Module 6 — Brooklyn College

• 

  Posted by Sara Vogel, PhD. (she/her) on June 7, 2023 at 4:02 pm

  Background

  The CITE Equity Working group has put together some resources to support faculty to think about equity in the context of designing CITE Artifacts

  • Equitable CITE Pedagogy: Putting it into Praxis – Long document on Manifold
  • Interactive version of our goals, approaches, design principles and moves

  Task

  • Feel free to annotate our document on Manifold with any noticings, wonderings, resources, and ideas you have as you review it! You will need to go to this site and create an account: https://cuny.manifoldapp.org/

  Then, come back here and share your responses to any number of these prompts:

  • What are some noticings / wonderings you have about how we’ve framed equity in CITE? Any feedback for us?
  • Where do you see connections between the spotlights you read last week and the ideas shared about equity in this week’s resources?
  • What are some of the inequities that you are interested in tackling as you design and roll out CITE artifacts?
  • After reading this, where do you think you might challenge yourself to go next?

• Michelle Ortiz (she/her/hers)

  Member

  June 12, 2023 at 2:06 pm

  After reading through the resources, one concept that really stood out to me is how CITE has framed equity by first exploring inequity. By learning about the data and research of the inequities found, the team was able to begin the process of unpacking and planning for equity in CITE. By reading the provided research statistics, I was able to gain insight of structural inequities and the complexities of exploring this topic.

  After exploring the spotlights from last week, one connection that I made while reading is from the spotlight applying “Technology Mindsets” by Dr. Noble and Dr. Powietrzynska. In their classes, they asked their students to analyze standardized testing data and consider the implications for equity found within the assessments. This helped their students develop a lens for evaluating equity in assessments. Dr. Noble and Dr. Powietrzynska spotlight truly highlighted an artifact that used the CITE equity framework.

  I have brainstormed some ideas for my own CITE artifact, but I am far from something concrete that I can truly reflect upon and to determine how I will tackle inequities. However, one thing that I am considering is how I can ensure that I provide my students with opportunities found within the Liberatory Design Approach. From here, my next steps include thinking more deeply about my artifact possibilities and how I can consider the framework of equity found within in CITE and the future of my artifact.
  Cristina Montagna, EdD (she/her)

  Member

  June 13, 2023 at 11:02 am

  • What are some noticings / wonderings you have about how we’ve framed equity in CITE? Any feedback for us?

  Wonderings

  As part of the discussion on inequity, CITE’s manifold publication identifies several systems of oppression (e.g., racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, classism, ableism, ageism, and antisemitism).  It is understood that the identified systems were not meant to represent an exhaustive list, but, I did find myself wondering why systems that have often received less cultural attention, such as those related to mental health, were excluded.  For example, sanism, better known as discrimination against/oppression of neurodivergent individuals (Perlin, 1992), is another system of oppression that is still widespread and has the potential to affect student’s opportunities in technology.  Factors such as stigma, discrimination, inflexible education environments, low expectations among educators and other school stakeholders, as well as a lack of appropriate professional help, often act as powerful barriers to successful learning experiences for the neurodivergent student (OECD, 2017).

  I tentatively question if its exclusion from the list is due to the dearth of research available on this form of discrimination/oppression, despite the fact that neurodiversity is increasingly becoming a part of the discourse around education (Aitken & Fletcher-Watson, 2022).  As an educator, and licensed school counselor, who has worked with many neurodivergent students in neurodiverse classrooms (i.e., 3-K through 12th grade, as well as at the post-secondary level), I felt the need to use this platform as a way to make discussions around systems of oppression, a bit more neurodiversity-inclusive.

  References

  Aitkin, D., & Fletcher-Watson, S. (2022). Neurodviersity-affirmative education: Why and how? The British Psychological Society. https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/neurodiversity-affirmative-education-why-and-how

  OECD. (2017). Trends shaping education: Neurodiversity in education. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Spotlight12-Neurodiversity.pdf

  Perlin, M. L. (1992). On “sanism”. Southern Methodist University Law Review, 46, 373–407.
  Cristina Montagna, EdD (she/her)

  Member

  June 13, 2023 at 11:25 am

  This tiny wondering aside, the manifold publication is very well written and researched.  It will be a very resourceful guide as I consider my equity design throughout the development of my CITE artifact.
  Veronica Paredes (she/her/hers)

  Participant

  June 14, 2023 at 6:06 pm

  What I liked about CUNY’s CITE equity approach is that it is explored in collaboration with others, it is more holistic than prescriptive, and encourages students and teachers’ agency. I appreciated the invitation to share our thoughts and feedback directly on the manifold. When reading about the process, I thought it was important the team addressed both benefits and the challenges of engaging in collaborative sensemaking with others around complex topics like equity. This made me think of how valuable others’ perspectives are in making visible any of our own assumptions/biases.

  The student centered approach visible in both activities by Dr. Ascenzi Moreno and Dr. Espinoza I explored in the previous modules was furthered explained by the manifold’s approaches to design. Dr. Espinoza’ s work had students reflect on both the barriers and benefits of the plot charting digital  tool they engaged with. This helped students identify barriers to equity they perceived and anticipate for their students (particularly language minoritized youth). In Dr. Ascenzi Moreno’s tinkering experience, we were asked to engage a young person’s perspectives on the subject of misinformation. The two videos I chose were based on the conversation I had with the youth. This reminded me of the manifold’s call to acknowledge learners’ digital lives. I thought of how centering students digital lives could be another way to help future teachers design an activity/lesson’s scope, sequence, and/or content.
  Yoon Joo Lee (she/her)

  Member

  June 15, 2023 at 2:50 pm

  <p style=”font-weight: 400;”>When I reviewed the discussion about equity within the CITE Framework, I appreciated the emphasis on collective sense-making through collaborative process.   I strongly agree with the point that equity can mean different things to different people depending on the contexts.  I wonder to what extent the CITE equity working group has experienced challenges due to different perspectives and how the group reached to the collective sense-making.   I appreciate the group to acknowledge the moment of discomfort.         It was interesting to read Shifting through equity discourse.  I like the part about “broadening participation” to include students traditionally marginalized in STEM and computing fields.  As a teacher educator who trains special education teachers, I thought about meaning participation for students with disabilities who are often marginalized from the computer integration even though they can benefit greatly from the technology when used appropriately and meaningfully.   Similar to the group, I also resonate with Zaretta Hammonds’ work, which defined equity as ensuring all students have the ability to be “powerful learners.”   This idea will guide me as I design my artifact, prioritizing the experience of learners with multiple identities.   I noticed how artifacts created by both Dr. Ascenzi-Moreno and Dr. Espinosa provided opportunities for learners to create their own knowledge through interactive learning experiences.
  The manifold publication is useful and user-friendly.  However, I didn’t utilize it to a great extent because I personally don’t want to depend on internet access when reviewing the documents.  I just save the document as a pdf and read it several times without worrying about the internet access. 
  Edward Birzin (He/Him)

  Member

  June 16, 2023 at 12:30 pm

  • What are some noticings / wonderings you have about how we’ve framed equity in CITE? Any feedback for us?

  I completely agree with the way equity has been framed, that is that as educators we should be looking to even the playing field by focusing on the students who are often left behind. One wondering that sticks out to me is about buy-in and bias against the internet and certain technologies. I am thinking about how most colleagues I have worked with, as well as students, seem to be convinced that Wikipedia is a poor resource without having ever really played with it or used it on a deep level. I wonder if the more teachers who sign up for the CS4ALL PDs will also change the bias against information found on the web as opposed to the knowledge found in books?

  I also wonder, and am a little bothered by, the use of buzzwords. Buzzwords have taken over most conversations, and again I do agree with equity and fair-play and changing the system, but I feel like the buzzword-iness of terms like “equity” either turn off people or simply confuse them. After teaching Paulo Freire’s ideas so many times I question whether most of his findings can be implemented in the DOE when so many schools that serve Black and Brown students, as well as LGBTQ+ students, are at odds with liberatory pedagogy and instead uphold the oppressive pedagogies because the principles and other seasoned teachers don’t want to let go of their old ways. Of course, I understand that safety is important but the way safety is is applied to many of the schools that I have worked at are oppressive in that students must go through metal detectors, no cell-phones are allowed, students must ask to use the bathroom and have a hall pass as well as many other oppressive practices. So I wonder can we truly create and implement liberatory practices if the principle and other higher ups are not buying in fully?

   

  • Where do you see connections between the spotlights you read last week and the ideas shared about equity in this week’s resources?

  One of the spotlights I read last week was about students reflecting on their digital lives. I see that coming up in this week’s reading as well. It reminds me of learning in Junior High School the difference between “good” journalism (NYTimes (although that is debatable because of their going along with the Iraq war)) and tabloid journalism (The NY Post).

  Another spotlight had a graph showing the rates of graduating students getting their teacher credentials after they graduated and I do believe that connects well with the ideas put forward in the texts. One can read the disparities between races and gender in the charts. Using data to show students the cold facts of who gets certified and how quickly can be empowering.

  • What are some of the inequities that you are interested in tackling as you design and roll out CITE artifacts?

  The major inequity I see after having taught at a few different schools in the DOE and after having spent much of my young life attending public schools in NYC, is how most public schools that serve Black and Brown populations do not trust their student body, do not try to raise the students to take responsibility for their education and do not allow for out of the box thinking instead opting to pump and dump information solely for test scores. I would hope to make an artifact that can be used in all DOE schools whether or not the principles of those schools encourage liberatory pedagogy or not. That sounds easier said than done, but I do believe in being subversive and so I hope that my artifact will be just that.

   

  • After reading this, where do you think you might challenge yourself to go next?

  I noticed that much of what is written. in the various texts aligns with Restorative Justice practices. I might want to align RJ practices with my artifact and live up to the idea that “equity work is a journey”. To that I would add that CS4ALL work is also a journey and so just implementing CITE work a little here and a little there is not the solution, but a commitment to bringing these practices and ideas to the classroom throughout the semester, making it a part of the students’ routines, is imperative.

   

  PS I was not able to annotate through the Manifold application because I kept getting the message that it was offline and would come back later, so I downloaded the pdf version.
  Jennifer I (she/her)

  Member

  June 19, 2023 at 6:50 am

  I noticed many similarities between the way equity in CITE is framed and the Culturally Responsive Sustaining Math Education Framework is laid out. I think the CITE faculty did a phenomenal job creating this framework while looking at all angles of Computer Science and the equity behind it. I noticed that following the guidelines of the design principles will help us  in creating our artifacts this summer. Having the moves to support teacher education is a great support for all of us that are just getting started with this content. There is so much in the CITE framework that it is a little overwhelming while reading, but I like that it address all aspects of equity in computer science.

  In Mobilizing computing and digital tools for social action under the teacher moves section, it states; “Ask teacher candidates to interpret graphs / charts / data that shed light on some aspect of an injustice or an issue related to your course, and then to interrogate and think critically about data sources.” This was something that I did during Module 4 when I analyzed the DOE data in CODAP. I was able to shed light on inequities in schools that were only located a few blocks away from each other and I was able to think critically about the data that was presented to me. 

  One of the inequities that I am interested in tackling is to ensure that my lesson is culturally responsive while also being engaging for my students. Hammond states, “All students have the ability to be “powerful learners”” which is what I am going to lead with in my research and the creation of my artifact. My goal for this summer is to create an artifact that will not lead with technology, but to give my students opportunities to express themselves by using technology as their vessel.
  Betina Zolkower (she/her)

  Member

  June 22, 2023 at 8:43 am

  I’m answering below some of the questions posed in this discussion.

  • What are some noticings / wonderings you have about how we’ve framed equity in CITE? Any feedback for us?
  • I like very much the way the issue of equity have been framed within CITE and I also like all the variety of theoretical and practical resources that have been made available to us. A suggestion: With the input of specialists & practitioners in the various school subjects as well as in line with state of the art research on ‘best practices,’ it would be nice also to specify what equity means, what it looks like, what it sounds like, in math classrooms, science classrooms, social studies classrooms, etc.
  • Where do you see connections between the spotlights you read last week and the ideas shared about equity in this week’s resources?
  • I read (Module 5) the Spotlight by Kennedy et al. (City Tech) on engaging pre-service 7-12 math candidates in exploring & interrogating NYC school and student data. This is definitely and explicitly linked to the issue of equity as outlined in CITE. I have created, in the recent past, similar in-class activities. E.g., as part of one of the grad math methods I teach, for the final papers, students are asked to work in small groups on a choice among a huge list of ‘real problems/real data’ whereby they outline a unit for teaching central ideas in the Stats/Data Analysis strand (middle or high school). Among the problems in that list is the timely one of equity in admissions to specialized high schools. Another inquiry involving real problem/real data, this one I’ve done in my MCHS Seminar 3 (Macaulay) involves a data analysis and critical examination of the Million Tree initiative in NYC with regard to equity across the city neighborhoods.
  • What are some of the inequities that you are interested in tackling as you design and roll out CITE artifacts?
  • The project I am working on, in collaboration with two grad students, centers on geometric dissection puzzles, in a sequence of activities spanning from hands on (cardboard pieces), to sketching on plain paper, to construction on graph/triangular isometric paper, to working with and learning to create digital spaces (e.g., Mathigon) for manipulating the pieces of the given puzzle, to studying other puzzles, to creating and then testing original dissection puzzles according to consensus-arrived at criteria. This project is at its very core in line with the issue of equity, in the sense of offering guided opportunities for math teachers (pre and in service) and, through them for their current/future students to engage in puzzles (puzzling) as a tinkering/creating context for learning/reviewing/applying a whole range of geometric ideas and skills. It is known that experiences with puzzles (beyond jigzaw ones, the ubiquitous Tangram, or the Rubik’s cube) are not equally distributed, so to speak, across class/ethnic/racial groups.
  • After reading this, where do you think you might challenge yourself to go next?
  • The anticipated challenge is how to entice/convince/support in service teachers attending my course (Fall, Spring) to try out the puzzles mini-unit (CIT artifact) with their students, given then fact that this unit takes more than one lesson and may not be perceived as relevant (from the official curriculum point of view, with regard to high stakes assessment pressure,  instructional calendars, etc.)  by some AP/Principals as well as by the teachers themselves. The hope is that even if this mini-unit is tried out in a few classrooms, the result/artifacts/insights/discussion of these experiences, is likely to motivate other teachers to try it out in thrown classrooms.