r s , it ’ s th e jo u r n e y.

• O n e s tu d e n t to ld m e s e ve r a l m o n th s la t e r , in a

jo kin g wa y, “ Th a t c la s s r u in e d m e ! I’ ll n e ve r lo o k a t th in g s th e s a m e wa y a g a in .”

• I a s ke d 15 o f th e s tu d e n ts , wh o I a m t e a c h in g a g a in

t h is s e m e s te r (lit e r a c y c o u r s e ), “ Wh a t we r e t h e b ig t a ke a wa ys fo r yo u ?”

v v \

y"

Vi a-f

f ho\

QY

I"S +\ti 1f

} I

'll\)

• £ yf?,S +o jw.

+ bD\

"1 \iWYL

\N

VV\J

6Xf«1-t!r1tf I.S •

:Y VJ et\'(\(.1t

Oft\'\ r ;f'J-el\

• c\!

'\,

V.nriv-)

':(-o c

\

• u

\'\.

\1vJ.

V GV"V \-il lkiI

bX1 +ev1 t.v •

• r\ni 1(1\'.:

\ CH'V' 1V\0 Y-{ qwC\re ot 1

1 \C

\ \t\ 1 0-XI\ S' WC

\\\}{'

I V1 C\ bCd or Joi

\ t'V\ 1n\c- 620 ("pe1 t.fd

L ctf up fu

. \\ ¥-{

1 S t'\1\.0 .e

i\/et'S1 Owl.

:.( i

t i l \ J\l\. l Vt I

• -------------- -======;

e\ :\ha\. 1: \\a e

s .\-u< \<d '\<J St

• th. \\'\ON'· 1: QW\ \'Nlr{.

lN \\\1' \

• he. Lt'Uf• 5

a,'Ju<A.\ \\er) e r'\

(,G. "

1¥ S Scli<,

"\·

• -'---------'

Questions?

Connections

? Feedback? Thanks so much for attending! Stay in touch:

jgreengersh@gmail.com