Module 6 — Hunter College

• 

  Posted by Sara Vogel, PhD. (she/her) on June 7, 2023 at 4:04 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?

• Virginia Gryta (She/her)

  Member

  June 21, 2023 at 3:14 pm

  Hi all,

  I appreciated the thoughtfulness with which these goals were discussed, data based and even tinkered with as we step in to additionally review what was presented to last year’s cohort.

  I really was craving more information around the words “excluded” and “had access to” throughout several materials.  For example, from the executive summary:

  “Schools that made greater improvement also enrolled lower percentages of Black and Latinx students on average, pointing to persistent inequities in CS access and participation not only within schools, but also across schools.” 

  Do these inequities in access mean that courses and content were not available universally (I think it does say that about middle schools) or, because participation was mentioned, that CS content was/courses were offered but not chosen by the students? Or perhaps participation by certain groups was not evident because those students were not in the schools that offered opportunity, as the KOI research indicates.

  Even the Department of Education (federal) site has this, ““Research shows how a sense of belonging in rich and rigorous classrooms is directly correlated to students’ long-term academic success. Moreover, the Department’s Civil Rights Data Collection continues to demonstrate that students of color and students with disabilities are disproportionately excluded from learning opportunities in STEM,” said U.S. Deputy Secretary of Education Cindy Marten. I totally see that there is an issue and understand the problem caused by a leaky (or clogged/blocked) pipeline to careers as a result of this problem. I would like more information on the WHY in order to think on how we might address this important issue.

  In one of the resources, I believe the executive summary, the lack of teacher preparedness is suggested as a cause for school success. If teachers are not comfortable or knowledgable then STEM and CS skills may not show up in the classroom. This is reinforced by the Kin10 research which shows the data around who pursues careers in STEM beyond graduation as correlated with the income -level of schools, among other factors.

  Empowering teacher candidates to see the CS and STEM potential in the work they do and to lift it up and highlight it, I think, speaks directly to the priority of promoting joy and learning. Rhonda and I are hoping with our artifact to develop at least one activity that extends through the k-12 range in developmentally appropriate ways that will allow our teacher candidates in our Learning Disabilities program to develop fluency in building, administering, and providing feedback (I’m seeing the About, With, Through, and Against here) to students as they tinker and learn.

   
  Maite T. Sanchez

  Member

  June 25, 2023 at 6:30 pm

  Hello everyone,

  This module has also been so interesting and thought-provoking. While I knew that the CUNY CITE project had an equity-lens, the resources for this module has shown me the depth and multifaceted aspect of this work. Reading the CITE Equity Working Group’s document related to the Design Principles has given me a lot of ideas to think about, and to grapple with, as I continue to think of my CITE project. I’m focusing this reflection on the last prompt: “After reading this, where do you think you might challenge yourself to go next?”

  My original CITE project idea was to redesign an existing group assignment where students engage in translanguaging theory and identify some applications that they could implement in their current or future educational settings. I used to have students work in groups to create a mock-PD session presentation (in-person or through VoiceTread, if it was pre-recorded) as if they were asked to give a PD at their schools about translanguaging. Their presentations had to include several aspects (theory, importance, and application) and I evaluated it based on a rubric that I created. Students also self- and peer-evaluated their work. While the final presentations were always of very high quality, the process has consistently been stressful for students. They had challenges managing group work and with their engagement with technology.

  The Liberatory Design Cards already gave me ideas for strengthening group work. The CITE Equity Working Group’s document is making grapple with some basic elements of my CITE project: the assessment piece. Should I still make the project an “assignment” (with a grade attached based on a rubric I create)? If yes, how would it address the design principles of “Supporting learner agency to tinker with, modify and create tools” and “Centering creativity and expression” if they are following a rubric that I created? Or how can I change my CITE project from a mock-PD presentation to another type of group self-lead creation that would allow them to engage with translanguaging theory and applications? I look forward to continue engaging with the modules and camp’s sessions and further develop my CITE project.
  Christine Rosalia (she/her)

  Participant

  June 27, 2023 at 12:52 pm

  Hi everyone,

  I enjoyed checking out Manifold and it feels good to be focusing on equity in CITE.

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

  In my work I’d like to really better integrate these ideas:

  Name historical institutional injustices and then work to transform the parts of the system where we have control, including the classroom and in our collaborations with colleagues.

  Push back on white mainstream assimilative schooling. Seek to affirm, build on, extend learners’ linguistic and cultural practices.

  TESOL is a field founded in a large part on colonization so there is A LOT to unpack with everyone– students and teachers alike. “Translanguaging” like “equity” is a term that needs definition and constant re-definition. I see that many of my teacher candidates think it is just a form of code switching (or allowance of multilingualism in the classroom) and leave out the need to dismantle and bring social change. I am still very much thinking about my project but adult English language learners and students with interrupted formal education are two identities and intersections I want to serve in my project.
  Alfonso Pérez (he/him)

  Member

  June 27, 2023 at 3:17 pm

  I appreciate all of the documents and conversations shared in this module. I believe it’s essential to explore, discuss, and define educational equity with our teacher candidates, so that it guides the work we do in our public schools. Typically, I use these two definitions of educational equity in the courses I teach: 

  1. “Educational equity means that each child receives what they need to develop their full academic and social potential” (National Equity Project, 2020). 
  2. Additionally, “equity in education means that personal or social circumstances such as gender, ethnic origin or family background, are not obstacles to achieving educational potential” (NYSABE, 2015, p. 69).

  However, based on the readings for this module, I realize the many members of our learning community may not have a shared understanding of equity, and we may need more time, space, and resources to make sense of this term before we put it into practice. Based on the helpful comments and annotations of other participants, I also notice the definitions of equity that I use are quite general in their scope (e.g., “each child”), and they don’t highlight concepts like joy, empowerment, and transformation in teaching and learning.

  Some of the inequities I would like to tackle have to do with unearthing Spanish-speaking teacher candidates’ internalized ideologies regarding Spanish language. I’m thinking of “remixing” an assignment to help our bilingual education teacher candidates share their own languaging practices and show pride in their bilingual/multilingual abilities and, by extension, consider ways of using technology purposefully to share, welcome, and celebrate all the wonderful “varieties of Spanish” that exist in their PreK-12 classrooms.
  Eugenia D. Coutavas

  Member

  July 2, 2023 at 5:30 pm

  As your gif on the splash page says, there is [certainly] a lot to unpack here. I love the image Beatrice posted. It’s a powerful reminder of the differences in access.

  Starting off this summer’s PD with the National Equity Project’s Liberatory Design Framework was already eye opening for me. It really helped me conceptualize my mindsets in regards to using technology or tech literacy in general. This was very foundational for me, and I find myself referencing it in a mindful way as I proceed with my fall planning.

  I think Christine is on the nose with her comment about our profession. TESOL is most definitely rooted in linguistic hegemony- a topic that needs to be further explored with teacher candidates. When and how English became the Lingua Franca needs to be inserted in the course work. In fact, a lot more discussion needs to take place about equity with our teacher candidates. This is to further and deepen their understanding of differentiation.

  For my artifact, I want explore bias in AI tools like ChatGPT. Purposely inserting bias or stereotypes in varying degrees in prompts used for Chat GPT to create materials would be one one for me to see if TCs are sensitive/aware to that. It would make for a good starting point in a larger discussion on equity in design.