Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education : International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion 9781787560659, 9781787560642, 9781787560666

Table of contents :
Contents
List of Contributors
Series Editor’s Introduction
Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning
PART I: CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES
Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education
Introduction
Literature Review
Definitions
Challenges
Summary
Chapter Overviews
Conclusion
References
PART II: GLOBAL PRACTICES AND CHALLENGES
Chapter 1: Removing the Rose Colored Glasses of Exclusivity
Introduction
Teachers as Moral Leaders
Unconscious Biases
Race
The Role of Education
The Educator as Gatekeeper
Diversity Management, Affirmative Action
Diversity Management Paradigm – A Complete Organizational Change
Quotas – Bridging and Bonding Social Capital
Forced Participation: Affirmative Action Programs
Diversity Management: Conflict and Backlash
Conclusion
References
Chapter 2: Authentic Caring: An Australian Experience
Introduction
Philosophical Context
Jodi’s Story – Glimpsing Pedagogical Caring in Action
When “Leaping in” is Guided by “Leaping Ahead”
When Snow Does Not Fall
Conclusion
References
Chapter 3: High-Impact Inclusive Learning Organizations: Evidence-Based Strategies in Higher Education
Introduction
Theoretical Framework
Designing Inclusive Learning Environments
Evidence Informed Strategy
Policy Implementation
Cross-Curricular Skills
Conclusion
References
Chapter 4: Access4All: Policies and Practices of Social Development in Higher Education
Introduction
Inclusion in HE: The European Perspective
Comparing Data on Inclusion in Tertiary Education in Europe
Assessing Innovation and Inclusion in HEIs
Good Practices for Inclusion in HE
Promoting Inclusion Through Strategic Planning
Conclusions
References
Chapter 5: Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance: Peer-to-Peer Mentoring for Equity Group Students in an Australian Regional University
Introduction
The SCU Unimentor Program
History of Unimentor Scheme
Sustained Growth and Resistance: 2009–2013
Recent Challenges 2014–2018
Disciplinary Responses to the Program
Reflection
Insights – Horizons and Possibilities
Conclusion
References
Chapter 6: Using Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty to Facilitate Engaging Critical Consciousness
Introduction
Literature Review
Critical Consciousness and Learning Equity
Communities of Practice
Coaching and Mentoring
Background
Design/Methodology
Group Coaching and Mentoring Framework
Virtual Communities of Practice Community of Practice
Standardized Meetings
Group Coaching and Mentoring
Collaborative Tasks
Qualitative Data Analysis
Participant Survey
Findings
Faculty Director’s Perspective
Unstructured Participant Observations
Results from Individuals One-on-One Coaching Sessions
Post-Then-Pre-Survey Results
Conclusions
References
Chapter 7: Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals in Higher Education
Introduction
Faculty Leader in Faculty Leadering
Traditional Faculty Leadering
Non-Traditional Faculty Leadering
Afrocentric Faculty Leadering Models Grounded in Africentric Philosophy
Culturally Relevant Faculty Leadering
Social Challenges that May Affect Higher Education
Benefits and Weaknesses of Faculty Leadering
Weaknesses of Faculty Leadering
Conclusion
References
Chapter 8: The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model to Enhance the Transition, Retention, and Success of Disadvantaged Students in Higher Education
Introduction and Background
Mentorship Framework
Design Rationale
Program Outcomes
Primary Student Concerns
Program Effectiveness
Longer-term Impacts of the Mentorship Program
Discussion and Conclusions
Getting the Right Mentor
Flexibility is Key to Success
References
Chapter 9: A “Critical Factor”: Facilitating the Success of Students from Low Socioeconomic Status Backgrounds at Australian Regional Universities Through Technology
Introduction
Literature Review
Students Affected by Financial Disadvantage and Regionality
The Importance of Technology for Non-traditional Student Cohorts
The Study
Key Findings
Family Responsibilities
First in Family Influences
Finding 1: Technology Allowing Flexibility and Life Management
Finding 2: Connectedness Fostered by Technology
Challenges Related to Technology
The Enduring Value of Face-to-Face Learning
Conclusion
References
Chapter 10: A Strategy for Enhancing Academics’ Cultural Lens: The Knowing Your Students Report
Introduction
Method
Participants
Measures and Materials
Participants
KYS Report
Procedure
Results
Quantitative Findings
Qualitative Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Chapter 11: Innovations and Insights for Higher Education Aspiration and Outreach Programs
Introduction
Ahead – Innovations in HE Outreach
Defining the Equity Challenge
University Outreach and National Equity Outcomes
University Recruitment And Outreach Programs
University Outreach Programs – Insights and Considerations for Higher Education Leaders
Institutional Social and Corporate Responsibility
Human Capital: Aspiration as Competency
Institutional Communication for an Equity Audience
Conclusion
References
Chapter 12: A Collaborative Study Abroad Model: Inspiring Fiscally Underrepresented Students
Introduction
Course Development and Description
Course Details
Class Size and Composition
Planning and Implementation
Best Practices
Benefits and Challenges
Student Voices: A Qualitative Analysis of the Survey
Survey
Service Learning Experiences
Student Experiences
Student Learning
Inclusivity and Course Improvements: From a Student’s Perspective
Conclusion
References
Chapter 13: Improving Bridge Programs on American College and University Campuses
Introduction
Overview of Bridge Programs
Bridge Program Target Populations
Federal and State Programs
Campus-based Programs
Bridge Program Evaluation and Effectiveness
Integrating the DSDM: Implications for Practice
Conclusion
References
Chapter 14: Inclusiveness in the 21st Century: Glasgow Caledonian University’s Approach
Glasgow Caledonian University
Widening Access
University’s Approach
Policy Context: Glasgow Caledonian University
The Role of the Disability Service at Glasgow Caledonian University
Rationale for Supporting Students with Disabilities from Pre-Entry to Graduation
“Taking Responsibility for Your Own Learning” Years 1–5
Evaluation and Analysis
Outcomes
Discussion
Conclusion
Future Research
References
Chapter 15: Advocating Equity and Community Through Residential Learning Programs
Introduction
History of Learning Communities
Dynamic Student Development Metatheodel
Relative Theory to Learning Communities
Considerations of Diversity and Inclusion
Framing of Diversity Through the DSDM
Conclusion
References
Chapter 16: Ensuring Equity and Inclusion in Higher Education Provision: Ghana’s Approach
Introduction
Country Profile
Higher Education Portrait
International Conventions
National Initiatives
The Constitution of Ghana
The Disability Act 2006, Act 715
The National Accreditation Board Act 2007, Act 744
Higher Education Reforms
Privatization of Higher Education
Student Loan Trust
The Disability Common Fund
Member of Parliament’s Share of DACF
Institutional Initiatives
Satellite Campuses
Affirmative Actions
Conclusion
References
Chapter 17: Innovative Strategies for Creating Inclusive Spaces for Hearing-Impaired and Visually Impaired Students in an Open Distance And e-Learning (ODeL) Environment: A Case Study of the University of South Africa (Unisa)
Inclusive Higher Education in South Africa Post-Apartheid
Students with Disabilities in South African Higher Education
Legislative Framework for Inclusion of Persons of Disabilities in Higher Education
The Role of Distance Learning in Higher Education: A Case of Unisa
Obstacles that Students with Hearing and Visual Impairment Face in an ODeL Context
Students with Disabilities at Unisa
Advocacy and Resource Centre for Students with Disabilities
Ethical Issues
Conclusions, Recommendations, and Future Studies
References
About the Authors
Name Index
Subject Index

Citation preview

STRATEGIES FOR FACILITATING INCLUSIVE CAMPUSES IN HIGHER EDUCATION

INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER EDUCATION TEACHING AND LEARNING Series Editor: Patrick Blessinger Recent Volumes: Volume 1: Inquiry-based Learning for Faculty and Institutional Development: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and John M. Carfora Volume 2: Inquiry-Based Learning for the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and John M. Carfora Volume 3: Inquiry-Based Learning for Multidisciplinary Programs: A Concept­ ual and Practical Resource for Educators – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and John M. Carfora Volume 4: Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (Stem) Programs: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and John M. Carfora Volume 5:  University Partnerships for Community and School System Development – Edited by Barbara Cozza and Patrick Blessinger Volume 6:  Emerging Directions in Doctoral Education – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and Denise Stockley Volume 7:  University Partnerships for Academic Programs and Professional Development – Edited by Patrick Blessinger and Barbara Cozza Volume 8: University Partnerships for International Development Volume 9: Engaging Dissonance Volume 10: University Partnerships for Pre-service and Teacher Development Volume 11:  Refugee Education: Integration and Acceptance of Refugees in Mainstream Society – Edited by Enakshi Sengupta and Patrick Blessinger Volume 12:  Contexts for Diversity and Gender Identities in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion – Edited by Jaimie Hoffman, Patrick Blessinger and Mandla Makhanya Volume 13: Strategies, Policies, and Directions for Refugee Education – Edited by Enakshi Sengupta and Patrick Blessinger Volume 14: Perspectives on Diverse Student Identities in Higher Education – Edited by Patrick Blessinger Volume 15: Language, Teaching and Pedagogy for Refugee Education – Edited by Enakshi Sengupta and Patrick Blessinger Volume 16: Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Classrooms in Higher Education – Edited by Jaimie Hoffman, Patrick Blessinger and Mandla Makhanya

INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER EDUCATION TEACHING AND LEARNING  VOLUME 17

STRATEGIES FOR FACILITATING INCLUSIVE CAMPUSES IN HIGHER EDUCATION: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON EQUITY AND INCLUSION EDITED BY

JAIMIE HOFFMAN

University of Wisconsin La Crosse, USA Noodle Partners, USA

PATRICK BLESSINGER

International HETL Association, USA St. John’s University, USA

MANDLA MAKHANYA

University of South Africa, South Africa Created in partnership with the International Higher Education Teaching and Learning Association

https://www.hetl.org/

United Kingdom – North America – Japan India – Malaysia – China

Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2019 Copyright © 2019 Emerald Publishing Limited Reprints and permissions service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-78756-065-9 (Print) ISBN: 978-1-78756-064-2 (Online) ISBN: 978-1-78756-066-6 (Epub) ISSN: 2055-3641 (Series)

CONTENTS List of Contributors

ix

Series Editor’s Introduction

xiii

PART I CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education Enakshi Sengupta, Patrick Blessinger, Jaimie Hoffman and Mandla Makhanya

3

PART II GLOBAL PRACTICES AND CHALLENGES Chapter 1  Removing the Rose Colored Glasses of Exclusivity Caterina Valentino

17

Chapter 2  Authentic Caring: An Australian Experience Joshua Spier

31

Chapter 3  High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations: Evidence-based Strategies in Higher Education Katelyn Romsa, Bryan Romsa, Kevin Sackreiter, Jana M. Hanson, Mary Kay Helling and Heidi Adele Sackreiter

41

Chapter 4  Access4All: Policies and Practices of Social Development in Higher Education David Rodríguez-Gómez, Joaquín Gairín, Fabio Dovigo, Kati Clements, Miguel Jerónimo, Lisa Lucas, Elena Marin, Saana Mehtälä, Fernanda Paula Pinheiro, Sue Timmis and Mihaela Stîngu

55

v

vi Contents

Chapter 5  Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance: Peer-to-Peer Mentoring for Equity Group Students in an Australian Regional University Bill (W.E.) Boyd, Katrina Alexander, Margie Wallin, Warren Lake, Rob Cumings and Rachel Callahan

71

Chapter 6  Using Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty to Facilitate Engaging Critical Consciousness Valencia Gabay, Shannon Voyles, Linda Algozzini and Grady Batchelor

87

Chapter 7  Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals in Higher Education Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu

103

Chapter 8  The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model to Enhance the Transition, Retention, and Success of Disadvantaged Students in Higher Education Gerry M. Rayner and Juliey Beckman

117

Chapter 9  A “Critical Factor”: Facilitating the Success of Students from Low Socioeconomic Status Backgrounds at Australian Regional Universities Through Technology Marcia Devlin and Jade Mckay

131

Chapter 10  A Strategy for Enhancing Academics’ Cultural Lens: The Knowing Your Students Report Meloni M. Muir, Helen Drury, Garth Tarr and Fiona White

145

Chapter 11  Innovations and Insights for Higher Education Aspiration and Outreach Programs Charles Flodin and Nicole Vidovich

163

Chapter 12  A Collaborative Study Abroad Model: Inspiring Fiscally Underrepresented Students Hellen Gerolymatos McDonald, Michelle Asbill, Tara L. Powell, Stacy Billman, Sebnem Ozkan and Sherrie Faulkner

179

Chapter 13  Improving Bridge Programs on American College and University Campuses Pietro Sasso, Roger “Mitch” Nasser, Jr and Shelley Price-Williams

197

Contents

vii

Chapter 14  Inclusiveness in the 21st Century: Glasgow Caledonian University’s Approach Angela Shapiro, Joanna Marshall Bhullar and Margaret McShane

209

Chapter 15  Advocating Equity and Community Through Residential Learning Programs Shelley Price-Williams, Pietro Sasso and Roger “Mitch” Nasser, Jr

223

Chapter 16  Ensuring Equity and Inclusion in Higher Education Provision: Ghana’s Approach Patrick Swanzy, Patrício V. Langa, and Francis Ansah

237

Chapter 17  Innovative Strategies for Creating Inclusive Spaces for Hearing-impaired and Visually Impaired Students in an Open Distance and e-Learning (ODeL) Environment: A Case Study of the University of South Africa (Unisa) Ashiya Abdool Satar

253

About the Authors 

269

Name Index

285

Subject Index

297

This page intentionally left blank

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS Ashiya Abdool Satar

University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

Katrina Alexander

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Linda Algozzini

Educational Consultant, Kansas City, MO, USA

Francis Ansah

University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana

Michelle Asbill

Azusa Pacific University, CA, USA

Grady Batchelor

American Public University System, Charles Town, WV, USA

Juliey Beckman

Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

Joanna Marshall Bhullar

Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland

Stacy Billman

Illinois Abroad and Global Exchange, IL, USA

Patrick Blessinger

St. John’s University and International HETL Association, New York, NY, USA

Bill (W.E.) Boyd

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Rachel Callahan

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Kati Clements

University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

Rob Cumings

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Marcia Devlin

Victoria University, Victoria, Australia

Fabio Dovigo

Aarhus University, Copenhagen, Denmark

Helen Drury

University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Sherrie Faulkner

University of Illinois, IL, USA ix

x

List of Contributors

Charles Flodin

Curtin University, Western Australia, Australia

Valencia Gabay

Educational Consultant, Orlando, FL, USA

Joaquín Gairín

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Jana M. Hanson

South Dakota State University, SD, USA

Mary Kay Helling

South Dakota State University, SD, USA

Jaimie Hoffman

Ventura, CA, USA

Miguel Jerónimo

Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal

Warren Lake

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Patricio V. Langa

University of the Western Cape, South Africa and Eduardo Mondlane University, Maputo, Mozambique

Lisa Lucas

University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu

University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

Mandla Makhanya

University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

Elena Marin

University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

Hellen Gerolymatos McDonald

University of Illinois, IL, USA

Jade McKay

Deakin University, Victoria, Australia

Margaret McShane

Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland

Saana Mehtälä

University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

Meloni M. Muir

University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Roger “Mitch” Nasser, Jr.

Lindenwood University, MO, USA

Sebnem Ozkan

University of Illinois, IL, USA

Fernanda Paula Pinheiro

Polytechnic of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal

Tara L. Powell

University of Illinois, IL, USA

Shelley Price-Williams

Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, IL, USA

Gerry M. Rayner

Monash University, Victoria, Australia

David Rodríguez-Gómez

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

xi

List of Contributors

Bryan Romsa

South Dakota State University, SD, USA

Katelyn Romsa

South Dakota State University, SD, USA

Heidi Adele Sackreiter

Augustana University, Sioux Falls, SD, USA

Kevin Sackreiter

South Dakota State University, SD, USA

Pietro Sasso

Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, IL, USA

Enakshi Sengupta

International HETL Association, New York, NY, USA

Angela Shapiro

Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland

Joshua Spier

Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia

Mihaela Stîngu

University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

Patrick Swanzy

University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa

Garth Tarr

University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Sue Timmis

University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

Caterina Valentino

Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada and Athabasca University, Alberta, Canada

Nicole Vidovich

Curtin University, Western Australia, Australia

Shannon Voyles

American Public University System, Salem, IN, USA

Margie Wallin

Southern Cross University, New South Wales, Australia

Fiona White

University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

This page intentionally left blank

SERIES EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER EDUCATION TEACHING AND LEARNING The purpose of this series is to publish current research and scholarship on innovative teaching and learning practices in higher education. The series is developed around the premise that teaching and learning is more effective when instructors and students are actively and meaningfully engaged in the teaching– learning process. The main objectives of this series are to: (1) present how innovative teaching and learning practices are being used in higher education institutions around the world across a wide variety of disciplines and countries; (2) present the latest models, theories, concepts, paradigms, and frameworks that educators should consider when adopting, implementing, assessing, and evaluating innovative teaching and learning practices; and (3) consider the implications of theory and practice on policy, strategy, and leadership. This series will appeal to anyone in higher education who is involved in the teaching and learning process from any discipline, institutional type, or nationality. The volumes in this series will focus on a variety of authentic case studies and other empirical research that illustrates how educators from around the world are using innovative approaches to create more effective and meaningful learning environments. Innovation teaching and learning is any approach, strategy, method, practice, or means that has been shown to improve, enhance, or transform the teaching– learning environment. Innovation involves doing things differently or in a novel way in order to improve outcomes. In short, innovation is a positive change. With respect to teaching and learning, innovation is the implementation of new or improved educational practices that result in improved educational and learning outcomes. This innovation can be any positive change related to teaching, curriculum, assessment, technology, or other tools, programs, policies, or processes that leads to improved educational and learning outcomes. Innovation can occur in institutional development, program development, professional development, or learning development. The volumes in this series will not only highlight the benefits and theoretical frameworks of such innovations through authentic case studies and other empirical research but also look at the challenges and contexts associated with implementing and assessing innovative teaching and learning practices. The volumes xiii

xiv

Series Editor’s Introduction

represent all disciplines from a wide range of national, cultural and organizational contexts. The volumes in this series will explore a wide variety of teaching and learning topics such as active learning, integrative learning, transformative learning, inquiry-based learning, problem-based learning, meaningful learning, blended learning, creative learning, experiential learning, lifelong and lifewide learning, global learning, learning assessment and analytics, student research, faculty and student learning communities, as well as other topics. This series brings together distinguished scholars and educational practitioners from around the world to disseminate the latest knowledge on innovative teaching and learning scholarship and practices. The authors offer a range of disciplinary perspectives from different cultural contexts. This series provides a unique and valuable resource for instructors, administrators, and anyone interested in improving and transforming teaching and learning. Patrick Blessinger Founder, Executive Director, and Chief Research Scientist, International HETL Association

PART I CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES

This page intentionally left blank

INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIES FOR FOSTERING INCLUSIVE CAMPUSES IN HIGHER EDUCATION Enakshi Sengupta, Patrick Blessinger, Jaimie Hoffman and Mandla Makhanya

ABSTRACT The chapters in this book focus on student experiences in higher education (HE) and how these experiences shape their future as contributors to the knowledge economy, which is being gradually replaced by natural resources. The chapter authors in this volumes stress on the value of mentorship program with a focus toward mentoring those who are neglected and underprivileged. Programs that help students with visual or audio impairment has been discussed along with bridge programs, which might help in imparting an inclusive and equitable HE with accessibility to all. Case studies from Ghana to South Africa, Glasgow, and Australia are discussed to increase motivation and willingness among educators and students to apply new skills and foster new teaching experiences that can help shape effective learning outcomes for students. Keywords: Social inclusion; transformation; multiculturalism; social mobility; inequality; diversity; educational access

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this chapter is to develop a more coherent understanding for fostering more inclusive and equitable campus environments in higher education (HE).

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 3–14 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017001

3

4

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

As demand for HE increases and as lifelong learning becomes more pervasive in society, educators continue to respond to the needs of a more diverse student population, and educators continue to seek effective ways to create more inclusive campus environments. As such, institutional transformation with the concept of inclusiveness is a current trend in HE. The concept of inclusion has grown and now occupies a critical position in the realms of HE. Inclusion urges and advocates those who are responsible for leading students, at both the classroom level and the campus-wide level, to create inclusive spaces that include those who are categorized as exceptional or different (Sengupta, 2017). In addition, Fraser and Shield (2010 p. 7) noted that “Many current practices in education persist because of long held and unquestioned assumptions about the nature of schooling and the respective roles of educators and students.” These assumptions have resulted from stereotyping and beliefs held by society. The increasing diversity which is becoming a reality in today’s education system is creating opportunities as well as challenges for instructional leaders across postsecondary and higher educational institutions. The concept of inclusiveness cannot be restricted to academic debates but a growing need to educate students in an environment that reflects the diversity of their society. The inclusive campus should reflect the global society in which tomorrow’s college graduates will be living and working. The concept of integration and multiculturalism is therefore considered paramount. Academic research conducted in this field supports the idea that a diverse campus environment is necessary to equip students to be successful in the twenty-first century and beyond (Milem, Chang, & Antonio, 2005). The challenge remains as to how one can design and implement diversity initiatives, policies, programs, and practices in institutions of HE so that students receive the necessary support. The process is not yet set in stone and is unique to every situation or campus and thus remains an intriguing question that researchers, educators, and policymakers are currently trying to answer. In today’s institutions of higher learning, diversity is not a botheration but an opportunity that is considered as a transformative tool that can contribute to the betterment of society. However, institutionalizing diversity and inclusive campus is not an ad hoc activity bolted on the institution, but should be viewed as an ongoing process rather than a single action or outcome (Milem et al., 2005). To create an inclusive campus one must secure the buy-in of all institutional stakeholders. Certain institutions have moved ahead in their diversity efforts than others, and their process has neither been linear nor uniform across institutions (Aguirre & Martinez, 2003). In other institutions of HE, minority students still remain under­ represented, unsupported, and unsuccessful (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Milem et al., 2005). In addition, diversity is not limited to the student population alone. For instance, nearly 83% of lecturers in public HE institutions in the United States are white (Turner, González, & Wood, 2008). True diversity involves an institutionwide focus that considers inclusiveness among students, faculty, administrators, and staff (Chen 2017). An institution can truly claim to be a world leader in HE when it is able to meet the projected workforce demands of the knowledge

Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education

5

economy, and their student body reflects and is representative of the society or community it serves. To meet such a demand of the growing economy one has no alternative but to ensure equitable educational access for an increasingly diverse population. It becomes the responsibility of institutions of HE to play a critical role in this effort of creating an inclusive campus by strengthening the focus on promoting HE access for the underrepresented populations, and fostering inclusion initiatives on college campuses. An institution of HE is designed to benefit students of all backgrounds and there are likely to be distinct economic benefits for students from traditionally underserved and underrepresented populations. In an era of social inequality and discrimination a college degree remains a powerful vehicle for upward economic and social mobility.

LITERATURE REVIEW Academics have been trying to meaningfully engage with diversity benefits of students educationally, yet we are still a long way off to create a comprehensive framework for excellence that will enable educational institutions to incorporate diversity at its core. A new body of knowledge that has been generated by researchers on how to help diverse and differentially able students succeed has not resulted in creating a widespread change across HE. Diversity and inclusion are yet to become a focus at any level in “quality improvement” efforts. As a result, the efforts of educational leaders seem to remain fragmented. This disconnect serves students very poorly and affects the long term benefit of educational outcomes.

DEFINITIONS In an institution of HE all stakeholders are affected and are profoundly impacted by experiences of inclusion or exclusion. The concept of an inclusive campus touches the lives of the student community, staff, and faculty recruitment. It also influences the learning, curriculum, innovation, retention, success, and satisfaction of its stakeholders. Diversity is an all-encompassing term that includes social identities such as race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexuality, and disability. Apart from these common examples it also includes parental status, educational background, religion, socio-economic status, geographic region, military affiliation, marital status, genetic information, citizenship status, and much more (Chapman University, Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan 2016). Inclusion is a state and an experience that is nurtured with a sense of connection, care, and trust, facilitating a state of open communication and fairness, creating self-awareness about intrapersonal perceptions of belonging and overall integrating the entire community into a holistic manner. Diversity consultant Dr Jaye Goosby-Smith (2016) uses the metaphor of a garden to explain the distinction between diversity and inclusion in a straightforward manner. Diversity, as described by Goosby-Smith, is characterized by

6

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

the different types of plants that grow in the garden consisting of a wide array of flowers and vegetation which in its totality creates a beautiful garden. Inclusion, on the other hand, can be thought of as the soil, climate, and conditions into which the vegetation is planted with the intention that it will blossom into full bloom. To thrive and become bountiful, we know that some plants need full sun, while others need more shade. Some may need large amounts of water, while others are drought tolerant and some need varying amounts of soil nutrients to thrive. The requirement of every plant differs but collectively all of them make the garden beautiful. Similarly in an organization, individuals must be supported by organization culture and behavior, nurtured with a sense of collegiality, a feeling of being valued, welcomed, and connected. Equity is a state of being in the garden when all plants have a fair chance to thrive as do the various diverse stakeholders of an institution. Diversity and inclusion within human, organization systems are complex and may be difficult to comprehend. Hence, complex and strategic approaches are needed to create an inclusive campus climate and to meet the diversity and inclusion goals in an institution of HE (GoosbySmith, 2016). Diversity in higher educational institutions is often guided by clear standards and policies, that define the roles of the HE institution and helps in creating an ideal relationship between HE and diverse communities. Chen (2017) has advocated three standards that should be considered in relation to diversity, which are as follows: (a) developing trust and engaging individual culture both among student and faculty members, (b) developing new admissions and hiring policies which are inclusive in nature, and (c) introducing diversity into the university through a systemic 360° approach. Developing trust among the stakeholders and creating an engaging individual culture helps in restoring the integrity of nonmainstream populations, but this is by no means an easy task and there are challenges in this field considering the lack of diversity and inclusive policies in colleges and universities around the world.

CHALLENGES While a garden of diverse range of flora and fauna is beautiful for a beholder it is fraught with considerable challenges that must be addressed and overcome. Some of the common challenges of diversity may include women and minority faculty members who are less satisfied with many aspects of their jobs. A number of studies in this field have revealed that women and minority faculty members are often discriminated leading to a decreased level of satisfaction with many aspects of their jobs than their majority male counterparts. Discrimination is often felt by the women members in the areas of teaching, and committee assignments, involvement in decision- making, professional relations with colleagues, promotion and tenure, and overall job satisfaction (Astin & Cress, 2003). Students and even faculty of color can experience exclusion, isolation, alienation, and racism in a university that lacks policies of social inclusion and diversity. Women students also experience what is known as a “chilly climate.”

Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education

7

Women students, particularly when they are minorities in their classes, may experience sexist use of language; presentation of stereotypic and disparaging views of women; differential treatment and even border toward sexual harassment (Foster 1994). Positive experiences increase comfort between groups and help build an atmosphere of bonding. Studies show that the lack of previous positive experiences with “outgroup members” (minorities) causes “in group members” (majority members) to feel anxious about interactions with minorities, which often poses hazardous effect to one’s mental and physical health. This anxiety can cause majority members to respond with hostility or to simply avoid interactions with minorities (Plant & Devine, 2003).

SUMMARY In spite of the problems of inclusion and diversity being mammoth in nature, academics and institutions have often resorted to shotgun approach to assess the effect of diversity on student’s academic performance and outcome. Institutional leaders often fail to lead their institutions from a mono-cultural ambiance to that of a multi-cultural one. They need to move from a standardized method of operation to one that is more sensitive in nature catering to diverse needs. They need to tear away from the single determination of diversity needs to multiple avenues of exploring the benefits that lie in creating an inclusive campus.

CHAPTER OVERVIEWS In “Removing the Rose Colored Glasses of Exclusivity” by Caterina Valentino, the author states that the aim of this chapter is to examine the degree to which mandated inclusion and diversity initiatives in HE have accomplished the goal of creating a more diverse workplace and student body compositions. The author argues that in attempting to achieve diversity targets, interpersonal conflict has increased between majority and minority groups. It is within this context that this chapter explores potential benefits that instructors may receive from professional development focused on diversity and inclusion. More specifically, this chapter examines social identity conflict that is produced when diversity increases. Finally, the author discussed the role of educators as moral leaders in and out of the classroom and the need for educators to develop inclusive classrooms, where diversity is not just tolerated but celebrated. In “Authentic Caring: An Australian Experience” by Joshua Spier, the author discusses Heidegger’s concept of caring-for-others and what it means to care authentically for young students who struggle to engage in the learning process. This chapter focuses on Heidegger’s concept of care which is expressed as human action rather than just understood as an emotive or cognitive state. From a Heidegger perspective, the author discusses how humans care for others in variable ways, distinguishing between inauthentic and authentic modes of caring. Building on this concept of care, the author builds on this binary analysis and

8

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

discusses how authentic caring is based on students leaping ahead of themselves, toward their own future self. In “High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations: Evidence-based Strategies in Higher Education” by Katelyn Romsa, Bryan Romsa, Kevin Sackreiter, Jana M. Hanson, Mary Kay Helling, and Heidi Adele Sackreiter, the authors discuss how inclusive learning in HE is essential for all learners. The authors argue that few theory-to-practice models exist that actually explain how to achieve this goal. To this end, the authors discuss how faculty and administrators from a public university in the United States are addressing the challenges associated with implanting inclusion at their university. The author explains how the main element of the inclusion model used by that university consisted of a campus-wide inclusion policy across all departments and disciplines. The policy was created collaboratively by all stakeholders with the aim to integrate universal inclusive learning throughout the entire institution. The goal of the policy is to equip students with broad knowledge, higher order thinking skills, and real-world experiences needed in a highly diverse global knowledge society. In “Access4All: Policies and Practices of Social Development in Higher Education” by David Rodríguez-Gómez, Joaquín Gairín, Fabio Dovigo, Kati Clements, Miguel Jerónimo, Lisa Lucas, Elena Marin, Saana Mehtälä, Fernanda Paula Pinheiro, Sue Timmis, and Mihaela Stîngu, the authors discuss how HE in Europe are an essential component in fostering economic growth since the Bologna Declaration in 1999, the aim of which was to widen participation in HE by creating the European Higher Education Area. The declaration attempts, among other goals, to reduce the inequalities in education and training due to geography and ethnicity. Widening access opportunities is essential to expanding inclusion and reducing exclusion, especially for underrepresented groups. The authors discuss inclusion policies and practices in European HE and discuss a strategic planning model for promoting inclusion in HE. In “Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance: Peer-toPeer Mentoring for Equity Group Students in an Australian Regional University” by Bill (W.E.) Boyd, Katrina Alexander, Margie Wallin, Warren Lake, Rob Cumings, and Rachel Callahan, the authors examine an undergraduate peer-topeer mentoring program, UniMentor, at a regional Australian university. The aim of the program is to support students in equity groups and the authors discuss benefits of the program such as increased student retention, increased academic achievement, and fostering of student social capital. The authors discuss internal and external factors that may impact access to student mentoring such as institutional support and curricular change. The authors also discuss how training and support networks can enhance the mentoring experience. The authors discuss how the program compares favorably with published frameworks of student mentoring. In “Using Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty to Facilitate Engaging Critical Consciousness” by Valencia Gabay, Shannon Voyles, Linda Algozzini, and Grady Batchelor, the authors have explored the usage of virtual communities of practice to help group coach and mentor educators and facilitate engaging critical consciousness. This chapter is based on group coaching

Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education

9

and mentoring framework in which the core elements of coaching, mentoring, metacognition, and self-regulated learning strategies were used to judge and determine the outcome of the practice. These core elements were applied in order to generate self-awareness, reflective thinking, planning for action, and accountability, which in turn will help facilitate development of critical consciousness. Evidence in the past has revealed that fostering critical consciousness creates spaces to address learning equity and gaps in educational achievement. This chapter would help guide educational leaders to implement group coaching with the aim to raise the educator’s higher order thinking, plan, problem solve, and co-create. As pointed out by the authors, the effective use of this design resulted in increased motivation and willingness among educators to apply new skills. This also helped in fostering new teaching experiences that shaped learning outcomes for their students. In “Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals in Higher Education” by Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu, speaks about Afrocentric mentoring models of individuals in HE. The author explores mentoring and its influence upon followers and how one can achieve its objectives. Issues of race, social class, disability, gender, sexual orientation, age, and geographic location influences faculty and leader faculty leadering. An extensive review of literature was used to investigate the phenomenon of faculty leadering from a cross-cultural perspective. Leadering relationships within the field of education and Afrocentric faculty leadering models were explored. Afrocentric philosophy, indigenous wisdoms, and also the cultural traditions were used along with sentiments of African people and their heritage which became a foundation toward a nuanced explanation of culturally relevant faculty leadering within the faculties of education. Examples were cited of faculty leaders whose professional behaviors and actions help in assisting staff in professional socialization in HE. Racism and other forms of oppression often experienced by colored people other marginalized youth in society’s causes many to develop fatalistic attitudes about themselves affecting their education and their future. African-centered faculty leadering models rooted within philosophies, cultures, and principles helps to apply theories to praxis, unique locally, and globally. The chapter titled “The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model to Enhance the Transition, Retention, and Success of Disadvantaged Students in Higher Education” by Gerry M. Rayner and Juliey Beckman, the authors advocates widening participation and the need for programs that will help in student’s transition and retention. The need for retention has prompted the value of mentorship in Australian universities which has resulted in the introduction of peer mentoring programs for students in many institutions. Mentorship, as highlighted in various literature, can take many different forms. This chapter describes a model of academic (faculty) mentorship for commencing science students belonging to a range of defined disadvantaged groups. The program was initially funded by an internal grant, with voluntary participation by eligible students. At the end of the first semester, the program was successful where participants overwhelmingly endorsed the program claiming it has resulted in their transition experience and have even improved their prospects for academic progress and retention.

10

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

Despite the challenge of reduced funding, the program was retained over two subsequent years inculcating slight modifications on student’s feedback and assessment, keeping its most effective elements. The success of this academic mentorship program demonstrates the usefulness and its potential value in the university retention and success of disadvantaged students. The chapter on “A ‘Critical Factor’: Facilitating the Success of Students from Low Socioeconomic Status Backgrounds at Australian Regional Universities through Technology,” by Marcia Devlin and Jade McKay, highlights the findings from an Australian study exploring how effectively the success of students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds can be implemented who are studying at regional universities. Interviews were conducted with 69 successful participants from low SES backgrounds, and 26 stakeholders who were involved in supporting these students. The study was carried out across six regional universities. This chapter focuses on a particular key finding which emerged from the study that is the criticality of technology helping in success of these particular equity group students. The use of technology enables flexibility and facilitates connectedness for students are found to be research-based strategies for improving practice within universities. In “A Strategy for Enhancing Academics’ Cultural Lens: The Knowing Your Students Report” by Meloni M. Muir, Helen Drury, Garth Tarr, and Fiona White, the authors conduct a study on how academics in two faculties (Business and Science) in a research-focused university use information about student diversity to modify their teaching. Ninety-nine Science academics were asked to complete an online survey to examine their knowledge of their student cohort’s demographic, cultural, language, and educational backgrounds at the beginning of the semester. Post which these academics were given a concise two-page, coursespecific document, Knowing Your Students (KYS) report, summarizing aspects of their students’ diversity. At the end of the semester, 44 of the same staff were now asked to complete a second survey with open-ended questions regarding how effectively they could use the report information in their teaching and curriculum design. The report was new for the Science department while Business academics had received the reports for three years. To conduct a cross-departmental study Science with Business, Business academics also completed the second survey. Academics across both faculties exhibited a very positive response to the reports and engaged with the information provided. The finding of the report to Science academics brought their self-assessed knowledge of their student cohort’s diversity to a level comparable with that of Business. This chapter highlights the KYS reports improved academics’ knowledge of student diversity, and challenged them to respond with suitable curriculum and pedagogical changes. In “Innovations and Insights for Higher Education Aspiration and Outreach Programs” by Charles Flodin and Nicole Vidovich, the authors describe the Addressing Higher Education Access Disadvantage (AHEAD) Program. This chapter shows how outreach programs help in national equity targets, university social responsibility practices, and university recruitment targets. This chapter describes innovations in tertiary outreach and establishes its relationship to the student recruitment chain. The program presents to HE leaders the approaches

Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education

11

to enable an equity outreach program at an institutional level and enlists the benefits of authentic university-based outreach initiatives. This chapter draws from the findings of the AHEAD Program since inception in 2014, and the data relating to student impact and university first preference scores from the Tertiary Institute Service Centre database. The data help to demonstrate the Program’s effectiveness in developing student aspirations for HE. The available data help in establishing the creation of place-specific aspiration and learning experiences within the program which has resulted in a recruitment advantage for the host institution. This chapter presents the position that institution-specific affinity and natural transition pathways engage with low SES communities with an aim to help solve specific demographic challenges. In “A Collaborative Study Abroad Model: Inspiring Fiscally Underrepresented Students” by Hellen Gerolymatos McDonald, Michelle Asbill, Tara L. Powell, Stacy Billman, Sebnem Ozkan, and Sherrie Faulkner, the authors present a study abroad course, where up to 15 students complete domestic service learning, post which they apply for a social work perspective on the global refugee crisis. This chapter highlights the importance of obtaining external funding to support students financially, the significance of how a university-wide collaboration helps, and ways to include larger numbers of culturally diverse and fiscally under­ represented students in the program. Feedback from survey participants suggests that offering of subsidies and funds to support scholarships would improve accessibility for fiscally underrepresented students. In “Improving Bridge Programs on American College and University Campuses” by Pietro Sasso, Roger “Mitch” Nasser, Jr, and Shelley Price-Williams, the use of a bridge program to help institutionalize interventions and provide equitable educational opportunities for low-income, first-generation, and disadvantaged traditional undergraduate students is discussed (Gullatt & Jan, 2003). The bridge programs are Pre-College Transition Programs that help to facilitate college access and readiness. This chapter discusses the role of bridge programs at American colleges and universities, and the recommends integration of the Dynamic Student Development Metatheodel (DSDM) as student success model (Frederick, Sasso, & Barratt, 2015). This chapter explores the typology of bridge programs at the federal, state, and campus levels, and highlights the target populations of these programs. Evaluation and outcomes regarding the efficacy of these programs are also discussed in depth. Implications and considerations for practice are provided from the DSDM program to help develop the bridge programs to enhance student growth. The chapter titled “Inclusiveness in the 21st Century: Glasgow Caledonian University’s Approach” by Angela Shapiro, Joanna Marshall Bhullar, and Margaret McShane speak about Glasgow Caledonian University in Scotland which has delivered pre-entry study skills programs since 2011. The program is tailor-made to suit the needs of students with disabilities prior to commencing their studies at university. Unfortunately following changes in the organizational structure made this program ceased to exist. Two staff members on their own initiative decided to collaborate on delivering a new customized program that would contextualize the type of support required by students with disabilities.

12

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

The study skill program as designed to: increase confidence, engage with support services before the starting of the program of study, encourage students to access support as early as possible, and provide useful advice on a range of topics specifically designed to meet their needs. This chapter presents a small-scale study that investigated whether a correlation could be drawn between pre-entry support and increased confidence. The feedback from attendees at the study skills’ workshops has been positive, yet the impact of this type of support is difficult to quantify. The reason being the small number of participants and the plethora of student support initiatives at the institution. However, the qualitative outcomes indicate that the program has helped to integrate the students successfully into their degree studies. In “Advocating Equity and Community through Residential Learning Programs” by Shelley Price-Williams, Pietro Sasso, and Roger “Mitch” Nasser, Jr, the authors begin with the discussion of the origin of the learning community, in HE in the United States which was initiated over a century ago. In contemporary HE, living-learning communities have become a key path to foster student development, engagement, and success as well to advance key tenets of diversity and inclusion. In this chapter, a historical narrative of the learning community is provided, in addition to a discussion of relative student development theory. This chapter ends with a positioning of diversity and inclusion as central to this educational intervention and frames along with the utility of this student engagement model within the DSDM, a modern theory of student success and development. In “Ensuring Equity and Inclusion in Higher Education Provision: Ghana’s Approach” by Patrick Swanzy, Patrício V. Langa, and Francis Ansah, the authors argue that the current economic stage of the world is that of a knowledge economy. The argument prompts a shift from natural resources to a new paradigm where the production and use of knowledge are paramount. Countries all over the world are engaged in full participation of the knowledge economy by providing opportunities for equitable access in HE with an aim to provide advanced knowledge to all citizens. Ghana is also striving hard to achieve equitable HE and use it as the agency for spearheading its full participation in the global knowledge economy. Ghana’s approach to equitable HE, which is discussed in this chapter, has so far not been synthesized and shared with the scholarly community. This chapter analyzes and synthesizes the various initiatives Ghana has undertaken to promote equitable HE, draws attention to the lacunae found between rhetoric and realities, and makes recommendations for improvements in the initiatives. In “Innovative Strategies for Creating Inclusive Spaces for Hearing-Impaired and Visually Impaired Students in an Open Distance and e-Learning (ODeL) Environment: A Case Study of the University of South Africa (Unisa)” by Ashiya Abdool Satar, the author highlights a case study of the University of South Africa (Unisa), an Open Distance and e-Learning (ODeL) institution. The case study describes the innovative strategies the university adopts to create inclusive learning spaces for students with hearing and visual disabilities and impairments in an ODeL environment. In doing so, this chapter initially discusses the obstacles that students with hearing and visual disabilities and

Introduction to Strategies for Fostering Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education

13

impairments face in the HE sector in South Africa in general, and then goes to examine the challenges these students face within a distance-learning context, with particular reference to the post-apartheid era. Subsequently, the discussion steers toward the specific context of Unisa and the approaches embraced by its Advocacy and Resource Centre for Students with Disabilities to create an inclusive learning environment for these students. A close examination of the various sound and audio formats, as well as support services for documents in Braille, are explored for students with visual impediments. This chapter further highlights the support systems, such as sign language interpretation, among other support structures, for students with hearing difficulties. This chapter concludes with a discussion of the ethical issues associated with the use of assistive devices and other support structures for these students and recommends further exploration of this field of study.

CONCLUSION As mentioned previously, and as these chapters illustrate, creating a more inclusive and equitable campus environment implies that positive changes are needed. The struggle and problems brought about by racial segregation, prejudice, and discrimination is a constant reality that plagues the existing higher educational institutions. It has become imperative that college and university leaders start addressing these problems without further delay. Academic institutions are created with the aim that they are supposed to help learners achieve their goals and objectives in education and career development. The racial climate in learning environments affects student performance and the practice of educators, college, and university leaders must be capable enough to consistently implement diversity efforts in all areas of their practice and throughout their institutions. These areas may include the recruitment, hiring, and retention of faculty of color and the admission of a diverse student population. The effort toward diversification must be consistent throughout all aspects of the academe, it should begin from the institution’s philosophy to its mission statement, vision, policies, and standards and percolate to its everyday practice and operational efforts. In summary, it is the totality of a student’s learning experiences and their interactions with others that help to shape their identity.

REFERENCES Aguirre, A., & Martinez, J. R. (2003). The diversity rationale in higher education: An overview of the contemporary legal context. Social Justice, 30(1), 138–152. Astin, H. S., & Cress, C. M. (2003). A national profile of academic women in research universities. In L. S. Hornig (Ed.), Equal rites, unequal outcome: Women in American research universities (pp. 53–88). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Chen, A. (2017). Addressing diversity on college campuses: Changing expectations and practices in instructional leadership. West Hartford, CT: University of Hartford. doi:10.5539/hes.v7n2p17 Foster, T. J. (1994). An empirical test of hall and Sandler’s 1982 report: Who finds the classroom climate chilly? ERIC. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED373368

14

ENAKSHI SENGUPTA ET AL.

Fraser, D., & Shields, C. M. (2010). Leaders’ roles in disrupting dominant discourses and promoting inclusion, in leadership for inclusion a practical guide. Leadership for inclusion: A practical guide. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Frederick, M, Sasso, P. A, & Barratt, W. R. (2015). Towards a Relationship-Centred Approach in Higher Education: The Dynamic Student Development Metatheodel (DSDM). New York Journal of Student Affairs, 15(2). Goosby-Smith, J. (2016). Equity, diversity, inclusion and diversifying search committee yield. Orange, CA: Chapman University. Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, H. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 120, 7–24. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1002/ss.254 Milem, F., Chang, M. J., & Antonio, A. L. (2005). Making diversity work on campus: A research-based perspective. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges & Universities. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/ Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial anxiety. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 790-801. Sengupta, E. (2017). Leadership and inclusiveness: A perspective from middle east and central Asian universities. In L. Stefani & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Inclusive leadership in higher education: International perspectives and approaches (p. 8). New York, NY: Routledge Publishing. Turner, C. S. V., González, J. C., & Wood, J. L. (2008). Faculty of color in academe: What 20 years of literature tells us. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(3), 139–168. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012837

PART II GLOBAL PRACTICES AND CHALLENGES

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 1 REMOVING THE ROSE COLORED GLASSES OF EXCLUSIVITY Caterina Valentino

ABSTRACT This chapter aims to expose the reader to the notion that mandated diversity and inclusion changes intended to vary the composition of institutions of learning has not accomplished its goal. Rather, it has triggered a complex mix of reactions from the very people for whom the policy was designed to assist and from those who work under the policy. As society is molded to meet diversity targets, salient threats from dominant groups directed toward minority groups result in interpersonal conflict. This chapter explores the benefits that instructors receive from professional development activities centered on diversity. It examines the social identity conflict that is created when different minded people work together. It provides insight into the benefits of approaching social identity conflict with a conflict transformation perspective. This chapter exposes the reality that, while the words one speaks are respectful and inclusive, one’s actions may be totally different. Educators must exhibit an overarching commitment to the making of decisions on integrity and evidence rather than impressions. This chapter discusses the importance of the role of educators as moral leaders and the need for educators to create inclusive classrooms where diversity is celebrated. Keywords: Biases; unconscious; conflict transformation; conflict management; diversity; inclusive; bonding social capital; bridging social capital; unconscious biases

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 17–30 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017002

17

18

CATERINA VALENTINO

INTRODUCTION “We need to dismantle the systems that perpetuate discrimination” (Cote-Meek, 2018, p. 44). The list of injustices against minorities, the disenfranchised, the marginalized and diverse individuals is long. In Canada it was just over 100 years ago that women won the right to vote; Indigenous women waited until 1960. And, in 2018 the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements introduced networking platforms that provided once silenced minorities with an amplified voice. Cote-Meek, associate vice-president academic and indigenous programs at Laurentian University, Ontario, Canada, is an Anishinaabe and a woman who knows what it is like to battle against racism and sexism. Cote-Meek recognizes that “we [university administrators] cannot simply stand back or bury our heads in the sand and not be affected by what is happening in broader society” (p. 44). Paraphrasing Cote-Meet (2018), to begin with, all instructors should be thinking of how they can personally contribute to creating inclusive learning spaces. Square one is safety. Classrooms, meeting spaces, and auditoria must be safe. Square two is policy. New policies must be developed to supersede legislated affirmative action programs and quotas that relegate diversity to a numbers game. Square three is acknowledging that everyone has ingrained into their psyche systemic, unconscious biases that influence the way they think, act and feel unconsciously – without the person even knowing. These unconscious biases influence how teachers deliver content and address learners be they women, disabled, developmentally delayed, people of color or LGBTQ2S individuals. University leaders and instructors must be able to identify their biases and reconcile with them before any real sustainable system change can occur. Cote-Meek (2018) believes that administrative leaders must turn their attention to developing an in-depth understanding of diversity issues. They must move beyond the metrics of diversity and prioritize the “… importance of building human and more human relationships … engaging in holistic pedagogical approaches that give attention to mind, body, and spirit” (p. 44). They must stand up for divergent points of view. Sharing them across faculties and among institutions. Cowering behind ill-prepared harassment, discrimination, and sexual orientation legislation and policies is passive. Now is the time to engage, to actively participate in dismantling gendered hierarchies and old boy/girl preferential clubs that perpetuate sexism, discrimination and showing disdain for those who are less fortunate, marginalized, challenged, or just plain different. This chapter is about exposing one’s mind’s eye to the reality that, while the words one speaks are respectful and inclusive, one’s actions may be totally different. Cote-Meek (2018) urges educational leaders to be observant. Take note of the complexion of the company in your professional and personal life. Be mindful of the voices that are missing. Take note of the seats that are filled with likeminded people of the same persuasion and devise a plan of how those seats can be filled with different minded persons from a variety of backgrounds. The aim of this chapter is to expose the reader to the notion that mandated changes used to vary the composition of learning institutions has not accomplished its mission but has triggered a complex mix of reactions from the people

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

19

for whom the policies were intended to assist and from those who must work under these policies (Friedman & Davidson, 2001; Kidder, Lankau, CharobotMason, Mollica, & Friedman, 2004). As classrooms are molded to meet diversity targets, salient threats from dominant in-groups directed toward minority groups result in interpersonal conflict (Dalton, 2003; Friedman & Davidson, 2001). In many instances, it is the management of this interpersonal conflict that moves instructors to manage the conflict and not transform it into a positive force to stem further discrimination. As organizations push (Kotter, 2002) diversity, they often are blinded to the fact that individuals differ widely in how much they identify with their given beliefs, race, ethnic background, or gender – their social identity. Diversity management programs (Kidder et al., 2004) that are pushed by the administration, and not pulled (Kotter, 2002) by frontline teachers through the classroom hierarchies allow biases (known and unconscious) to create intergroup conflict that prevents diverse learners from attaining their personal and educational goals.

TEACHERS AS MORAL LEADERS Education is one of the most important tools to curtail discriminatory behavior in social environments. Nevertheless, the government imposed laws that prescribe pathways of equal opportunity, affirmative actions, and ideals of equality have not truly transformed society’s beliefs (Robinson, 2001). On the surface, mandated changes that require just treatment of all community members through the creation of opportunities, quota systems, and the removal of barriers that address historic and current disadvantages for under-represented and marginalized groups have served only to make a superficial difference in the complexion of our classrooms. When the veneer of the legislation is removed, biased and discriminatory beliefs and values continue to be harbored deep in individuals’ psyche, preventing the establishment of inclusive classrooms. It is these deep unconscious biases that must be exposed before classrooms are truly transformed into sustained hubs where learner differences are seen as positive attributes that contribute to the overall learning process. These are challenging obstacles because they are invisible. And it is these deep unconscious biases that instructors do not even know they hold that prevent them from modeling inclusive classrooms. It is not until instructors force themselves to delve deeper within their psychological traits and come to a personal understanding – equity mindfulness (University of Southern California, n.d) – of exclusionary practices will classrooms be transformed into hubs of inclusiveness.

UNCONSCIOUS BIASES Biases are perceptual filters. They are simplistic images or distorted truths about individuals or groups rooted in stereotypes and prejudices. Biases are learned as part of one’s normal moral development. Gonzalez, Kim, and Marantz (2014)

20

CATERINA VALENTINO

describe unconscious biases as pervasive. Unconscious biases are activated when instructors unknowingly classify people as members of specific groups and apply stereotypical characteristics, positive or negative, to other individuals. Unconscious biases are a blink of an eye action. It is that automatic response that unconsciously pushes one person to nudge another to hide their belongings when a Black person takes an adjacent seat on a bus or in a theater. Unconscious biases likely account for why women undergoing performance reviews are assessed using different language and are more likely to be labeled as abrasive (Cote-Meek, 2018). Unconscious biases likely account for why résumés displaying typically White names receive 50% more callbacks than those having typically Black named candidates (Ross, 2008) that possess equivalent skill sets. Biases are consistent among populations and across time. And, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the findings attributed to studies of racism against Blacks are likely applicable to other marginalized populations (Dovidio, Kawakami, & Gaertner, 2002; Gonzaler et al., 2014). By combining Mintzberg’s work on managerial roles (Williams, Kondra, & Vibert, 2008) with Dewey’s (Nelsen, 2015) work on the role of educators, one recognizes that instructors are moral developers. This reinforces the position of Banks (2006) and Banks and Banks (1993) that multicultural initiatives and human rights legislation is ineffective in the hands of educators retaining unconscious racial biases.

RACE Race is a defining characteristic of one’s life. It shapes values, beliefs, and perspectives. Hence, it is no surprise that acquiring an education in a racially diverse setting is qualitatively different – as it turns out, better – from education that is undertaken in the absence of that diversity (The Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education, 2012). The Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education (2012) report determined that “patterns of racial segregation and separation historically rooted in our national life can be broken by diversity experiences in higher education” (para. 4). Furthermore, students’ diversity experiences in higher education have significant effects on the extent to which they practice racially integrated lives. This position is supported by the research of Patricia Gurin (Distinguished University Professor Emerita of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the University of Michigan), which demonstrates that outward expressions of racial bias can be broken by exposing students to diversity experiences in higher education (The Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education, 2012). Yet, the Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education (2012) report noted that different racial groups seldom benefit from integrating with diverse people. Despite exposure to different ideas and perspectives, each group unknowingly and, in rapid time, used their unconscious beliefs as decision-making heuristics to tune out what is different. It is these learned and ingrained heuristics that perpetuate diversity stereotypes of “others.” It is these classroom behaviors that

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

21

instructors must alter if inclusive classrooms are to flourish. It is these unconscious biases that result in intergroup conflict brought about when diverse groups are asked to learn together. In these circumstances, instructors are forced to hone their conflict management skills rather than employ conflict transformation processes (Lederach & Maiese, 2003) to bridge (span) (Foster, Meinhard, & Berger, 2003) cultural differences, instead of conflict management techniques (Lussier & Achua, 2004) that only serve to bond and solidify the individual learner into separate homogenous group affiliations. The first step to changing cultural stereotypes is for each instructor to bring to a conscious level their unconscious biases. This soul searching and humbling work forces an individual to make obvious that which is hidden. In most cases, the first time one encounters someone different from oneself is in school. This elevates the instructor’s role from subject matter expert to cultural role model. To succeed in harnessing the benefits of diversity and inclusion, diversity must begin in the cradle and extend throughout each person’s formative years.

THE ROLE OF EDUCATION While parents have always been tasked with the responsibility of setting their children’s moral compass that reality has shifted. The waxing and waning of the role of religion in family life, globalization and migrations that separates the family unit, extended and non-traditional family relationships hamper the transmission of cultural norms and values to future generations (Curtis, 2008). But, the power of technology coupled with the ubiquitous nature of the Internet has electronically shrunk one’s world to 92.16 cm2 – the average size of a cellphone display. Social media (Facebook), telecommunication applications (Skype), and videotelephone (FaceTime) facilitate and encourage like-minded people to exclusively socialize with their own kind. Furthermore, when parental guidance is sporadic, non-existent or delegated to paid employees and extended relatives, society looks to and entrusts the educational system to pick up the slack and guide its young citizens in what is the acceptable way to think, act and feel in today’s world. Society entrusts the educational system, as described by Campbell (2018) to prepare students to maneuver the 3Rs, respect, relationships, and responsibility. Respect for ideas and identities in all their diverse forms. Relationship building that fosters face-to-face communications where ideas are spoken rather than Tweeted. Responsibility compels instructors to base decisions on integrity and evidence over impression. The classroom instructor is the face of the educational system. Students enter post-secondary education at an impressionable stage of mental and moral development. It is at a time when they are experimenting with new ideas and roles, and begin to make adult commitments (Curtis, 2008). For many post-secondary students, the college and graduate school years represent the first sustained exposure to an environment other than their home communities. This is a time when political and social attitudes are shaped and are heavily influenced by contact with peers and role models. Kohlberg’s classification of moral development

22

CATERINA VALENTINO

suggests that higher education instructors influence the student’s movement from law and order (Stage 4) to the social contract stage of high moral principles (Stage 5) where the person treats others as human beings and not as means to an end (Schwind, Uggerslev, Wager, Fassina, & Bulmash, 2016, p. 24). Never have the role of school been more important in a nation’s children’s lives. Never has the job of school leaders in articulating those values, day by day, week by week, been so important. For many children, school and its values, its clear boundaries and moral framework, may be the only solid bedrock in their lives. (Curtis, 2008, para. 4)

THE EDUCATOR AS GATEKEEPER Grant and Sleeter (2011) make the point that what teachers communicate to students is first filtered through their personal understanding of the material. “It is impossible, in fact, to understand other people without first understanding yourself and how your perspectives shape how you interpret others” (p.10). Miller Dyce and Owusu-Ansah (2016) found that introducing diversity and inclusiveness education into pre-service teacher curricula was central to helping them understand their beliefs and how these beliefs influenced their interpretation of the learning material. Specifically, diversity education (multicultural education) provides teachers with a systematic way to bring to the surface biases, conscious or unconscious, they may harbor. Exploring multicultural issues lays bare the connection between one’s culture, cognition, values, and beliefs. It exposes the limitations of myopic, personal understandings that narrow one’s view of diversity and inclusion. In the world of post-secondary education where the entry to practice is not a teaching license but a PhD there are few, if any, requirements for new or tenure instructors to take courses on diversity and inclusion. Perhaps in the wake of the pedagogical movement to stimulate student engagement and authentic learning, and the recognition that higher education instructors have a wider responsibility than only research and teaching, progressive universities are placing more promotion weight on professional development activities that broaden the candidate’s comprehension of diversity, social justice, and inclusion. These professional development activities prepare instructors for serving fragile “first-gen” (Hayes, 2015) students, as well as minorities, the marginalized and foreign students. Kumar and Hamer (2012) hypothesize that instructors who do not understand how cultural identities play out in the classroom are unable to support culturally pluralistic classrooms. Their study results indicate that a portion of their sample of pre-service teachers explicitly held stereotypic beliefs about poor and minority students. After diversity training and the exposure of their unconscious biases, Kuman and Hamer determined That preservice teachers were significantly less biased and prejudiced by the time they were ready to graduate from the teacher education program than they were during their 1st year in the program. (p. 172)

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

23

This finding supports the hypothesis that diversity and multicultural education provided during pre-service teacher instruction positively shapes instructor attitudes toward culturally diverse students. It provides them with the tools to use adaptive and inclusive classroom practices. Unfortunately, the longitudinal data analysis indicated that the pressures of the real classroom, as opposed to the practice classroom, reduced teachers’ ability to react on the spot and modify their instruction to meet the needs of all learners. In many instances to maintain classroom decorum, instructors invoked conflict management techniques rather than conflict transformation techniques that require time and patience on the part of all concerned parties. While the research is clear that diversity training makes a difference, more work on the translation of the education to action needs to be undertaken. In spite of this gap, principals and provosts must take the lead and begin the process of strongly supporting multicultural professional development for higher education instructors that explores and surfaces their biases.

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION Recognizing diversity or its representations in one social system of people with distinctly different group affiliations of cultural significance (Jaschik, 2017; Weisinger & Salipante, 2005) has eluded many universities and colleges. Neither following legislative paths of equal opportunity nor affirmative action has resulted in truly transforming higher education institutions into sustained workplaces made up of employees with different human qualities. Moreover, to succeed in harnessing the benefits of diversity, learning institutions are obliged to build diversity within their faculty leadership. Enlightened deans transform faculties through their words and actions, and they task their instructors to carry the message that diversity matters into the classroom. The Urban Universities for HEALTH (2015) report Faculty Cluster Hiring for Diversity and Institutional Climate concluded that cluster hiring – hiring multiple scholars into one or more departments based on shared, interdisciplinary research interests – when done right is a powerful way to build both institutional excellence and faculty diversity. The first step is to use a working definition of diversity that is inclusive in terms of race, ethnicity and gender, perspective, and ideology. Although cluster hiring was first designed to expand interdisciplinary research, residual impacts were felt both in faculty diversity and components of institutional climate, including the learning environment, collaboration, community engagement, and success of faculty from all backgrounds. When done correctly, cluster hiring has the potential to improve institutional excellence overall by breaking down faculty silos and shifting hiring practices to attract innovative, non-traditional scholars (Flaherty, 2015). Flaherty ends by repeating the sentiments of Laura Severin, professor of English and special assistant to the provost for academic planning at North Carolina State, […] that cluster hiring can be used for purposes of diversifying the faculty if institutions make diversity a priority and are skillful in setting up their hiring processes. For me, that is the most significant result. (para. 28)

24

CATERINA VALENTINO

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PARADIGM – A COMPLETE ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE Perpetuating diversity management practices that prescribe quota admissions for underrepresented groups (Bowens, Merenivitch, Johnson, & McFadden-Bryant, 1993) fails to move organizations beyond a human resources model of affirmative action and compliance, and falls short in fully embracing the inherent value that flows from a diverse student body (Gilbert, Stead, & Ivancevich, 1999). Left Out (College Opportunity, 2018) found that in California over 69% of students enrolled in college are ethnically or racially diverse. Yet 60% of college faculty and senior leadership on California’s campuses and 74% of academic senators are White. Grove (2017) notes that Black academics will outnumber their White colleagues in South African universities within the next decade in part due to the retirement of tenured White faculty and the youthfulness of the Black faculty. Grove adds that this upward trajectory of Black African academics and a concomitant downward trajectory of White academics hide the true situation. The reality is that half of all Black professors are located at three historically Black institutions: the Universities of South Africa and Limpopo, and Walter Sisulu University. A primary hurdle to the career progression of Black African academics is the low rate of PhDs among staff – only 34% of Black academics hold a doctorate – and that universities must compete head on with corporations seeking the talents of the Black PhD student.

QUOTAS – BRIDGING AND BONDING SOCIAL CAPITAL The Lumina Foundation (Bensimon, 2018) proposes that Too often, they’re [mandated diversity quotas] datacentric approaches that focus on structures, not people, to achieve more equitable outcomes. It’s hard to see how a predominantly White faculty that isn’t prepared to teach students from a wide range of racial and ethnic backgrounds can achieve equity with these practices alone. (para. 2)

Furthermore, the Lumina Foundation (Bensimon, 2018) suggests that, to successfully close the racial equity gaps engrained in the American higher education systems when it comes to Black, Latino, Native American, and marginalized Asian-American representation requires that faculty racial divisions be addressed. The first step is to educate. Insight and cultural sensitivity brought about by diversity education brings increases in numbers and the probability of attracting, recruiting, and hiring the best people in the face of shrinking and changing labor pools (Kidder et al., 2004). Diversity education (Pant & Vijaya, 2015) allows the instructor to understand that inclusivity is a belief that society is not a melting pot. It is a salad bowl where each unique ingredient contributes to making the dish tasty. Transformative educators create a culture that recognizes the visible and hidden cultural differences in its learners and provides an environment that allows interpersonal bonds to be built between different groups (as cited in Pant & Vijaya, 2015).

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

25

Sustainable inclusivity demands a complete organizational cultural change designed to foster appreciation of demographic, ethnic, and individual differences with the intent of fostering collaboration (Foster et al., 2003; Gilbert et al., 1999). These social ties or one’s desire and willingness to interact with other humans that are different from oneself build interpersonal relationship exchanges between and among the different parties that minimize the differences or social structural variances, for example color of skin, income bracket, and sexual orientation between them (Tristan, 2018). When one’s willingness pulls one to cross social divides, to make connections with people who are different from them, that builds bridging social capital. Bridging social capital creates cooperative connections with people from different walks of life. It fosters organizational cultures of inclusiveness. It binds social networks across heterogeneous groups, allowing learners to retain their own cultural identity while appreciating the knowledge gained from doing things differently. Bridging social network ties allows employees to mix their own cultural identity and capitalize on the benefits of diversity. Instructors who have embraced diversity develop opportunities to overcome collegial silos that bond learners together, bonding social capital, and, instead, create opportunities for cross-functional communication networks of bridging social capital to grow. Bonding social capital ties are created when one’s desires and willingness is to interact exclusively with like-minded people to strengthen similar ways of thinking (Tristan, 2018). It is the creation of bridging social bonds that fosters inclusivity and discourages any singular dominant group thinking to interfere with everyone’s full participation in the learning process (Valentino, 2017).

FORCED PARTICIPATION: AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS Affirmative action programs are remedial approaches designed to increase the number of underrepresented students in the classroom (Kidder et al., 2004). The underlying rationale is to alleviate historical discrimination. The work of Lind and Tayor (1988) demonstrates that for the most part these programs have drawn more opposition resulting in conflict especially by dominant groups who perceive quota systems as being procedurally unfair. Furthermore, it has been found that non-prejudiced employees often oppose affirmative action (Kidder et al., 2004) because it violates the distributive justice norm of equal allocation – progression based on merit. Research (Gilbert et al., 1999) also suggests that some of the staunchest resistance to affirmative action policies come not from the dominant group, but rather from minority groups who were intended to benefit from the policies. For example, Heilman, as cited in Gilbert et al., found that women who perceived they were hired as a result of affirmative action mandates suffered stress, experienced job dissatisfaction, and selected less demanding work assignments than women who felt that their gender was not responsible for their employment. These negative

26

CATERINA VALENTINO

perceptions eventually led to the downfall of affirmative action programs as a hiring technique for increasing organizational diversity. Consequently, affirmative action programs became known as handout programs in which the discount principle, phenotype, is the dominant screening criterion (Gilber et al., 1999, p. 64). At both the individual and group levels, people pay attention to how fairly resources are allocated among identity groups in their organization. When inequalities are perceived, social identity conflict arises. While equity management programs can lead to decreased levels of frustration and turnover for minorities, issues of backlash and conflict from other groups (Kidder et al., 2004) can occur.

DIVERSITY MANAGEMENT: CONFLICT AND BACKLASH Backlash (Kidder et al., 2004) is a negative response that occurs based on the sensitivity of diversity and politicized topics. At the American Sociological Association meeting in 2017 (Flaherty, 2017) a number of sessions discussed the troubling trend of backlash among sociology scholars. Grollman noted that marginalized scholars people of color, women and LGBT scholars – are disproportionately targeted. These attacks are not isolated incidents, but they’re actually part of a larger conservative assault on higher education, and it’s not limited to what we call our extramural utterances … There are scholars who’ve been attacked for what they teach in the classroom, for the type of research they do (para. 5)

In academic bureaucracies (Mintzberg, 1981) perceived scholarship differences can lead to negative reactions and increased intergroup conflict and reprisals (Hornsey & Hogg, 2000). University of Oregon’s President, Michael Schill, faced with demands that one of its professors be terminated for wearing Blackface to an unofficial off campus event responded with We condemn this action unequivocally as anathema to the University of Oregon’s cherished values of racial diversity and inclusion. The use of Blackface, even in jest at a Halloween party, is patently offensive and reinforces historically racist stereotypes. It was a stupid act and is in no way defensible. (Jaschik, 2018, para. 4)

Schill’s open condemnation of the action is the first step to opening a dialog to expose the underlying cultural beliefs of both the perpetrator and the offended to explore why they judged the action as either inoffensive or offensive in order to avoid backlash. On the other hand, at the California Lutheran University, a private, Hispanicserving, four-year institution, minority faculty complained about its “culture of niceness” (Bensimon, 2018). Black and Latino faculty who experienced discrimination were afraid to voice their concerns because they felt conflict avoidance was highly valued. A “culture of niceness” made it very difficult for employees to speak up and call out practices that undermined the college’s espoused diversity values. Those who dared to speak up risked being viewed as troublemakers. One of the consequences was that Black and Latino faculty engaged in self-imposed silence about racialization in how things were done at the university.

27

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

In spite of institutions of higher learning pushing (Kotler, 2002) diversity through quotas and admission policies (Kim, 2017), an associate professor of Pediatrics at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College reports that graduate physicians do not reflect the race and ethnicity of the population they serve. To start, a disproportionately low number of African-American/Black, Hispanic/Latino, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or economically disadvantaged apply. The rate of minority acceptance is lower as compared to White and Asian counterparts. Finally, for those minorities who are accepted, even fewer graduate within four years (unless they attend a historically Black medical school such as Meharry, Morehouse, Howard, or Drew). Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges suggests that Hispanic or Latino medical students are half as likely to graduate in four years as compared to White classmates. Insisting on pre-teaching, diversity education fosters sustainable change by bringing into focus the underlying personal, relational, structural, and cultural dimensions of human experience that results in interpersonal conflict (Lederach & Maiese, 2003). An instructor’s approach to the interpersonal conflict that arises when different people are tasked to work together is best addressed with a conflict transformation perspective, not a conflict management perspective.

CONCLUSION Higher education instructors pursue cutting-edge research, provide service to the governance of post-secondary institutions, and actively and passively pass on the society’s social norms to the talented learners of tomorrow (Campbell, 2018). Moreover, when families are unable to set the moral compass for its members, society looks to and entrusts the educational system to pick up the slack and prepare students to maneuver the complexities of today’s society. Campbell (2018) uses the 3R’s. Engraining these characteristics into today’s learners allows them to appreciate the privilege they have been given to participate. First students must feel respect (Campbell, 2018). Instructors must model respect for diversity in all its forms. Instructors must shun oppressive behavior that polarizes students on topics such as hosting controversial speakers, or the use of preferred pronouns and space for religious observation. Second instructors must foster activities that encourage person-to-person relationships rather than person-to-device relationships. Space must be carved out for learners to personally interact with their peers and the course content. These activities reduce isolation and build strong communities of diverse thinkers. Third is responsibility. Responsibility demands that action and decision making be based on integrity and evidence over impression. Responsible teachers recognize that power and authority must be tempered with accountability and fairness (Campbell, 2018). Focusing on responsibility and not rights allows the instructor to focus on the success of others. Diversity and multicultural education enhance an instructor’s ability to promote classroom inclusiveness. Currently, there are few requirements for higher

28

CATERINA VALENTINO

education instructors to undertake professional development education that is not directly related to their field of study. Pushing diversity education into the classroom in many cases has left the underlying biases intact. In a step-wise fashion this chapter examined the potential benefits and costs associated with mandating diversity education. It explored the benefits of instructors receiving professional development in diversity and the use of conflict transformation to quell interpersonal conflict that can be created when different minded people are forced to work together. It provides insight into the benefits of approaching the social identity conflict with a conflict transformation perspective as opposed to a conflict management mentality.

REFERENCES Banks, I., & Banks, C. (1993). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Banks, J. A. (2006). Race, culture, and education: The selected works of James A. Banks. New York, NY: Routledge. Bensimon, S. M. (2018, March 26). Creating racially and ethnically diverse faculties [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/03/26/new-policies-are-needed-recruitracially-and-ethnically-diverse-faculties-opinion?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_ campaign=a95ada1361-DNU20180111&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421a95ada1361-197767585&mc_cid=a95ada1361&mc_eid=3480081860. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Bowens, H., Merenivitch, P., Johnson, A., & McFadden-Bryant, D. (1993). Managing cultural diversity toward true multiculturalism: Some knowledge from the black perspective. In R. R. Sims & R. F. Dennehy (Eds.), Diversity and differences in organizations (pp.33–71). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Campbell, A. (2018). Respect, relationship and responsibility are foundational to academic success. University Affairs, 04(18), 41. College Opportunity. (2018, March). Left out [Blog Post]. Retrieved from http://collegecampaign.org/ portfolio/left-out-report/. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Cote-Meek, S. (2018). We need to dismantle the systems that perpetuate discrimination. University Affairs, 04(18), 44. Curtis, P. (2008, March 10). School replacing parents as moral guide. Retrieved from https://www. theguardian.com/education/2008/mar/10/schools.children. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Dalton, M. (2003). Social identity conflict. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(1), 7–8. Dovidio, J., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 62–68. Flaherty, C. (2015, May 1). Cluster hiring and diversity [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www. insidehighered.com/news/2015/05/01/new-report-says-cluster-hiring-can-lead-increased-facultydiversity. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Flaherty, C. (2017, August 14). Belly of the beast [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www. insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/14/sociologists-seek-systematic-response-online-targetingand-threats-against-public?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=64b112b74eDNU20170814&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-64b112b74e197767585&mc_cid=64b112b74e&mc_eid=3480081860. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Foster, M., Meinhard, A., & Berger, I. (2003). The role of social capital: Bridging or bonding? Working Paper Series No. 22. Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Ryerson University, Faculty of Business, Toronto, ON. Friedman, R. A., & Davidson, M. N. (2001). Managing diversity and second-order conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12(2), 132–153. doi:10.1108/eb022853 Gilbert, J., Stead, B., & Ivancevich, J. (1999). Diversity management: A new organizational paradigm. Journal of Business Ethics, 21(1), 61–76.

Removing Glasses of Exclusivity

29

Gonzalez, C. M., Kim, M. Y., & Marantz, P. R. (2014). Implicit bias and its relation to health disparities: A teaching program and survey of medical students. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 26, 64–71. Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (2011). Doing multicultural education for achievement and equity (2nd. ed). New York, NY: Routledge. Grove, J. (2017, November 10). The evolving demographics of South Africa’s professors [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/11/10/Black-faculty-members-willsoon-outnumber-White-professors-south-africas?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_ campaign=8ea185a0a8-DNU20171110&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc044218ea185a0a8-197767585&mc_cid=8ea185a0a8&mc_eid=3480081860. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Hayes, D. (2015). Helping first-generation students find their way. University Affairs, 05(15). Retrieved from https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/first-gen-students-find-their-way/. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Hornsey, M., & Hogg, M. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 1–17. Jaschik, S. (2017, August 2). Justice department will target affirmative action [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/08/02/report-justice-department-will-seek-suecolleges-over-affirmative-action?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign= bb4895703a-DNU20170802&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-bb4895703a197767585&mc_cid=bb4895703a&mc_eid=3480081860. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Jaschik, S. (2018, November 4). Punishing a professor for Black face. [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/11/04/u-oregon-suspends-professor-who-woreBlackface-party. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Kidder, L., Lankau, M., Charobot-Mason, D., Mollica, K., & Friedman, R. (2004). Backlash toward diversity initiatives: Examining the impact of diversity program justification, personal and group outcomes. International Journal of Conflict Management, 15(1), 77–104. Kim, J. (2017, August 6). To diversify med schools, focus on completion [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/technology-and-learning/diversify-med-schools-focuscompletion Kotler, P. (2002). Marketing management (the millennium edition, Custom Edition University of Phoenix). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc. Retrieved from https://www.perspectiva. md/ro/files/biblioteca/Kotler-Marketing%20Management%20Millenium%20Edition.pdf. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Kumar, R., & Hamer, L. (2012). Preservice teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward student diversity and proposed instructional practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(2), 162–177. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/10.1177/0022487112466899 Lederach, J., & Maiese, M. (2003). Conflict transformation. In G. Burgess & H. Burgess (Eds.), Beyond intractability. Denver, CO: Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado. Retrieved from http://www.beyondintractability.org/m/transformation.jsp. Accessed on December 17, 2016. Lind, E., & Taylor, R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Lussier, R., & Achua, C. (2004). Leadership: Theory, application, skill development (2nd ed.). Toronto, ON: Thomson South-Western. Miller Dyce, C., & Owusu-Ansah, A. (2016). Yes, we are still talking about diversity: Diversity education as a catalyst for transformative, culturally relevant, and reflective preservice teacher practices. Journal of Transformative Education, 14(4), 327–354. doi:10.1177/154134461665075 Mintzberg, H. (1981). Organizational design: Fashion or Fit? Harvard Business Review, 59(1), 103–116. Nelsen, P. (2015). Intelligent dispositions: Dewey, habits and inquiry in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 86–97. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.ryerson. ca/10.1177/0022487114535267 Pant, J. J., & Vijaya, V. (2015). Challenges in diversity management: A case study of MediHealth systems. South Asian Journal of Management, 22(1), 159–186. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib. ryerson.ca/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/docview/1690205085? accountid=13631

30

CATERINA VALENTINO

Robinson, J. A. (2001). Affirmative action: A documentary history. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Ross, H. (2008). Proven strategies for addressing unconscious bias in the workplace. CDO Insights: Retrieved from http://www.cookross.com/docs/UnconsciousBias.pdf. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Schwind, H., Uggerslev, K., Wgear, T., Fassina, N., & Bulmash, J. (2016). Canadian human resources management (11th ed.). Toronto, ON: McGraw-Hill Ryerson. The Compelling Need for Diversity in Higher Education. (2012). University of Michigan Admission Lawsuits. Retrieved from https://diversity.umich.edu/admissions/research/expert/intro.html. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Tristan, C. (2018, January 7). What is bridging social capital? [Blog Post]. Retrieved from https://www. socialcapitalresearch.com/what-is-bridging-social-capital/ University of Southern California. (n.d). What is equity-mindedness? Retrieved from http://cue.usc. edu/equity/equity-mindedness/. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Urban Universities for Health. (2015). Faculty cluster hiring for diversity and institutional climate. Retrieved from http://urbanuniversitiesforhealth.org/media/documents/Faculty_Cluster_ Hiring_Report.pdf. Accessed on August 6, 2018. Valentino, C. (2017). Conflict Transformation not conflict management: The key to sustainable diversity management. Journal of Health Administration Education, 34(2), 243–256. Weisinger, J., & Salpante, P. (2005). A grounded theory for building ethnically bridging social capital in voluntary organizations. Nonprofit and Volunteer Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 29–54. Williams, C., Kondra, A., & Vibert, C. (2008). Management (2nd ed.). Toronto, ON: Thomson Nelson.

CHAPTER 2 AUTHENTIC CARING: AN AUSTRALIAN EXPERIENCE Joshua Spier

ABSTRACT This chapter engages Heidegger’s notion of caring-for-others to consider what it means to care authentically for young students who are struggling to engage in their professional education. While care is commonly understood as an emotive or cognitive state, from Heidegger’s perspective, caring for students is expressed in human action. In “Being and Time”, Heidegger examines how humans care for one another in variable ways in the course of everyday life and distinguishes between “inauthentic” and “authentic” modes of caring. The author critically builds upon Heidegger’s underdeveloped analysis, which articulates a binary between “leaping in” for others (inauthentic modes), and “leaping ahead” of others (authentic modes). From within this conceptual binary, the author argues that authentic care could be mistaken for the educator’s capacity to somehow always care for students in leaping ahead modes, and that such a view leaves little room for the possibility of pedagogic situations that sometimes call educators to leap in for students. Drawing on an Australian youth work lecturer’s story about her experience caring for a student, the author shows how any authentic caring on the educators’ part is predicated on students leaping ahead of themselves, toward their own futural selves as caring professionals in the world. Keywords: Caring; caring-for-others; authentic caring; youth work; students; Heidegger; phronesis; practical wisdom; temporality

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 31–40 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017003

31

32

JOSHUA SPIER

INTRODUCTION My focus in this chapter is on caring for students as an integral strategy for creating and sustaining inclusive higher education. The notion of caring will be considered as human action, rather than as an emotive state related to what educators may or may not “feel for their students” (Huber, 2010, p. 71). Some scholars continue to advocate for a deeper understanding of human caring in university teaching. Notably, Barnacle and Dall’Alba (2017), Barnett (2007), and Fitzmaurice (2008) offer philosophical explorations of the meaning and significance of caring in higher education. The former two works draw on Heidegger’s (1962) philosophy of caring to argue teaching in higher education should both nurture students’ care about others, and teachers’ care about students’ temporal “becoming” as the kind of professional that only they can be in the world. My goal in this chapter is to extend their Heideggerian contributions. It was my encounter with Heidegger’s (1962) seminal notion of “caring-for” (Fürsorge) that led me to the theme of caring while analysing interviews I conducted for a broader study of Australian lecturers’ experiences of being university teachers in the niche field of professional youth worker education (Spier, 2018). After first introducing Heidegger’s (1962) idea of caring-for-others in the next section, I will present lecturer Jodi’s (pseudonym) story to orient my subsequent discussion. While this story can only reveal one educator’s experience of caring for students in one disciplinary context, I invite educators from different disciplines to contemplate what this story might have to say in relation to pedagogical caring in their own academic field of practice. After presenting Jodi’s story, I return to Heidegger’s understanding of caring, and in relation to Jodi’s story, develop his ideas toward a more nuanced understanding. I then circle back to consider Jodi’s story afresh in light of this nuanced understanding. To conclude, I suggest how authentic caring for students is not grounded in the agency of educators, but in the human capabilities of students to care authentically for their own future selves. While acknowledging the limits of authentic caring for students, this chapter invites educators to focus on enabling students to attune to their own possibilities for being in the world, helping them to comport toward their futural sense of themselves as caring professionals in the world.

PHILOSOPHICAL CONTEXT In Being and Time (1962), Heidegger develops an ontological interpretation of being human in the context of everyday life. One of the core insights emerging in this text is that, as the kind of being that we ourselves are as human beings, we primarily exist in the world as “care” (Sorge) (p. 84). Existing as care means the questionability of being, including our own being, is always an issue for us. Elaborating care as a basic structure of human existence, Heidegger (1962) uses the German verb Fürsorge (literally, “caring for”, often translated as “solicitude”) to distinguish our caring for other people from our taking care of the things (Besorgen) we use to accomplish tasks. Heidegger’s notion of caring-for-others recognizes how other people are not things we need to take care of, or care over.

Authentic Caring

33

Rather, other people exist as we do: as beings who “tacitly” direct our shared activity toward projects of mutual concern that lie beyond ourselves (Anton, 2001, p. 157). Heidegger (1962) goes on to distinguish “positive” modes from “deficient” modes of caring-for-others (p. 158); the different (and indifferent) ways we may care for others in our lives. In everyday life, we typically relate to others in the latter, says Heidegger, such as when we walk past a stranger in the grocery aisle. Even deficient modes are only possible because we are constantly open to encounter others as “mattering” (and not mattering) to us in relevance to our lives, whether we are conscious of our constant openness or not (Heidegger, 1962, p. 158). So, Heidegger’s idea of caring-for-others, then, does not relate to how we may think, feel or speak about other people, but to an inescapable aspect of what it means to be human: others always matter to us in variable ways as we live out our lives. Beyond distinguishing between deficient and positive modes of caring, Heidegger (1962) offers further analysis of the latter. He suggests that positive Fursorge has two “extreme” possibilities: “leaping in for” and “leaping ahead of ” the other (p. 158). Leaping in for the other is to act instead of them; to take away their responsibility to take care of themselves. By doing so, we take away the other’s care. In this extreme form, for better or worse, the other tends to become “dominated by” or “dependent upon” the person who has leapt in for them (Gordon, 2001, p. 16). For example the parent, when asked for help by their child with a homework project, simply steps in and does the project rather than helping their child to do the work themselves. In contrast to modes of leaping in, Heidegger suggests our caring-for-others can leap ahead of the other. (A sense of Heidegger’s phrase “leaping ahead” is conveyed when we speak everyday phrases like “getting ahead of ourselves.”) As opposed to leaping in modes, leaping ahead modes empower others to “become transparent to [themselves] in [their] care and to become free for it” (original emphases) (Heidegger, 1962, p. 159). Leaping ahead modes of caring-for-others do not seek to release the other from their own responsibility, but rather leap ahead of the other so as to “free the other for his or her responsibility” (Raffoul, 2002, p. 217). In our parent–child example, the parent leaps ahead by enabling their child to tackle the homework for themselves. The parent, free to leap ahead of their child, helps them “just enough” to allow them to take care of the project, realizing their own abilities to be a learner in the world (Simmons & Benson, 2013, p. 206). It is important to note some key aspects of Heidegger’s thought on caringfor-others. First, caring-for-others is derivative of our practical involvements in shared projects. Second, in between the two extremes of caring-for-others (leaping in and leaping ahead) there is a multiplicity of possible forms, which he does not elaborate. Third, the two extremes of caring-for-others disclose the temporal nature of our caring for others: leaping in is directed toward someone’s current existence, whereas leaping ahead is more concerned with their future existence (Tomkins & Simpson, 2015). Fourth, Heidegger’s notion of leaping ahead is related to his broader motif in Being and Time of authenticity (Eigentlichkeit). Heideggerian authenticity is about how, as humans, we are confronted with our

34

JOSHUA SPIER

own possibilities of authentic and inauthentic ways of being-with-others in our social world. Regarding leaping ahead, Heidegger (1962) writes: there is also the possibility of a kind of [caring-for-others] which does not so much leap in for the Other as leap ahead of [them] in [their] existential potential-for-Being, not in order to take away [their] “care” but rather to give it back to [them] authentically as such for the first time. This kind of [caring-for-others] pertains essentially to authentic care … it helps the Other to become transparent to [themselves] in [their] care and to become free for it. (p. 159, emphases in original)

Here, in disclosing how we care for one another in variable ways throughout our shared existence, Heidegger distinguishes between inauthentic and authentic possibilities of caring. I now invite readers to bring these preliminary insights to bear in their reading of Jodi’s story in the next section. Notice the tension between leaping in and leaping ahead in Jodi’s recounted experience of caring for Ash, a young student who became a graduate of, and guest lecturer in, the youth workspecific degree program Jodi teaches and leads.

JODI’S STORY – GLIMPSING PEDAGOGICAL CARING IN ACTION As a university educator, what does it mean to care for a young student who, despite all the potential you see in them, seems indifferent toward their professional studies? While I interviewed Jodi, she recalled the following story about being an educator in the Australian youth work bachelor degree that she coordinates. There was this one student, Ash, who is fantastic. I get him in [now] as a guest speaker all the time. Before he came to [university] he was a snowboarder, and he used to just follow the snow around the world. And there are a few times that his mum rang and said, “Ash’s in bed and says he can’t continue the course – I’m taking the phone into the bedroom now Jodi, can you get him out of bed and get him into class today? Because I know he’ll regret it.” So, I kept dragging Ash through the course. Anyway, Ash was one of the students we got to know very well. And, what I saw was really amazing. In traditional academic terms, less academically gifted or bright, but when it came down to actually communicating, doing the work, understanding, there was this open heart and just an openness to reflect on his assumptions and privilege, and all these things we’d been teaching. And, the change that occurred within [him] was really profound…. So, after he finished off the course, Ash went off and became a fantastic youth worker. Ash is just a legend. He’s totally non-judgemental in his work. [Since graduating] he comes and he presents to my students. He’s relaxed. He has a hilarious sense of humour. He is able to basically find something in every person that he can connect with. So, it might be music, it might be a shared experience, it might be snow, it might be whatever. He’s little. He’s not a big man, but at the moment, he’s been working with kids post-release from jail – so kids 18–25. So, big guys, serious offences, and [he] just manages to build that relationship with deep empathy, he draws on all that theoretical knowledge when he needs to, but his thing is just that he can combine that with just a fantastic sense of being human and finding a shared humanity with a young person and kind of building on that. He’s also incredibly inspiring. I think if I was a young person and I was working with him, I’d feel like – yeah, Ash’s cool; I just really want to set these goals and I really want to move toward them; if nothing else, because he’s a good bloke and he’s put in the time, and I’m prepared to

Authentic Caring

35

do that. To me, someone who is able to integrate that theory but with the stuff from the heart, and a deep empathy and the building of a solid relationship is what makes a good youth worker. And, there have been a few who have come out of our course. But, there are other “Ashs.” He and I laugh about it, because he and I talk about it every time he comes in to do a lecture – about the colds – yeah Ash come in here – get out of bed.

Jodi’s story can only reveal her experience of caring for one student in a particular higher education context. It cannot speak for everyone’s experiences of being a university teacher. Indeed, her story possibly paints somewhat of an unconventional picture of what everyday university teaching looks like for many. Yet, I think this story points to how quality teaching is not primarily grounded in a set of normative principles and strategies, but caring pedagogical encounters (Giles & McCarty, 2017). Jodi’s pedagogic relations with Ash took place in the context of one Bachelor of Youth Work program offered by an Australian university, which prepares students for the challenging profession of supporting disenfranchised young people in Australian society. While this is only one of the diverse professional disciplines in which university educators teach today, Jodi’s story perhaps speaks to a common challenge of caring for students in contemporary higher education. Facing cumulative pressures to pump more publications out while bringing more research dollars in, university educators may find themselves struggling to find quality time to invest in students’ learning and human becoming (Brew, 2014; Huber, 2010; Vostal, 2016; Ylijoki, 2014). Negotiating increasing demands of academic work, what is at stake if university teachers are no longer able to care authentically for students in the manner that Jodi cares for Ash? If educators no longer have the time or freedom to care in such ways, then perhaps the world will be denied the kind of transformative practitioner that Ash went on to become. Stories like Jodi’s remind us that caring for students is integral to the lived world of good teaching in higher education. They provide a powerful tool for thinking about caring-for-students in an unpredictable world of pedagogic practice, a world wherein normative principles and strategies, by themselves, cannot adequately guide a person to know how to enact inclusive pedagogic caring. Before I offer an interpretation of Jodi’s story, I return to Heidegger’s underdeveloped idea of caring-for-others. In particular, already emerging from Jodi’s story is a sense that authentic caring in relation to students, in the world of practice, exceeds Heidegger’s simplistic binary between inauthentic leaping in and authentic leaping ahead.

WHEN “LEAPING IN” IS GUIDED BY “LEAPING AHEAD” In preparing to allow Jodi’s story to speak to us of authentic caring, let us return to Heidegger’s analysis of caring-for-others, to blur the lines between the binary between authentic and inauthentic modes of positive caring-for-others. For our purposes, Koo (2017) helpfully points out the limits of this binary:

36

JOSHUA SPIER there is actually space in [Heidegger’s] conception of being-with-others that can regard “leaping in” and caring for others in a positive light, provided presumably that this is carried out in a way that is reasonable and unoppressive. […] in terms of concrete examples, we merely need to consider parents, other caregivers, teachers, mentors, friends, colleagues, life-partners, etc., who often initially or continually “leap in” for others about whom they care deeply, in the best sense of “leaping in,” of course. Oftentimes, people in such roles initially “leap in” for others with the intent at least, though, of course, not the guarantee of the actual result, of eventually enabling those for whom they “leap in” to flourish as the best human beings they can become. Now, this possibility of being with others can seem to come close to what is involved in “leaping ahead” for others […] Consequently, Heidegger’s position in Being and Time implicitly makes room for […] modes of caring for others (Fursorge) that are situated between the extreme possibilities of “leaping in” and “leaping ahead” for them. I think it is not hard to conceive [of] mixed modes of being-with-others…. (p. 73)

Here, Koo helps to illuminate the possibility of “mixed modes” of good caring for students that unite both leaping in and leaping ahead. Within this fresh perspective, I argue that the educator’s act of leaping in can only be classified as authentic (in a Heideggerian sense) if their leaping in is guided by a leaping ahead that has already been made. That is, only if the educator has already sensed that a way of being in the world (such as youth work) is already calling the student forward. It is this realization that turns us back to what I think is the power of Heidegger’s articulation of authentic caring-for-others: it reveals how caring is essentially characterized by temporality. Authentic leaping in, then, can be understood as the kind of leaping in that springs from a prior leaping ahead that is fundamentally anticipatory in nature. This insight means that the educator’s practical wisdom (phronesis) of authentic care arises from what Heidegger (1962) would call our “being-attuned” (Befindlichkeit) to how the “mood” of a temporal situation is calling us to respond (p. 172). Pedagogic encounters are essentially temporal events, meaning educators do not respond to them in chronological time (quantitative time, from the Greek chronos), but as kairological time (qualitative time, from the Greek kairos) (Spier, 2018). The latter kind of temporality relates to the educator’s openness to discern a given moment as the right time to act – decisive moments that “cut time into before and after” (Harman, 2007, p. 174). This sensibility of time challenges the idea that the educator’s wisdom relies on “knowing-how” (proficiency in activating invariable –normative strategies within variable situations). Nor can wisdom be reduced to “knowing-that” (proficiency in pre-reflectively following invariable-normative principles to variable situations). Instead, the educator’s practical wisdom of caring is better understood as “knowing when.” As Smythe (2003) elucidates: “it takes skilled judgement [phronesis] to know when to leap in and when to leap ahead” (my emphasis) (p. 201). And I would add, in our case, it takes practical wisdom on the part of an educator to know when a situation is calling them to leap in for the sake of a leap ahead that has already been made. What I am arguing here is that the good educator’s practical wisdom of authentic care involves an openness to enact modes that not only balance between the extremes of leaping in and leaping ahead, but that might, sometimes, involve a mode of leaping in that is informed by a prior leaping ahead (Koo, 2017).

37

Authentic Caring

So, when faced with a kairos moment of deciding what to do in an unfolding pedagogic encounter, practical wisdom is holding oneself open to the possibility of caring-for-students in a way that, when called for, enacts leaping in as a form of an a priori leaping ahead, rather than limit authentic caring to ways that move closer to one extreme possibility than the other. While I am suggesting that the educator’s wisdom of caring is spacious enough to sometimes include leaping in that is directed toward leaping ahead, even so, the educator’s wisdom also maintains a sensibility of knowing the limits of leaping in, that is, the sensibility needed to discern when one’s leaping in is encroaching on the verge of “doing too much” to empower the student. At which point, leaping in guided by leaping ahead becomes inappropriate, and more critically inauthentic. Having contemplated the complex and overlooked complexity of enacting authentic caring-forstudents, we are ready to revisit Jodi’s story, allowing the ontological insights that have been developed in this section to illuminate the wisdom of authentic caring in action. To do this, I offer interpretive comments that seek to draw out the possible mixing of leaping in and leaping ahead that can sometimes happen when an educator responds to discrete situations that they find themselves dealing with.

WHEN SNOW DOES NOT FALL Let us return to Jodi’s story to ponder it afresh in light of the philosophical insights we have developed. We find Ash, a student who has enrolled in Jodi’s youth work degree, sleeping in. He has somewhere to be – a university class. Yet something is keeping him in bed, holding him back. Perhaps for Ash, the novelty of studies as a new student, or the novel challenge of becoming a youth worker, is wearing off a little. The process of learning-to-be is harder than he thought. Or he is not so sure anymore what he wants to do with his life. Maybe as he awakes from his dreams of snowboarding, the snow is calling him. Yet Jodi already knows a way of being in the world, namely youth work, has also been calling to him. Youth work still calls him, though this morning, Ash is finding it difficult to let this call get him out of bed. He turns over, ignoring a more existential call to be a youth worker. For now, it can wait. But Jodi hears it, loud and clear – Ash can be, will be, a “fantastic youth worker.” She already knows it. Ash’s mum senses something too. Together, Ash’s mother and teacher see how youth work, a meaningful way of being with marginalized young people, is an activity that would suit who Ash already is, and an activity that he might grow to love, one day, maybe even more than snowboarding – if he can only start getting on board with his education. It is within this background that Jodi, following a mother’s lead, quickly decides to jump in, maybe sensing a critical moment for Ash. Jodi answers an unexpected morning phone call, perhaps on her way to teach a full lecture theater of students. A mother’s plea suddenly confronts her with a decision that she must quickly make: “Ash is in bed and says he can’t continue the course – I’m taking the phone into the bedroom now Jodi, can you get him out of

38

JOSHUA SPIER

bed and get him into class today?” At hearing this request, what moved Jodi to go along with this leaping in, to agree to help Ash’s mother “drag” him out of bed? (It is unclear from Jodi’s story how Ash’s mother came to be in direct communication with her son’s tertiary educator). What do untold moments within this story say? Between the moment when Ash’s mother asked Jodi to speak to her son, and the moment when Jodi agreed to enter Ash’s bedroom (via a phone conversation), something happened. As far as we can tell, before speaking to a dozing Ash, his mother holding the phone to his ear, Jodi did not delay. There is a sense that not even for a moment did she weigh up what she “should do” in this given situation. She did not stall her response, did not ask if she could call Ash’s mother back in a minute, just to give herself a moment to pause, deliberate, to recall the normative principles of quality teaching that were given in a professional development session. Rather, it seems that she responded to a call from the pedagogic situation itself, not from her cognitive reflection about how she “should” care for students. She attuned to what was disclosed in the context of Ash’s life, and cared accordingly. When Jodi agreed to care enough to speak with Ash on the phone, did she do the “right thing”? We could forgive, or even applaud Jodi if she had acted upon a different way of caring, if she had instead politely declined a mother’s request, explaining to her that doing so would be “unprofessional.” At the end of the day, or in this case the beginning, Jodi could have gently explained to a worrying mother that it was up to Ash to get himself out of bed and start taking responsibility for his own studies and future. Yet Jodi takes a different route of caring. Yes, she would let a concerned mother carry the phone into Ash’s bedroom, where he was snoozing, in order to leap in. Jodi said something in his ear to stir a vocation that she knew he was drawn to. She leapt in, but not too far. Her caring fell short of, say, driving to Ash’s house so she could physically drag him out of bed and to class. Did she do the right thing? The story does not reveal what words Jodi actually spoke to Ash on this occasion, or on others like it. And maybe, in response, Ash gave Jodi a rouse, “I’ve got a cold.” But we know that, in this educator’s wisdom, whatever she said on those phone calls did more than “drag” Ash through his preparatory degree toward being the fantastic youth worker that he has become today. Rather, the way she leapt in enabled Ash to get out of bed and engage in his professional learning for himself: Jodi could not do the assignments and learning for Ash, but she could leap in, just enough, to keep reminding him of the call that was beckoning him. Perhaps we could say, then, that Jodi’s leaping in for Ash was tacitly directed toward enabling Ash to flourish as the fantastic youth worker that she was already projecting he would become? In this way of caring, we can recognize how the wisdom of caring for students might sometimes involve leaping in for the sake of their future. In such times, maybe an educator’s leaping in for a student is directed by a prior leaping ahead of them, which is already in play, anticipating and grasping that which the student is able to be in their futural existence. While coming into a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between leaping in and leaping ahead, I am still left wondering, whose leaping ahead really matters in the lived experience of caring for students?

39

Authentic Caring

CONCLUSION In this chapter, I have sought to offer a critical expansion of Heidegger’s (1962) limited account of caring-for-others, which forms part of his broader analysis of being human in Being and Time. My hope has been to provoke the thinking of university educators in relation to their own possibilities of authentic caring. The purpose has not been to provide practical solutions to overcoming the barriers educators face in caring authentically for students, although I suspect that the safeguarding of authentic care in higher education requires a critical rethink of what universities are expecting their educators to devote their time to. What has emerged is a possibility that some pedagogical encounters may call for subversive, and even risky modes of authentic care for students. Subversive because, as educators, we are currently thrown into a neoliberal context that expects us to relate to students-as-consumers, rather than attend to the unique existential possibilities belonging to each student who, like for all of us, is always struggling to open up new possibilities, not only for themselves, but for other people in their own future work-life. And this leads to my final possibility. Any leaping ahead of students that educators may enact in a given situation is only made possible by the students’ own leaping ahead of themselves in terms of their possibilities. Disengaged students, or better, not-yet-engaged students, like Ash, whether projecting themselves toward being a youth worker, or toward some other possibility (e.g., the possibility of being a professional snowboarder), have already “jumped ahead” of themselves in response to an ontological call. And the student’s hearing of a still small call toward their own futural being, even when they only hear it faintly, even when it is not yet strong enough to “get them out of bed in the morning,” that makes the educator’s authentic caring possible. Ash completed his studies, I dare say, not because of Jodi’s vision for his life, or her belief in his potentiality to be a “fantastic youth worker.” And ultimately, nor did he do it for himself. But rather, it was his ontological care for young people in society that got him through, his projection of being able to care for young people who are experiencing an absence of authentic care. It was his care for others, which, however vague and uncertain in the early days, was enough to get him through the doors of the university in the first place. Specifically, it was his anticipation of being able to care for sidelined young people, like “serious offenders,” which drew him forward and into his own future. Since graduating, it has been marginalized young people for whom Ash has been caring. And today, hopefully, Ash continues to leap ahead of oppressed young people, toward freeing them for their own care. And so, in a twist, we are starting to remember how caring authentically, as educators, is not primarily about our leaping ahead of students, but enabling students to find, remember and nurture their own ways of leaping ahead of themselves, and, their own ways of leaping ahead of the people they are being called to care-for as the fantastic professionals that only they can be. What we have glimpsed in Jodi’s story is the lived complexity of leading students back to their own anticipatory projections of themselves in the world, and the importance of remaining open to nuanced possible modes of authentic care – modes that do not easily fall into Heidegger’s positive categories of leaping in or leaping ahead, but rather, unify them in the educator’s authentic, anticipatory care for students.

40

JOSHUA SPIER

What is still required, which I am unable to venture into here, is further consideration of the challenge of extending authentic care for not-yet-engaged young students for whom, unlike Ash, enter their university study with profound uncertainty, or confusion surrounding their futures. Students who do not have at least a partially clear, futural sense of their future possibilities to draw them into and through their studies, even breakfast in bed from mum, along with an encouraging morning phone call from a busy educator who sees potential, may not be enough to drag a student out of bed. Maybe with this thought, we arrive at the inevitable limits of caring for students in higher education.

REFERENCES Anton, C. (2001). Selfhood and authenticity. New York, NY: State University of New York Press. Barnacle, R., & Dall’Alba, G. (2017). Committed to learn: Student engagement and care in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 36(7), 1326–1338. Barnett, R. (2007). A will to learn being a student in an age of uncertainty. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Brew, A. (2014). Academic time and the time of academics. In P. Gibbs, R. Barnett, O. Ylijoki, & C. Guzmán-Valenzuela (Eds.), Universities in the flux of time: An exploration of time and temporality in university life (pp. 182–195). London: Routledge. Fitzmaurice, M. (2008). Voices from within: Teaching in higher education as a moral practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(3), 341–352. Giles, D., & McCarty, C. (2017). Creating meaningful learning spaces through phenomenological strategies. In L. S. Watts & P. Blessinger (Eds.), Creative learning in higher education: International perspectives and approaches (pp. 65–80). New York, NY: Routledge. Gordon, H. T. (2001). The Heidegger-Buber controversy: The status of the I-Thou. Westport, CT/ London: Greenwood Press. Harman, G. (2007). Heidegger explained: From phenomenon to thing. Chicago, IL: Open Court. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell. (Original work published 1927). Huber, M. (2010). Caring for students: Pedagogy and professionalism in an age of anxiety. Emotion, Space and Society, 3(2), 71–79. Koo, J. J. (2017). Heidegger’s underdeveloped conception of the undistinguishedness (Indifferenz) of everyday human existence. In H. Schmid & G. Thonhauser (Eds.), From conventionalism to social authenticity: Heidegger’s anyone and contemporary social theory (pp. 53–78). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Raffoul, F. (2002). Heidegger and the origins of responsibility. In F. Raffoul & D. Pettigrew (Eds.), Heidegger and practical philosophy (pp. 2015–218). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Simmons, J., & Benson, B. (2013). The new phenomenology: A philosophical introduction. New York, NY: Bloomsbury. Smythe, E. (2003). Uncovering the meaning of ‘being safe’ in practice. Contemporary Nurse, 14(2), 196–204. Spier, J. (2018). Heidegger and the lived experience of being a university educator. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Pivot (Springer). Tomkins, L., & Simpson, P. (2015). Caring leadership: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 36(8), 1013–31. Vostal, F. (2016). Accelerating academia: The changing structure of academic time. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Ylijoki, O. (2014). Conquered by project time? Conflicting temporalities in university research. In P. Gibbs, R. Barnett, O. Ylijoki, & C. Guzmán-Valenzuela (Eds.), Universities in the flux of time: An exploration of time and temporality in university life (pp. 94–107). London: Routledge.

CHAPTER 3 HIGH-IMPACT INCLUSIVE LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS: EVIDENCE-BASED STRATEGIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION Katelyn Romsa, Bryan Romsa, Kevin Sackreiter, Jana M. Hanson, Mary Kay Helling and Heidi Adele Sackreiter

ABSTRACT There is a wide consensus among higher education constituents that inclusive learning is essential for all students (Landorf, Doscher, & Jaffus, 2017). Despite this consensus, few theory-to-practice models exist demonstrating how to achieve this goal. Faculty and administrators from a public, land-grant university located in the Midwestern United States are addressing the challenges associated with implementing equity and inclusion at their institution through the development of a model that includes intentional use of theory for designing inclusive learning environments. A primary component of this model was to develop a campus-wide policy across all departments and disciplines. This policy was collectively created with stakeholders across divisions, departments, and disciplines to integrate universal inclusive learning throughout the institution to achieve the aim of inclusive excellence. The outcomes of this policy are in the preliminary stages, but the goal is that far-reaching educational gains will occur in helping students acquire the broad knowledge, higher-order thinking skills, and real-world experiences they need to thrive in a diverse global society. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a helpful way of examining Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 41–53 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017004

41

42

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

how intentional application of theory might work in higher education institutions to achieve high quality, high-impact inclusive learning for all students. Keywords: Inclusive learning; inclusive learning environments; theory-topractice model; campus-wide policy; intentional application of theory; civic engagement

INTRODUCTION There is a wide consensus among higher education constituents that inclusive learning is essential for all students (Landorf et al., 2017). Inclusive learning has been described as a process where diverse individuals collaboratively analyze complex problems transcending all types of borders. The need for inclusive learning has been prompted due to the realization that college campuses exist within a larger society and world where social oppression exists. Sociologists define social oppression as a relationship of dominance and subordination between categories of people in which one benefits from the systematic or methodical abuse, exploitation, and injustice directed toward the other (Crossman, 2017). In social oppression, all members of dominant and subordinate categories participate regardless of individual attitudes or behavior. These oppressive, systemic processes occur and can be found in social interactions, ideologies, representations, social institutions, and social structures (Crossman, 2017). Systemic oppression is in the social fabric of this country (Watt, Kilgo, & Jacobson, 2017). Oppression exists in the attitudes and behaviors that position dominant and oppressed groups in relation to each other (Hardiman, Jackson, & Griffin, 2007). These behaviors and attitudes can both overtly and covertly invade and inform how people interact on college campuses. The nature of systemic oppression that exists can dehumanize marginalized individuals causing psychological, physical, and economic harm. Oppressive systemic processes operate at both macro and micro levels (Crossman, 2017). At the macro level, oppression operates within social institutions including the media, government, and legal and judicial system, and education system. They can also be operated through the social structure itself, where people are organized into hierarchies of race, class, and gender, where privileges are reinforced and stabilized through the workings of the economy and class structure. At the micro level, oppression operates through social interactions between people in everyday life, in which biases that work in favor of dominant groups and against oppressed group’s shape how they see others, what they expect from them, and how they interact with them. Thus, the social forces of power and privilege must be considered when understanding the development of students and their connection to their meaning-making processes. In other words, the role of context more than ever, must be examined in terms of how students make meaning of their environment (Hernandez, 2017). Postsecondary institutions have the opportunity to play an important role in advocating social change in the areas of racial and

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations

43

gender inequality and other human rights issues through the intentional design and implementation of programmatic interventions that promote self-awareness, understanding, civic engagement, and social justice (Watt et al., 2017). However, few theory-to-practice models demonstrate how to achieve this goal. Examining the context was a critical component of the theory-to-practice model. Given the increasing diversity in the state and within their own college population located a public, land-grant university located in the Midwestern United States, the taskforce team was aware of the need to establish processes to develop a college climate where all students feel welcome and a sense of belonging regardless of their difference or background. The taskforce was composed of faculty and administrators with the aim of addressing the complex issues of diversity while examining the ways that power and oppression were and continue to affect the college experience at their own institution. In this chapter, the authors address the need in the literature for a theory-to-practice model that provides a helpful way of examining how intentional application of theory might work in higher education institutions to facilitate high quality, high-impact inclusive learning for all students. The authors first discuss the advantages of using critical race theory (CRT) as a key construct of their theory-to-practice model. Second, they provide a review of literature outlining examples of ways that institutions can design inclusive learning environments that encourage students to develop relationships among diverse perspectives leading to greater degrees of equitable and sustainable solutions for the world’s interconnected human and natural communities. Third, they describe how the policy was collectively developed with stakeholders across departments and disciplines to integrate universal learning throughout their institution to achieve the aim of inclusive excellence. They further explain how cross-curricular skills were implemented through the intentional design of evidence-based strategies. In all, their theory-to-practice model provides a helpful way of examining how theory might work in higher education institutions to facilitate high quality and high-impact inclusive learning for all students.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Multicultural perspectives and approaches regarding race, ethnicity, religion, or gender expression have recently been applied within higher education settings to address inclusion, respect, and tolerance (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 2009). These multicultural approaches have been effective in representing diversifying voices through various identities and lived experiences; however, most recently scholars have criticized these as approaches as limiting because systemic issues of power and oppression were not considered (Hernandez, 2017). CRTs Ladson-Billings and Tate (2009) have contributed to multicultural approaches by emphasizing an agenda that critiques the status quo and/or systems in place that reinforce privileging those in power. CRT is a theoretical framework in the social sciences that examines how society and culture relate to categorizations of race, law, and power with a focus of

44

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

uncovering how racism is perpetuated in the lives of those victimized (Yosso, 2005). It began as a theoretical movement within American law schools in the mid- to late-1980s as a reworking of critical legal studies on race issues and is connected by two common themes (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller, & Thomas, 1995). The first theme CRT proposes is that white supremacy and racial power are maintained over time and in particular, that the law may play a role in this process. The second theme CRT proposes is the possibility of transforming the relationship between law and racial power, and more broadly, pursuing a project of achieving racial emancipation and anti-subordination. CRT has become an important tool for deconstructing oppressive structures and in creating new models that are socially just. When creating their theory-topractice model, the taskforce purposely selected CRT because of its new ideas and directions in how student development is being examined and understood. CRT was applied as key construct of their theory-to-practice model, which helped guide the decision making of developing a campus-wide policy processes to more fully recognize and understand students’ racialized, gendered, classed, and political realities and how they may affect their development and meaningmaking processes. CRT and the role of context were carefully examined in terms of how students make meaning of their environment in helping guide the intentional design and implementation of their policy, with the aim of self-awareness, understanding, civic engagement, and social justice as key student outcomes (Watt et al., 2017). CRT was influential in the institution’s decision in creating a policy by stakeholders across divisions, departments, and disciplines aligned to integrate universal learning throughout the institution to achieve the aim of inclusive excellence.

DESIGNING INCLUSIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS The authors will now discuss some characteristics of inclusive communities as well as provide a review of literature demonstrating how to create inclusive learning environments. To begin, a college experience should not only teach students the necessary skills to exist in a diverse society with honor, respect, and dignity but should also facilitate and foster experiences that expand students’ knowledge about how to deconstruct social inequalities (Watt et al., 2017). In order to do that, postsecondary institutions must be intentional in exposing students to difference through curriculum and program interventions. Watt and Linley (2013) define difference as “having dissimilar opinions, experiences, ideologies, epistemologies and/or constructions of reality about self, society, and/or identity” (p. 6). Thus, the value of exposing students to difference through curriculum and program interventions at an institution is critical. When creating inclusive campus climates with high-impact experiences, thought should first be given about the characteristics of inclusive communities. In 1990, American Council on Education and the Carnegie Foundation joined together to conduct a study on campus life leading to the creation of a report entitled Campus Life: In Search of Community (1990). Authors of this

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations

45

special report stated that colleges and universities should strive for a community that (1) Is an educationally purposeful place where learning in the focus? (2) Is an open place that affirm civility and diversity is valued? (3) Is a just place that honors persons and aggressively pursues diversity? (4) Is a disciplined place where group obligations guide behavior? (5) Is a caring place where individuals are supported/services are encouraged? and (6) Is a celebrative place where rituals embrace both traditions and change? (McDonald & Associates, 2002, p. xviii)

These six characteristics were inspired by the legacy of Ernest Boyer, an American educator and innovator of secondary and postsecondary education, most notably known for his innovative ideas for valuing difference in our increasingly diverse world (McDonald & Associates, 2002). Creating an inclusive campus climate is the responsibility of all of higher education constituents and is directly related to the concept of inclusion as an action (Winkle-Wagner & Locks, 2014). Intention and action are not always closely connected. Even with positive intentions to promote diversity, there may not always be a genuine commitment to consider race and differences in practice (Neito, 2004). Ignoring or evading issues related to diversity and inclusion will not simply solve them. Although intercultural pedagogy may run head-on into the academy’s norms and practices (Lee, Poch, O’Brien, & Solheim, 2017), critical examination and reflection of traditional approaches of understanding are essential for creating learning and development opportunities and campus climates that are optimal for all students. Intentional activities are preferred to improve the learning environment for all students (Neito, 2004; Winkle-Wagner & Locks, 2014). According to WinkleWagner and Locks (2014), diversity and inclusion in higher education are not just discussion points rather they should inspire and require action. There are several excellent examples in the literature that demonstrate how to design inclusive learning environments both inside and outside the classroom within the higher education setting. In their seminal work on the principles of good practice in undergraduate education, Chickering and Gamson (1987) highlight several key concepts of practice relevant to a discussion of inclusion in the classrooms of our higher education institutions. A core concept of their work includes the importance of inclusion and equity in the classroom stating that good practice “respects diverse talents and ways of learning” (Chickering & Gamson, 1987, p.1). Furthermore, ideas related to the development of relationships among students, the support of quality interactions between faculty and students, and the use of active learning strategies to engage students are foundational to a discussion of supporting inclusion efforts in higher education. Jayakumar (2008) provides another solid example through studying the relationship between white individuals’ exposure to racial diversity during college and their postcollege cross-cultural workforce competencies. They explored how diversity and the campus climate impacted future career-related skills. The author found that white college students from both segregated and diverse precollege neighborhoods, their postcollege leadership skills and level of pluralistic orientation were either directly or indirectly related to the structural diversity and racial

46

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

climate of their postsecondary institutions, as well as their level of cross-racial interaction during the college years. Thus, they conclude that when postsecondary institutions promote a positive racial climate for a diverse student body, the benefits are lasting, having the potential to directly impact students’ future development later in their careers. Tatum (1997) offers the perspective that cross-racial dialogues must happen everywhere. These dialogues should be meaningful and productive so that they raise awareness and lead to social change. This change can be difficult because of the obstacle of fear. Tatum (1997) explains that this fear can come from recognizing self-ignorance and lack of experience, which may concern them to worry that they may unintentionally offend or hurt others. Diversity experiences at the university level, and how the institutions of higher learning could assist in preparing graduates for careers, were similarly examined by Engberg (2007). These can include engaging diverse populations as well as the ability to encounter controversial dialogue with tolerance. Engberg (2007) found that there were significant benefits in the promotion of communication across differences. Higher education institutions must help students develop the resources and skills to successfully navigate work in diverse settings. Additional scholars have explored ways to promote diversity, inclusion, and understanding among students of diverse backgrounds through collaborative experiences (Engberg, 2007; Jayakumar, 2008; Ronesi, 2003; Wideman, 2005). Ongoing emphasis can be found at many universities to prepare graduates to become caring and informed citizens who can participate in a global society (Engberg, 2007; Jayakumar, 2008; Wideman, 2005). Common themes in achieving these outcomes among these studies included the importance of (a) exposure to different groups and (b) positive social interactions. The importance of intentionally designing curriculum and programs that encourage students to develop relationships among diverse perspectives is more important than ever in our world’s interconnected human and natural communities so that greater degrees of equitable and sustainable solutions. Ronesi (2003) conducted research that examined attempts to connect nativeborn, English-speaking university students and immigrant university students. This research was in response to common concerns about diversity at many universities. Ronesi (2003) explored experiences by bringing together groups of students who traditional may have stayed apart. The English-speaking students completed training within a three-credit course before connecting with the immigrant students and offering English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction. The purpose of these partnerships was to create positive social experiences that could potentially combat hurtful or negative stereotypes. The cooperative learning experiences were researched closely through interviews and observations. The research indicated that the interpersonal aspect was particularly important, and that getting to know someone as an individual helped the students to get to know more about their partners. Researchers have indicated that cross-cultural experiences are worthwhile and the creation of a positive climate in an educational setting is necessary and impactful (Engberg, 2007; Jayakumar, 2008; Ronesi, 2003). However, Wideman

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations

47

(2005) stated that simply providing or putting students into a culturally diverse situation or place is likely not enough to significantly enhance empathy and it is believed that other variables may be worth examining. Simply placing people in close physical proximity does not automatically imply that genuine connections and understanding will occur. Diversity and inclusion are intentional and supported by the research (Neito, 2004; Winkle-Wagner & Locks, 2014). Cooperative experiences encourage interpersonal communication between groups of students who otherwise might not engage, but also to prepare them for a diverse and exceedingly global society. Bain (2004) maintains that the best teachers place an investment in their students and that they demonstrate a care for them as students and as people. By focusing on creating inclusive environments within higher education, higher education leaders, and educators are able to create learning climates that value our students as people, not just consumers. The creation of inclusive experiences benefits them as learners and as global citizen.

EVIDENCE INFORMED STRATEGY Now a discussion will be provided of how the campus-wide policy was collectively developed with stakeholders across departments and disciplines using an evidenced and informed strategy to integrate universal learning throughout our institution to achieve the aim of inclusive excellence. The taskforce knew that inclusive learning is often based on the trust of those will be the receipts of the policy, mainly college students. A trustworthy response from the taskforce team who were responsible for creating the policy would have been to respond nonjudgmentally – with compassion and emphatic understanding to students and their concerns. Yet to be most effective, the taskforce decided that they wanted to respond in a way where students could achieve a greater sense of their own agency or voice. To empower students, the taskforce included student-driven data perspectives in the in creating the policy and within their evidenced informed strategy. The taskforce was charged with using the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) data to establish which of the 11 cross-curricular skills might be required in all undergraduate programs at the institution. In particular the goal of the taskforce was (1) to use the NSSE data to identify areas that their institution ranked lower than peer institutions; (2) discuss the relationship of the 11 cross-curricular skills to meet the identified areas of need for students; (3) provide a ranking of the cross-curricular skills relative to the perceived needs of students so the skill can be integrated into the curricula; and (4) provide a suggestion for any skill that must be a university priority and therefore required by all programs to implement into the curricula. When creating campus-wide policy, the institution came face-to-face with the opportunity to honestly consider the following question: “Are there cross-curricular skills that should be required of all students and that all undergraduate academic programs should include in their curriculum and assessment plans?” To answer this question, in Fall of 2016 a taskforce on cross-curricular skills

48

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

was created to decide whether the institution needed common skills across all undergraduate academic programs. The importance of evidence-based decision making was discussed among the taskforce team. The taskforce was composed primarily of faculty, the Director of Institutional Assessment, and the Dean of University College. A culture of evidence-based decision making was central in the policy creation. In addition to their CRT framework and review of the literature, the taskforce analyzed NSSE data from their institution, which measures the level of student participation at universities and colleges as it relates to learning and engagement (NSSE, 2018). NSSE results help administrators and faculty assess their student levels of engagement. The survey targets first-year and senior students on campuses and provides a range of evidence, including 10 student Engagement Indicators (EIs) that are categorized in four general themes: academic challenge, learning with peers, experiences with faculty, and campus environment. First, the taskforce reviewed data from NSSE 2016. In particular, the group evaluated the NSSE EIs, which include: higher-order learning, reflective and integrative learning, learning strategies, quantitative reasoning, collaborative learning, discussions with diverse others, student–faculty interaction, effective teaching practices, quality interactions, and supportive environment (http:// nsse.indiana.edu/html/engagement_indicators.cfm). The taskforce discussed the relationships between the 11 cross-curricular skills and the NSSE EIs. Next, both the first-year and senior students’ data were used and comparisons made with peer institutions. The taskforce evaluated the overall EI comparison information, as well as the performance of each individual item within the EI. In particular, areas of need were identified. For example, the EI –Collaborative Learning overlapped with the cross-curricular skill – Teamwork. The institution score on Collaborative Learning was not statistically and significantly different from peer institutions and was not considered an area of need. However, Discussions with Diverse Others had similar qualities to the cross-curricular skill Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity. This was statistically lower than peer institutions, indicating that their students were not engaging with diverse others to the same extent as peer institutions. After review and discussion of the data, each member of the taskforce rank ordered each of the cross-curricular skills on a scale from 1 (this skill must be the focus of the university community) to 11 (the university as a whole does well with this skill). The top two cross-curricular skills that emerged as a high priority for the institution were (a) diversity, inclusion, and equity, as well as (b) intercultural knowledge. As such, the recommendation from the taskforce was that the University requires all program to integrate and assess the cross-curricular skill diversity, inclusion, and equity.

POLICY IMPLEMENTATION To implement the policy and taskforce recommendation, the institution rolledout the cross-curricular skills during the institution’s Assessment Academy. The

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations

49

Assessment Academy was created as part of the University’s on-going accreditation through the Higher Learning Commission and its Quality Initiative. The Assessment Academy provides opportunities for academic and co-curricular areas to develop their knowledge, skills, and experiences with assessment processes and is a key component of the institution’s efforts to design and implement a more comprehensive university assessment plan as well as enhance the culture of inquiry about student learning. The main purpose of the Assessment Academy is to foster a culture that values and uses assessment as a means of improving teaching and learning and overall institutional effectiveness. More specifically, the Academy provided participants with guidance, resources, and professional development opportunities so that they may create and improve upon assessment activities. The goals of the Assessment Academy are to: (1) provide a theoretical and methodological foundation that will advance the assessment of student learning; (2) provide assessment training, resources and on-going consultation based on research and best practices to facilitate continuous improvement and change; and (3) build and empower campus leaders in the assessment of student learning. All undergraduate, graduate, and co-curricular (student affairs) unit have (or will have) representatives that participated in the Assessment Academy. The Academy is pivotal in increasing and sustaining assessment efforts. The participants meet monthly to discuss an assessment-related topic. They purposely introduced the cross-curricular skills into the November session. At this session, participants learned about each of the cross-curricular skills and requirements. Participants were provided with resources on how to write outcomes for each of the cross-curricular skills and assessment methods for each. In addition, they are informed that they must select five cross-curricular skills and one of the skills must be Diversity, Inclusions, and Equity. The expectation is that by the end of the institution’s Assessment Academy, each undergraduate program has designed or edited their assessment plan. Within their plans, they must have identified the five cross-curricular skills. The office of assessment keeps track of this information and provides reports to the Board of Regents as needed. In addition to providing this information at the Assessment Academy, the policy, and expectations have been shared at campus-wide management team meetings, college, and departmental meetings.

CROSS-CURRICULAR SKILLS The campus-wide policy included a cross-curricular skill requirement across all departments and disciplines. At the institution, the cross-curricular skills align with the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) and Liberal Education and America’s Promise (LEAP) initiative, a national public advocacy and campus action initiative that is responding to the changing demands of the twenty-first century (AACU, 2016). Cross-curricular skills are a broad set of knowledge, skills, work habits, and attributes that are believed by educators, higher education professionals, and employers to be critically important in today’s diverse work environments (Gallucci, Bellelli, Saccà, & Addeo, 2014).

50

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

How the cross-curricular skills moved from policy to implementation is an excellent example of a collaborative system that is student-centered. First, the Board of Regents recognized the importance of cross-curricular skills as a way to prepare undergraduate students with general education knowledge and skills that can be used across disciplines. The taskforce was instrumental in identifying a specific need and priority area to ensure that students from the institution graduate with the ability to engage with a diverse world. Finally, the policy was implemented over time allowing programs to align current student learning outcomes and assessment to expectations. Collaborative efforts between academic affairs, the office of assessment, and the institution’s Assessment Academy allowed programs to efficiently realign assessment plans to include cross-curricular skills. The university is governed by a Board of Regents. Recently, the Board of Regents expanded the assessment policy to include a cross-curricular skill requirement. According to the policy, the purpose of the cross-curricular skills was to enable each institution to integrate and extend general education learning into its programs of study in a manner that is consistent with and supportive of each institution’s mission, vision and values, and any requirements of ongoing institutional or program-specific accreditation or approval. Each undergraduate program must include one or more student learning outcomes, activities, and assessment plans that include at least five of the following crosscurricular skills:





Inquiry and Analysis: A systematic process of exploring issues, objects, or works through the collection and analysis of evidence that results in informed conclusions or judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them. Critical and Creative Thinking: A habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. Both the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways and the experience of thinking, reacting, and working in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking. Information Literacy: The ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively and responsibly use and convey that information to the need or problem at hand. Teamwork: Behaviors under the control of individual team members – effort they put into team tasks, their manner of interacting with others on team, and the quantity and quality of contributions they make to team discussions. Problem Solving: The process of designing, evaluating, and implementing a strategy to answer an open-ended question or achieve a desired goal. Civic Knowledge and Engagement: Developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values, and motivation that make a difference in the civic life of communities and promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes. Engagement encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of personal and public concern that are both individually life enriching and socially beneficial to the community.

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations







51

Intercultural Knowledge: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts. Ethical Reasoning: Reasoning about right and wrong human conduct. It requires students to be able to assess their own ethical values and the social context of problems, recognize ethical issues in a variety of settings, think about how different ethical perspectives might be applied to ethical dilemmas, and consider the ramifications of alternative actions. Foundational Lifelong Learning Skills: Involves “purposeful learning activity, undertaken on an ongoing basis with the aim of improving knowledge, skills, and competence.” Integrative Learning: An understanding and a disposition that a student builds across the curriculum and co-curriculum, from making simple connections among ideas and experiences to synthesizing and transferring learning to new, complex situations within and beyond the campus. Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity: The intentional engagement with diversity (i.e., individual differences and group/social differences) in ways that increase awareness, content knowledge, cognitive sophistication, and empathic under­ standing of the complex ways individuals interact within systems and institutions leading to opportunities for equal access to and participation in educational and community programs for all members of society.

These cross-curricular skills are based on the 16 Essential Learning Outcomes that were produced by the AACU as part of the LEAP challenge. LEAP champions the importance of general education and preparing students with strong intellectual and practical skills. The 16 Essential Learning Outcomes provide a “guiding vision and practical approach to college learning” (https://www.aacu. org/leap). The outcomes from the policy are in the preliminary stages, but the hope is that far-reaching educational gains will occur in helping students acquire the broad knowledge, higher-order thinking skills, and real-world experiences they need to thrive in a diverse global society.

CONCLUSION As the research and conversation around support of inclusion and equity in higher education has progressed from Chickering and Gamson’s (1987) foundational perspectives on teaching, the importance of these ideas has solidified in both research and practice. Acceptance of diversity and inclusion of all learners takes intentional effort. Intentional and purposeful attention must be given to supporting diversity and the actual implementation of experiences and interactions in which university students can learn about and from each other in meaningful ways. An underlying key reason for inclusive campus climates with high-impact experiences is so that students feel valued and understood. Understanding the perceptions of students as individuals and realizing the impact that positive interactions across differences might have on student success is critical. Identifying

52

KATELYN ROMSA ET AL.

strategies to bring students of various backgrounds together is useful in decreasing bias, helping university students develop necessary career skills, and potentially, allowing all students a more welcoming and enjoyable experience. Before creating curriculum changes and/or having dialogues on power with students at your institutions, the authors recommend that institutions first honestly assess their own knowledge, comfort level, and skill to do so. It is recommended that additional reading and learning occur on theories such as CRT and/ or intersectionality frameworks that consider how power, privilege, and oppression influence and constrain experiences, meaning making, and the ways that individuals negotiate and manage these social forces in their everyday lives with themselves and others. In this increasingly diverse world, it is essential that college students strengthen their ability to engage with difference (Watt & Linley, 2013). Higher education leaders and educators must welcome and embrace diverse complexities while honestly examining the ways that power and oppression may be affecting the college experience at each of our institutions. Creating high-impact learning experiences for students while employing CRT involves teaching students the skills to enter into the social change process constructively. Intentionally designing programs through evidence-based practices with an underlying structure that determines the values of inclusive communities will support the skill development of students for working together productively across difference. In developing skills for engaging across difference, the recommendations brought forth through the theory–practice model of this chapter provide a valuable set of replicable guiding principles that higher education faculty and administrators can similarly facilitate at their institutions to achieve higher quality, higher-impact inclusive learning for all students.

REFERENCES Association of American Colleges & Universities (AACU). (2016). Retrieved from https://www.aacu. org/leap Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(1), 3–7. Crenshaw, K., Gotanda, N., Peller, G., & Thomas, K. (1995). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement. New York, NY: The New Press. Crossman, A. (2017). Definition of social oppression. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/ social-oppression-3026593 Engberg, M. E. (2007). Educating the workforce for the 21st century: A cross-disciplinary analysis of the impact of the undergraduate experience on students’ development of a pluralistic orientation. Research in Higher Education, 48(3), 283–317. doi:10:1007/s11162-006-9072-2 Gallucci, C., Bellelli, P., Saccà, G., & Addeo, F. (2014). The assessment of cultural experience through the measurement of cross-cutting skills: The Giffoni experience case study. In Handbook of research on management of cultural products: E-relationship marketing and accessibility perspectives: E-relationship marketing and accessibility perspectives (p. 83). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Hardiman, R., Jackson, B., & Griffin (2007). Conceptual foundations for social justice courses. In M. Adams, L. A. Bell, & P. Griffin (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 35–66). New York, NY: Routledge. Hernandez, E. (2017). Critical theoretical perspectives. In J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, & V. Torres (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (6th ed., pp. 205–219). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

High-impact Inclusive Learning Organizations

53

Jayakumar, U. M. (2008). Can higher education meet the needs of an increasingly diverse and global society? Campus diversity and cross-cultural workforce competencies. Harvard Educational Review, 78(4), 615–646. Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (2009). Toward a critical race theory of education. In A. Darder, M. P. Baltodano, & R. D. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (2nd ed., pp. 167–182). New York, NY: Routledge. Landorf, H., Doscher, S., & Hardrick, J. (2017). Making global learning universal: Promoting inclusion and success for all students. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Lee, A., Poch, R., O’Brien, K. & Solheim, C. (2017). Teaching interculturally: A framework for integrating disciplinary knowledge and intercultural development. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC. McDonald, W. M., & Associates. (2002). Creating campus community: In search of Ernest Boyer’s legacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2018). Center for postsecondary research. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University. Retrieved from http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/origins.cfm Neito, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Read, K., Aldridge, J., Ala’i, K., Fraser, B., & Fozdar, F. (2015). Creating a climate in which students can flourish: A whole school intercultural approach. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 11(2), 29–44. Ronesi, L. M. (2003). Enhancing postsecondary intergroup relations at the university through studentrun ESL instruction. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 2(3), 191–210. Tatum, B. D. (1997). “Why are all the black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?” And other conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books. Watt, S. K., Kilgo, C. A., & Jacobson, W. (2017). Designing programs for engaging in difference. In J. H. Schuh, S. R. Jones, & V. Torres (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (6th ed., pp. 499–513). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Watt, S. K., & Linley, J. L. (Eds.). (2013). Creating successful multicultural initiatives in higher education and student affairs (new directors for student services, no. 114, pp. 5–15). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Wideman, R. E. (2005). Empathy development in undergraduate students through the cross-cultural learning experience. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Regent University, VA. Winkle-Wagner, R., & Locks, A. M. (2014). Diversity and inclusion on campus: Supporting racially and ethnically underrepresented students. New York, NY: Routledge. Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1): 69–91. doi:10.1080/1361332052000341006

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 4 ACCESS4ALL: POLICIES AND PRACTICES OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION David Rodríguez-Gómez, Joaquín Gairín, Fabio Dovigo, Kati Clements, Miguel Jerónimo, Lisa Lucas, Elena Marin, Saana Mehtälä, Fernanda Paula Pinheiro, Sue Timmis and Mihaela Stîngu

ABSTRACT Higher education (HE) systems in Europe have been identified as an essential element for promoting economic competitiveness since the Bologna Declaration in 1999. The aim of the Bologna Process was to expand access to educational opportunities, fostering participation in post-compulsory education by creating the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Inequalities in training because of geographic, ethnic or social origin, and inequalities in job opportunities, salaries, and incomes are critical dimensions of social development in HE. The development of policies, including those concerning education, that extend access to opportunities is essential to prevent such exclusion becoming permanent. The Access4All project aims to promote the educational and social inclusion of underrepresented groups as well as of non-traditional learners. In this chapter, the project’s main results are reviewed, with: (1) a brief overview of inclusion policies and practices in European HE; (2) an operational

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 55–69 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017005

55

56

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

definition of “good practice” and criteria for selecting examples of good practice for inclusion in HE; (3) a self-assessment tool enabling the characterization of institutional capacity for innovation and of inclusion policies and practices; and (4) a model for promoting strategic planning, focusing on inclusion in HE. Keywords: Higher education; inclusion; innovation; good practices; strategic planning; innovation

INTRODUCTION The most recent European financial and debt crisis (2007–2012) has directly and indirectly affected the middle and lower classes, with controversial policies to reduce the fiscal deficit. Among other consequences, these policies have led to a rise in the cost of access to higher levels of training in some European countries (such as Italy, Portugal, and Spain), creating newly excluded groups from higher education (HE) (e.g., working-class students). Education inequalities in training because of geographic, ethnic or social origin, and in job opportunities, salaries and incomes are critical dimensions of social development in HE. The development of policies, including those concerning education, is essential to prevent such exclusion becoming permanent. The European project Access4All (A4A) (https://www.access4allproject.eu/) has been developed within the framework of the Bologna Process and takes into consideration the Prague Communiqué of 2001, which emphasized the need to work toward the inclusion of students and the need to promote mobility for all. Successive declarations and communiqués have insisted on the need to promote the social dimension when constructing and consolidating the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). A4A aims to promote the educational and social inclusion of underrepresented groups as well as of non-traditional learners. A4A, therefore, aims to add to the many initiatives implemented and efforts made in accordance with some of the EHEA’s main priorities for the decade to come: greater overall participation and increased participation of underrepresented groups in HE (EHEA, 2009). The main aim of A4A can be set out as four specific objectives: (1) to map out the institutional policies for dealing with vulnerable groups in relation to academic access and success; (2) to establish a plan for HE organizations with initiatives aimed at promoting the access and successful development of students who are underrepresented at university; (3) to develop solutions for the phases of access, retention (and success) of vulnerable students, and non-traditional learners in the institutions of HE; and (4) to create a laboratory to reflect on and promote the social commitment of HE institutions in relation to the most vulnerable student groups. This chapter sets out the main results of the project. First, there is a brief review of inclusion policies and practices in European higher education institutions (HEIs). The conceptual delineation of the term “good practices” as well

Policies and Practices of Social Development

57

as formal and content-related criteria used to identify good practices are also described in this chapter. The knowledge gathered about successful policies and strategies for improving students’ access, retention, and success in different HE systems across Europe is a key element for promoting more inclusive institutions. Focusing on the need to identify the current situation of our HEIs before developing any kind of intervention, a self-assessment tool has been developed within the framework of the A4A project. This tool focuses on two main areas: institutional capacity for innovation, and inclusion policies and practices. Finally, a model for promoting inclusion in HE and some ideas for formalizing and monitoring institutional strategies and actions are set out briefly.

INCLUSION IN HE: THE EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE Since the launch of the Bologna Process in 1999 (EHEA, 1999), HE has been identified as an essential element for promoting economic competitiveness in an increasingly global context. Accordingly, educational credentials have been defined in Europe as among the most salient factors in the development of the contemporary labor market (Archer, Hutchings, & Ross, 2003; Orr & Mishra, 2015). As policies today are aimed at promoting knowledge-based economies, the aim of the Bologna Process was to expand access to educational opportunities across all national contexts, fostering participation in post-compulsory education by creating the EHEA. The EHEA would help students enroll on a wider range of high-quality courses, improving both the appeal and transparency of European HEIs by facilitating recognition procedures and enhancing international exchanges (EHEA, 1999). Nevertheless, the Bologna Declaration’s emphasis on the promotion of international competitiveness and improvement of the European workforce’s skills also helped to create tension with the concurrent aspiration of promoting social cohesion by widening access to HE. The next communiqué, issued in Prague in 2001, stressed the principle that HE should be a concern not only as a public good but also in terms of public responsibility (EHEA, 2001). The Prague document introduced the concept of social dimension as a core component of HE development in terms of equity and justice. The following EHEA conference, held in 2003 in Berlin, linked the growing attention to the social dimension to the expansion of lifelong learning, suggesting that access to university could be broadened with the active inclusion of mature students on academic courses (EHEA, 2003). However, only with the 2007 London Communiqué has students’ diversity been clearly acknowledged as a key element for achieving more equitable HE in Europe. The London Communiqué emphasizes the great impact of socioeconomic differences on access to and success in tertiary education (EHEA, 2007). The following meeting, organized in Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve in 2009, further expanded the dimension of diversity applied to students; raising the concern that access to HE should be widened by fostering the potential of students from underrepresented groups and by providing suitable conditions for them to

58

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

complete their studies (EHEA, 2009). This idea also resonated in the meetings in Budapest/Vienna (2010) and Bucharest (EHEA, 2012), where it was acknowledged that the student body entering and graduating from HEIs should reflect the diversity of Europe’s populations (EHEA, 2010). Furthermore, the Bucharest Communiqué specified that this goal should be supported by reducing inequalities and providing suitable student support through the delivery of services, counseling and guidance, flexible learning paths, and alternative access routes, including the recognition of prior learning. Finally, the Yerevan meeting (EHEA, 2015) restated the universities’ commitment to enhance the social dimension by improving the gender balance and widening opportunities for access and completion. The meeting also stressed the importance of providing “mobility opportunities for students and staff from conflict areas, while working to make it possible for them to return home once conditions allow,” as well as promoting “the mobility of teacher education students in view of the important role they will play in educating future generations of Europeans” (EHEA, 2015, p. 3). All in all, the idea of inclusion in HE has been introduced through the notion of “social dimension,” interpreted as a commitment to equity in education. This commitment reveals the aspiration both to ensure that the structure of the student body will reflect as far as possible the overall diversity of the general population and to create the appropriate conditions to guarantee access to tertiary education for non-traditional students. The overview of EHEA accomplishments highlights the efforts made over time to build a shared conceptual framework to help identify common goals and strategies. However, this does not imply that the idea of a social dimension related to HE refers to a clear-cut and workable description, as it is necessary to deal with the very diverse range now involved in studying and working in tertiary education in Europe.

COMPARING DATA ON INCLUSION IN TERTIARY EDUCATION IN EUROPE Even though the importance of promoting the social dimension of tertiary education has been widely recognized and highlighted by the communiqués regularly issued after the European meetings of 1999–2015, the objective of increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in HE has primarily remained a postulate, with no practical application. Less than 20% of the European countries involved in the Bologna Process have defined quantitative indicators and procedures to enable the consistent gathering of date on this phenomenon (Łybacka, 2015). This is especially relevant as almost all European countries have now implemented a monitoring system to analyze a range of features of the student body. So far, very few countries have invested enough time and resources to collect data systematically on the key aspects involved in the social dimension of HE, except for the gender question. Moreover, the kind of features monitored and the level at which they occur on the HE path differ considerably from one country to another. Out of 36 education systems analyzed by the Eurydice report of 2014,

Policies and Practices of Social Development

59

27 collected data about qualifications prior to HE, while socioeconomic status was monitored in 19 systems and disability in 17. Nevertheless, other important questions crucial to the inclusion of underrepresented students in HE are given less consideration. For example, the migrant status of students is tracked in 13 countries, whereas only eight offer data about the ethnic origins of students. Moreover, despite the emphasis that the Bologna Process put on the importance of strengthening HE’s connection with the labor market, only 13 educational systems collected information about the students’ status in terms of the labor market prior to their entry into HE. If social dimension is to be identified as a core element of tertiary education, data on students’ access to the academic path should not only account for the number of first-year students enrolled but also investigate how the student population is influenced by social composition. From this perspective, interventions promoted by European countries to ease access to HE can be regrouped into three types of positive action (Eurydice, 2014): 1. General policies directed at students’ participation and attainment. 2. Special targets aimed at facilitating the access of specific groups. 3. Concrete measures taken to enforce the process of widening participation. Beyond developing general policies and targets, countries that have been able to identify specific group targets and/or to carry out concrete measures to improve students’ participation are generally better positioned when it comes to developing effective practices aimed at tackling exclusion and promoting inclusive HE environments. In the 10 years, by developing special policies aimed at specific groups, nine countries provided examples of policy agendas dedicated to favoring the inclusion in HE of underrepresented groups. Interestingly, this represents a common thread among the nine countries, although the structure and composition of the targeted groups differ at the various institutions – these include a focus on children whose parents do not have a HE qualification (Belgium), addressing gender participation (male in Finland and female in Lithuania), and supporting adult learners and students with disabilities (Ireland). France and Estonia have been focusing on disadvantaged socioeconomic groups by improving their study loan and grant systems in order to facilitate access to HE for disadvantaged and part-time students, as well as for adult learners. However, it must be noted that efforts concentrated on specific groups entail the risk of valuing only the diversity component of the social dimension, further stressing the “specialness” of those groups. This could undermine the complementary process of becoming part of the learning community by building social links, which is also a core part of the inclusive process in HE. On the other hand, research shows that programs designed to help a specific group of student’s access or progress through HE may improve the conditions of other groups at the same time (Hauschildt, Vögtle, & Gwosć, 2018). Furthermore, although a body of data is available about students in HE, information is seldom related to the social dimension or, when such a connection is

60

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

established, data is not adequately interpreted and utilized. With regard to the changing profile of HE students over a timeframe of 10 years, 19 out of 36 countries were unable to offer an overall picture of change in the diversity of the student body. Such an information gap is remarkable in countries that invest a large amount of time and resources in supporting data collection about HE trends. It is important to note that some countries have put in place such a reporting system. Some countries have been unable to generate a comparison of students’ attributes over 10 years. Nevertheless, as the Eurydice report notes, it also appears likely that, in some national contexts, issues related to diversity are of marginal national and public interest, and that the data collected is not being analysed or not being publicised. (European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, 2014, p. 19)

The demand for more data is a recurring theme, expressed in all European Union documents that address inclusion in HE. However, it appears as if the complexity of collecting and analyzing information on this topic is sometimes used as an excuse for indefinitely postponing the development of actual strategies and policies that could have a real impact on the inclusion of non-traditional students.

ASSESSING INNOVATION AND INCLUSION IN HEIS As noted, inclusion is one of the most complex concepts to be considered and one of the greatest challenges for existing HEIs. These institutions must be aware that inclusion is more than understanding specific educational needs. As Armstrong, Armstrong, and Barton (2016) state: “At the heart of the idea of inclusive education lie serious issues concerning human rights, equal opportunities, and social justice” (p. 1). Inclusion implies that the challenge to understand this new scenario is an opportunity for mutual learning and innovation, rather than a problem. Within this framework, the A4A project has developed a self-assessment tool for those HEIs (such as universities and polytechnics) that are willing to explore and improve their innovative and inclusive policies. The main goal of this selfassessment tool helps HEIs describe and understand their current situation and explore promising areas for development. The self-assessment tool should measure not only the HEI’s values and principles but also the main organizational characteristics for promoting any kind of innovation, especially ideas aimed at improving students’ inclusion, making the HEI more open and reducing structural discrimination. Any HEI willing to become a socially responsible institution (Vasilescu, Barna, Epure, & Baicu, 2010) should not only be an institution committed to inclusion but also a dynamic institution that supports innovation and creativity. Hence, the main dimensions to be evaluated by the A4A self-assessment are related to institutional factors (HEI organizational maturity, institutional innovation management culture, and knowledge sharing) and inclusion factors (shared understanding of inclusion, policies for inclusion, and actions for inclusion).

Policies and Practices of Social Development

61

1. HEI organizational maturity (How organizationally mature is your HEI?): This first general and comprehensive dimension is constructed according to organizational development theories that focus on both individual- and organizational-level change, development and transformation through planned interventions and aim to improve organizational effectiveness (Waddell, Cummings, & Worley, 2011). 2. Institutional innovation management culture (Is your HEI flexible enough to deal with a volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous environment?): This factor refers to the nature and type of institutional values, processes, rules, manifestations, and trends in relation to changing and adapting to new external and internal demands (Obendhain & Johnson, 2004), especially those related to equity and inclusion in HE. 3. Knowledge sharing (How does your HEI share knowledge, both inside and outside the organization?): This is a key process of any knowledge management strategy and, therefore, a basic form of action for promoting innovation in any HEI. Knowledge sharing processes should include the acquisition of knowledge and its organization, distribution, reuse, and transfer in accordance with collective and organizational benefit (Rodríguez-Gómez, 2015). 4. Shared understanding of inclusion (Is there a clear and shared understanding of inclusion in HEIs?): This is determined by several factors (institutional, organizational, personal or individual, cultural, social, curricular, political, or ethical, among others) and has to guarantee social justice principles (such as students’ self-determination, their rights and their access, and equity and social participation in HE contexts). 5. Policies for inclusion (Do the HEI policies clearly encourage inclusion?): Policies for inclusion are the first steps for taking care of vulnerable students but also the conditions for organizational improvement. Policies for inclusion represent the basis for any future strategies for dealing with vulnerable groups. This dimension includes aspects related to university governance and management related to inclusion. 6. Actions for inclusion (What kind of inclusion-related action is your HEI developing?): Inclusion requires the involvement of the affected individuals, as well as the collaboration of institutional actors, civil society and the public and private sectors in the design, implementation, and evaluation of action for inclusion. Each factor included in this self-assessment tool has five indicators and each indicator sets out four possible scenarios (see Table 1). From each indicator, you must choose only one scenario (the one that best represents your HEI). If any of the dimensions are irrelevant to your own institution or you do not have enough information to answer it, you can leave it blank. The A4A self-assessment tool can be used by individuals (e.g., managers, faculty, staff, and students), groups, or any kind of formal institutional structure (departments, institutes, schools, etc.). The group and “formal institutional structure” allow discussions to be opened up inside HEIs. The A4A self-assessment

62

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

Table 1.  Example of Indicators and Scenarios for Evaluating the HEI Organizational Maturity. Organizational Approach: How Do You Define Your HEI?  My organization designs its interventions regardless of its structural characteristics and personnel.

 My organization is dynamic and work around a shared vision.

  My organization My organization makes continually reviews the most of the its underlying internal knowledge policies and objectives and share it with to improve. other organizations.

Leadership: What kind of leadership is “predominant” in you HEI?   The leader/director is The leader/director autocratic. He/she delegates the make decisions based implementation on his/she own ideas of activities, but and does not accept controls results any input from HEI members.

 The leader/director trust on the autonomy and responsibility of HEI schools, departments, groups and individuals.

 The leader/director trust on the autonomy and responsibility of groups and individuals, and she/ he is actively involved in organizational activities.

Organizational structure: What you HEI structure looks like?   My organizational My organizational structure is rigid and structure is flexible, mostly vertical. although with limitations, and project oriented.

  My organizational My organizational structure allows a structure depends certain autonomy of on the relationships organizational bodies between people (the and personnel. structure promotes networking).

tool can also be used to compare different visions about the same HEI or how HEI perceptions of innovation and inclusion change over time. The result of the questionnaire is an organizational profile (see Fig. 1) that will guide the subsequent proposal for improvement. Based on the results of the selfassessment, some guidance notes for improvement are provided. The A4A toolkit (available at https://www.access4allproject.eu/) also provides a broad bank of good practices, a strategic plan for improving inclusion in HEIs, and additional ideas and guidance for substantive institutional change.

GOOD PRACTICES FOR INCLUSION IN HE The discussion about the concept and relevance of best practices, from a broad approach, is wide ranging. Prior contributions have focused on the lack of standardized models and definitions (Sanwal, 2008; Wellstein & Kieser, 2011) and on the rigorous process that is used when collecting ideas, actions, or processes that later become best practice (Bardach, 2003; Turner, Haley, & Hallencreutz, 2009).

Policies and Practices of Social Development

63

Fig. 1.  Example of the Organizational Profile Output.

Moreover, when talking about best practice it is important to keep in mind that professionals are increasingly asked to be more accountable and to quantify and document the impact of services (Druery, McCormack, & Murphy, 2013). In the A4A project, “practice” refers to when a specific technique, method, process, activity, policy, or strategy is performed habitually or customarily. To be a “good practice,” a practice must serve the desired purpose better than the average practice. A good practice differs from the best practice in the sense that the former is a common practice that works, something that is actually practiced, while the best practice is something that surpasses all others in excellence but may not be very commonly practiced as yet. A rigorous evaluative process must be used when selecting good practices in support of improving access, retention, and success in HE for vulnerable groups and non-traditional learners in Europe. Thus, the A4A project uses formal and content-related criteria, as described below. The first section of the good practice template asks for general information including the title of the project or activity, three to five keywords, the project or activity’s objectives, the phase of studies (access, retention, graduation, or transition to working life), the type of degree (bachelor’s, graduate, or master’s), the scope (international, national, institutional, faculty, group, or individual), the name of the institution and its location (city and country), the target groups, and also the stakeholders involved. The criteria shown in Table 2 are followed by final reflections that focus on providing success factors (What are the factors required for successful implementation?), on identifying actions needed to sustain the action or project being implemented (What is needed to sustain the practice? What resources are required? How does it contribute to environmental, economic, or social sustainability?), and on identifying challenges (What are the constraints identified? How easy it is to learn and develop?).

64

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

Table 2.  Formal and Content Criteria for Selecting and Collecting Good Practices. A Formal Criteria A1. Access to Information: Is the information about the practice publicly available? Yes/no A2. Timeframe: Since when has it been in use (time frame)? What is its maturity level (initial, intermediate, advanced)? Is there evidence of its duration in the long rung? A3. Number of Students: How many students are involved? Is the number representative considering the target group? A4. Scalability: Has it been or can it potentially be scaled up and practiced in a wider scale? Or, has it been or can it potentially be scaled down (e.g., from larger to smaller institutions)? A5. Transferability: Has it been or can it potentially be transferred and applied to different (a) target groups, (b) institutions, and (c) societies? Can you name some practices that this initiative was developed from or has inspired to? A6. Assessment: How has it been evaluated? How has it proved its relevance as the most effective way to achieve the objective? How was it successfully adopted? How it has had a positive impact on people? How the impact has been measured?  A6.1 User evaluation (all stakeholders involved) YES/NO  A6.2 Self-evaluation YES/NO  A6.3 Peer evaluation YES/NO  A6.4 External expert evaluation YES/NO A7. Contact: Who can be contacted so as to seek support and networks for implementing the practice? B Content Criteria B1. Social Justice Principles (see Nelson & Creagh, 2013):   B1.1 S  elf-determination: Have students participated to its (a) design, (b) enactment, and (c) evaluation? Is it possible to make informed decisions about participation?   B1.2 R  ights: Are all participants treated with dignity and respect? How have their individual cultural, social and knowledge systems been recognized and valued?   B1.3 A  ccess: Has an active and impartial access to the resources (e.g., curriculum, learning, academic, social, cultural, support, and financial resources) been provided?   B1.4 E  quity: Does it openly demystify and decode dominant university cultures, processes, expectations, and language for differently prepared cohorts?   B1.5 P  articipation: Has it led to socially inclusive practices? Does it increase students’ sense of belonging and connectedness? B2. Collaboration: Is there collaboration between various stakeholders? Does the practice increase this collaboration? B3. Student Satisfaction: What is the student perception of this initiative? Is there evidence of their satisfaction? (See also A4) B4. Student Wellbeing: How does it influence on students’ (a) psychological, (b) social, (c) academic, and (d) physical wellbeing? What kind of evidence there is on the improved student wellbeing?

Taking these criteria into consideration, a template has been created for collecting and sharing good practices. The people involved in the implementation process completed the template and also provided information through interviews. The criteria developed in the A4A project serve as a self-evaluation tool for identifying good practices. Before distributing a good practice, it has to be evaluated by experts (such as university staff members, policy makers, and student union representatives). When the practice is published, it is also exposed to peer evaluation. The detailed criteria and template are available at https://goo.gl/ LqzoZg.

Policies and Practices of Social Development

65

Furthermore, there is a set of examples of good practices, selected using the A4A “good practices” template and collected from HEIs in Finland, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Spain, and the UK. The examples relate to educational, economic, social, and technological accessibility issues. A further explanation of all these good practices can be found on the A4A project website (https://access4allproject.eu/ bestpractices). 1. Goodie model: This is a unique operations model established in the University of Jyväskylä in Finland to support the wellbeing of students. In the so-called Goodie model, where a “Goodie” is a student wellbeing adviser, members of staff are trained to assist students with their problems in discussion sessions. The model’s underlying idea is to provide support to students in different life situations and help guide the students to the right services when needed. Thus, this model is a low-threshold channel for student support (Fig. 2). 2. Confidential counselor: The confidential counselor model is an external adviser service provided in the University of Trento, Italy. The counselor assists with mobbing or sexual harassment situations. Information and training are provided to raise student awareness of different forms of mobbing and sexual harassment as well as to prevent them. 3. Supporting students through mobile phone technology (SAS-Mobile): The Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo in Portugal has created a mobile phone application for students that includes information about available services. The objective of the app is to raise awareness about services (food, accommodation,

Fig. 2.  Finnish Student Wellbeing Model with “Goodies.”

66

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

social support, health, sport, and culture) as well as to increase the use of these services. 4. Social aid scholarships: These scholarships are used in the University of Bucharest in Romania to assist students from socially disadvantaged groups. The scholarships provide financial help to students from such groups on condition that they have fulfilled their duties as students at a suitable level. 5. Social and linguistic support (connect a community program): This program is offered at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona in Spain, targeting international students. These students have the opportunity to connect with other students with an international background while learning Catalan or Spanish. The program thus combines language learning with socializing. 6. Access to Bristol scheme: This scheme is delivered by the University of Bristol in England to increase access to university education to people from traditionally underrepresented groups. The scheme offers students taking A-levels or equivalents the opportunity to enrich their curricula and thus achieve higher grades, helping them succeed with their university applications.

PROMOTING INCLUSION THROUGH STRATEGIC PLANNING HEIs are expected to be strong and determined leaders in the (re)building of society for the future, providing access to knowledge and technology in order to face the multiple and differentiated global challenges related to human beings’ impact on the planet. The social responsibility of HE in post-modern societies needs to be an integral part of the HEI. It needs to be incorporated, first, in the institution’s mission and guiding principles and values and, later, in the strategic planning of the HEI (which translates into policies, actions, human resources, and budgets) in order to achieve the organization’s objectives. Inclusion should, therefore, be framed within the HEI strategy. A systemic institutional integration model should be followed – one that involves vertical and horizontal leadership, internal organizational structures, governance (including top management), and external stakeholders in a participatory network relationship and that is representative of the expectations of all stakeholders, including students. This line of strategic planning of an HEI is based on the principle of the continuous promotion of inclusion in access, retention, and success in HE, and is the reference matrix of the A4A pyramid inclusion model (see Fig. 3). The interactive and dynamic pyramid inclusion model guides institutional representatives in an in-depth analysis of the internal and external environment that may impact the institution. To do this, it uses a collaborative process in which the interested parties participate. This allows representatives to identify the measures of intervention (strategy and actions) that should take priority to ensure inclusion. The process of strategic planning for inclusion requires the commitment of top management, along with inputs from other relevant key stakeholders in the HE ecosystem. Students, teachers and researchers, technical and administrative collaborators, and employers cannot be relegated to the background. The lack of coherence and/or harmony between what the organization

Policies and Practices of Social Development

67

Fig. 3.  A4A Pyramid Inclusion Model.

perceives about what stakeholders value and what they truly value can lead to a lack of alignment and transparency for all involved (ORSIES, 2018). Finally, there should be an evaluation and monitoring system that is built on a set of impact indicators that can periodically compare the results of the organization’s evolution. These results should be communicable to the different segments of the academic community in particular and to all audiences in general, in a logic of accountability.

CONCLUSIONS Quality in HEIs is clearly associated with promoting their social dimension. Although no HEI can guarantee a 100% student success rate, HEIs should work on promoting the access, retention, and graduation of everyone prepared to take part in this stage of education. HEIs should also promote the effective development of new competences and capacities for productive and professional development that is relevant and significant. HE should be available as of right to all would-be students and especially to those in vulnerable situations. Considerable efforts have been made to encourage the inclusion of vulnerable groups in HE, based on promoting their access to institutions. However, this first step is not enough, bearing in mind that there is a gap between being “inside” the institution and guaranteeing the right to HE by ensuring the appropriate conditions to allow for real inclusion and the achievement of relevant, good-quality learning. The A4A toolkit (the bank of good practices and criteria for selecting good practices, the self-assessment tool, and the pyramid inclusion model) seeks to add to the many initiatives and efforts made to increase overall participation and the participation of underrepresented groups in HE.

68

DAVID RODRÍGUEZ-GÓMEZ ET AL.

The main goal of the A4A project is to prevent individuals and social groups from being left on the margins of socioeconomic development and from entering the progressive escalation that sometimes accompanies differential processes (for reasons, such as gender, ethnicity, economic situation, and geographical location) and that involves processes of discrimination and marginalization until the end result is exclusion. By promoting more inclusive HE, we are not just avoiding discrimination, marginalization, or exclusion but are also fostering a more democratic, just, and respectful society formed by critical and highly competent people.

REFERENCES Archer, L., Hutchings, M., & Ross, A. (2003). Higher education and social class: Issues of exclusion and inclusion. Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer. Armstrong, F., Armstrong, D., & Barton, L. (2016). Inclusive education: Policy, contexts and comparative perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge. Bardach, E. (2003). Creating compendia of “best practice”. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(4), 661–665. Druery, J., McCormack, N., & Murphy, S. (2013). Are best practices really best? A review of the best practices literature in library and information studies. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 8(4), 110–128. Hauschildt, K., Vögtle, E. M., & Gwosć, C. (2018). Social and economic conditions of student life in Europe. Bielefeld, Germany: Bertelsmann. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/qr621n EHEA. (1999). The Bologna declaration of 19 June 1999. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/media. ehea.info/file/Ministerial_conferences/02/8/1999_Bologna_Declaration_English_553028.pdf EHEA. (2001). Towards the European higher education area. Communiqué of the meeting of European ministers in charge of higher education in Prague, Czech Republic. Retrieved from http://www. ehea.info/media.ehea.info/file/2001_Prague/44/2/2001_Prague_Communique_English_553442. pdf EHEA. (2003). Realising the European higher education area. Communiqué of the conference of ministers responsible for higher education in Berlin, Germany. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/ media.ehea.info/file/2003_Berlin/28/4/2003_Berlin_Communique_English_577284.pdf EHEA. (2007). London communiqué: Towards the European higher education area: Responding to challenges in a globalised world. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/media.ehea.info/file/2007_ London/69/7/2007_London_Communique_English_588697.pdf EHEA. (2009). The bologna process 2020: the European higher education area in the new decade. Communiqué of the conference of European ministers responsible for higher education, Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/media.ehea.info/file/2009_Leuven_ Louvain-la-Neuve/06/1/Leuven_Louvain-la-Neuve_Communique_April_2009_595061.pdf EHEA. (2010). Budapest-Vienna declaration on the European Higher Education Area. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/media.ehea.info/file/2010_Budapest_Vienna/64/0/Budapest-Vienna_ Declaration_598640.pdf EHEA. (2012). Making the most of our potential: Consolidating the European Higher Education Area – Bucharest communiqué. Retrieved from http://www.ehea.info/media.ehea.info/file/2012_ Bucharest/67/3/Bucharest_Communique_2012_610673.pdf EHEA. (2015). Yerevan communiqué. Retrieved from http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/ YerevanCommuniqueFinal.pdf European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2014). Modernisation of higher education in Europe: Access, retention and employability 2014: Eurydice report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/ publication/59560dcc-a3c3-11e5-b528-01aa75ed71a1/language-en Łybacka, K. (2015). Report on follow-up on the implementation of the Bologna Process. Brussels, Belgium: European Parliament Committee on Culture and Education. Retrieved from https:// goo.gl/J8dQXA

Policies and Practices of Social Development

69

Obendhain, A. M., & Johnson, W. C. (2004). Product and process innovation in service organizations: The influence of organizational culture in higher education institutions. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 9(3), 91–113. Orr, D., & Mishra, S. (2015). A comprehensive approach to investigating the social dimension in European higher education systems: EUROSTUDENT and the PL4SD country reviews. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, & P. Scott (Eds.), The European higher education area: Between critical reflections and future policies (pp. 467–478). New York, NY: Springer International Publishing. ORSIES. (2018). Livro verde sobre responsabilidade social e instituições de ensino superior. “Versão provisória para consulta pública” (“Provisional version for public consultation”). Lisbon, Portugal: Press Forum – Comunicação Social, S.A. Retrieved from http://orsies.forum.pt/ wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Livro_Verde.pdf Rodríguez-Gómez, D. (2015). Gestión del conocimiento y mejora de las organizaciones educativas. Madrid, Spain: La Muralla. Sanwal, A. (2008). The myth of best practices. Journal of Corporate Accounting and Finance, 19(5), 51–60. Turner, D. M., Haley, H., & Hallencreutz, J. (2009). Towards a global definition of best practice in change management. International Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 9(8), 187–192. Vasilescu, R., Barna, C., Epure, M., & Baicu, C. (2010). Developing university social responsibility: A model for the challenges of the new civil society. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4177–4182. Waddell, D. M., Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2011). Organisational change: Development and transformation (4th ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning. Wellstein, B., & Kieser, A. (2011). Trading “best practices”: a good practice? Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(3), 683–719.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 5 ENHANCING INCLUSION, EXPERIENCE, AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: PEER-TO-PEER MENTORING FOR EQUITY GROUP STUDENTS IN AN AUSTRALIAN REGIONAL UNIVERSITY Bill (W.E.) Boyd, Katrina Alexander, Margie Wallin, Warren Lake, Rob Cumings and Rachel Callahan

ABSTRACT This chapter describes an undergraduate peer-to-peer mentoring program, UniMentor, at a regional Australian university, which aims to support students in equity groups. Key benefits identified are: enhanced retention rates; improved academic performance; and strengthened social networks. While the focus is on commencing students (mentees), significant positive outcomes for thirdyear mentors are also apparent. Internal and external challenges that may influence access to mentoring among students include shifting institutional support and roles and curriculum change. Enablers include training, clarity of purpose, strong support networks, and fostering student sense of ownership. The effect of disciplinary culture on uptake and effectiveness of mentoring is also important. Overall, the program compares well against published frameworks of successful student mentoring. Nevertheless, critical questions remain

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 71–86 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017006

71

72

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

regarding the effectiveness of general versus targeted mentoring programs for students in equity groups. Keywords: Peer-to-peer mentoring; equity groups; university; disciplinary culture; first in family; Indigenous; low socio-economic status; regional and remote; non-English speaking background; international students

INTRODUCTION Peer-to-peer support has a long tradition among students in higher education, although only in the last two decades or so have universities formalized such support into university-wide student-mentoring schemes. Here, we reflect and report on the 10-year program of our university’s student peer-to-peer mentoring scheme – the UniMentor program – and consider its role in supporting students in equity groups. A review of the program’s history, along with reflection on lessons learnt along the way, provides both a case study of such a program in a university with many students identifying as equity group students, and a demonstration of the effectiveness of a university-driven approach to student support. Student-mentoring schemes commonly engage peers at various stages of their academic career: teaching staff, tutors, undergraduate, and postgraduate students, and alumni with undergraduate students. The program described here is focused on undergraduate peer-to-peer mentor–mentee relationships, supporting commencing students. The students describe their experience in diverse ways; a small sample of the 2016 first-year mentees illustrates this point (SCU Equity & Diversity Office, 2016).

• “It makes you feel like you are not alone and always have someone to talk to.” • “… having the thought of someone who cares a bit about how you are going • •

with your studies and that extra connection and feeling of belonging in the Southern Cross University (SCU) family.” “Uni is daunting, having someone there who’s been there before available is really nice.” “My mentor helped alleviate [my] anxiety … prior to commencing, and during my first few weeks of university study. She gave me helpful tips and advice that gave me confidence to manage and stay on track with my study.”

University student-mentoring programs are usually focused on new or commencing students and aim to improve retention rates (Cutright & Evans, 2016). The target cohort among commencing student is often based around equity or other under-represented groups. In Australia, these include people of low socioeconomic status, living in rural and remote areas, being culturally and linguistically diverse, identifying as Indigenous, with a disability, and of diverse gender or sexuality. Our university also recognizes a significant group, students who are first in family attending university. The importance of mentoring programs in supporting students from disadvantaged groups is widely understood. Devlin, Kift, Nelson, Smith, and Mackay

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

73

(2012, p. 45) highlight the role of peer mentoring programs as a “key institutional strategy” in supporting low socioeconomic status students. A similar conclusion was reached regarding second chance education, the opportunity for students from disadvantaged or socially diverse backgrounds to engage in higher education, often later in life (Savelsberg, Pignata, & Weckert, 2017). Savelsberg et al. (2017) identify the first of several vital aspects to successful equity programs, “the importance of mentoring with a focus on participants’ personal development, especially for participants who face multiple and complex needs and challenges” (p. 55). Mature age students also benefit from peer mentoring (Hryciw, Tangalakis, Supple, & Best, 2013). Mentoring programs for minority groups can focus on specific needs (Hood, Hood, & McBride, 2013), and can be designed to address key disadvantages faced by students who identify as Indigenous (e.g., James, McGlone West, & Madrid, 2013; Kensington-Miller & Ratima, 2015; Okun, Berlin, Hanrahan, Lewis, & Johnson, 2015; Pidgeon, Archibald, & Hawkey, 2014; Shotton, Oosahwe, & Cintrón, 2007), belong to ethnic minority groups (Murakami & Núñez, 2014; Phinney, Torres Campos, Padilla Kallemeyn, & Kim, 2011; Reyes, 2011; Rios-Ellis et al., 2015) or may be from refugee and migrant backgrounds (Vickers, McCarthy, & Zammit, 2017). There is also a rich literature regarding mentoring for students with disabilities (e.g., Adams & Hayes, 2011; Culnane, Eisenman, & Murphy, 2016; Farley, Gibbons, & Cihak, 2014). This literature reflects the importance of Beltman, Samani, and Ala’i’s (2017) recommendation that, given that students from equity groups are proportionately more likely not to complete university compared with other students, an increase in support for students from these groups through the engagement phase is recommended. (p. 39)

Mentoring provides support and guidance to both commencing students and those who volunteer to mentor. Benefits to mentors (Beltman & Schaeben, 2012) include a greater sense of connectedness and confidence building, and career development skills that assist them to become more competitive after graduation. Academic success is often the first outcome of mentoring for both mentor and mentee (Fox, Stevenson, Connelly, Duff, & Dunlop, 2010; Hatfield, 2011). Engaged mentees scored significantly higher on grades, deep, and strategic methods of study, and study efficacy (Mitchell, 2013). Colvin (2015) notes the beneficial connections for mentees between assistance in class work, connection to the campus and improved retention, while mentor benefits arise out of helping others, applying mentoring practices to their own lives, and building their own networks. Some of our 2017 student mentors commented on these advantages: “I learned new skills and became more connected with uni,” and “supporting other students helped to consolidate my knowledge base” (SCU Equity & Diversity Office, 2017). The majority of published studies affirm that mentoring, in some form, is valuable to mentors and/or mentees.

THE SCU UNIMENTOR PROGRAM Here, we present a case study from our university, in which senior (third year) undergraduate students mentor commencing (first year) students. The focus is

74

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

on university life in general, building new students’ capacity to live and study well within the university environment. This entails social support, from building social networks to navigating the system. The following account is based on interviews with program coordinators and other staff (co-authors), and analysis of annual satisfaction surveys (qualitative and quantitative) and annual reports; the latter are available in the public domain. The surveys largely comprised qualitative responses from students. The case study first describes the history of the program, from which insights into successful influences are provided, and then asks the question of how well the program is meeting the needs of equity groups. Our university is a new-generation (24 years old) regional and rural university, with a distinctive student cohort. Equity of access to higher education is important in our student engagement processes. Our students represent the common equity groups, notably from regional and remote or isolated areas. Many are of low socioeconomic status, limited prior educational opportunity, first in family, Indigenous, and mature age students. A significant number have a disability, are from non-English speaking backgrounds, or have diverse sexuality or gender identities. Many identify with more than one equity group. To illustrate the scale and patterns of equity group presence at our university; the figures tend to be at the high end of university population figures in Australia:

• 9% of students have a disability, 30% of which are of low socioeconomic status. • 61.5% of commencing students are first in family. • One-third of Indigenous students are of low socioeconomic status. • 14% of students are of low socioeconomic status, with regional or remote background. • 46.5% of domestic undergraduate students are over 25; 21% of these, and 25% of under-25-year-olds are of low socioeconomic status.

To support such equity groups, the university established the UniMentor program. It is designed for students commencing their study, who are paired in their first study session with senior undergraduate student mentors. The mentor’s voluntary role is to help the student to settle quickly and successfully into university life, helping new students overcome the academic and social challenges of commencing university. Every commencing student may join the program, and mentors become eligible in their third or final year.

HISTORY OF UNIMENTOR SCHEME Design and Development: 2006–2008 The program was piloted in 2006, and formally implemented in 2007; evaluation data collection commenced in 2009. It has grown consistently, with approximately 1,000 of the 4,000 commencing students being matched to 350 mentors (Fig. 1). Charting the program’s growth and development – an example of Ingleby’s (2011) “institutional transformation from small beginnings” (p. 97) – provides insight

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

75

Fig. 1.  Number of Mentors and Mentees Engaged Per Year in the Southern Cross University UniMentor Program Since the Program Began in 2007.

into its effect and impact, shines light on the challenges of running such a program, and helps understanding the benefits of the program. The program is designed around active involvement and training of mentors and mentees. The core premise is this is a student-to-student program; academic and other staff have a light touch, supporting but not mentoring (Kirkham & Ringelstein, 2008; Poling, 2015; Reyes, 2011; Streitwieser & Light, 2010). Training is important, and is ongoing (Barker et al., 2012; Bichy & O’Brien, 2014; Colvin & Ashman, 2010; Cornelius, Wood, & Lai, 2016; Holt & Berwise, 2012). However, for practical reasons, only mentors were initially given leadership and up-skilling training, while the mentees only had the program intention and process explained to them. Mentors were expected to pass on information and understanding of mentoring, and primarily drive the experience. Training for mentees came later in response to student feedback indicating both desire and need for mentees induction; there is now a full training program. The 2006 pilot program was funded to engage equity student groups in nursing and business on only one of the university campuses. The program was coordinated by the Equity Services Office and funded by a federal government Australian Higher Education Equity Participation scheme grant. The pilot drew on a promising first cohort of 40 new students as mentees, each linked with a second or third-year student mentor within their departments. Some first-year students (tens) also attended a weekly lunch for information. Even at this stage, mentors reported developing the confidence to informally mentor other students, and they often became student champions, widely promoting the program. The next year, a new coordinator opened the program to all undergraduate students on all three campuses, attracting 213 student mentors and 191 mentees. Students from equity groups were well represented among both mentors and mentees (179 and 85); most were from rural and isolated areas, then of low socioeconomic status students, with a disability, from non-English speaking backgrounds and Indigenous students – students understood the educational and social benefits of being mentored.

76

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

By 2008, the program was available to all students, including distance students, with the number growing to 259 mentors and 392 mentees. Reporting became more detailed at this stage, and patterns of interest and uptake diversified across the university. Women were the main mentors and mentees (c. 80%) (Fig. 2) and most students completed their period as mentee or mentor (c. 95%). Campus numbers reflected the three campus and online populations. With continuing interest in the established program disciplines, there was strong uptake in education and elsewhere in the health sciences, where professional mentoring is well established. The complexity of this growing environment resulted in some on-campus and distance-study students being matched. Most of the students identified with one or more equity group, mostly from rural and isolated areas, or of low socioeconomic status; student from non-English speaking backgrounds increased.

SUSTAINED GROWTH AND RESISTANCE: 2009–2013 For the next couple of years, an increase in numbers of student mentees and mentors continued along similar lines, reflecting the dynamics of a growing regional university. This period of growth saw some interesting discussions emerging regarding the role of such a mentoring program. Three matters stand out. 1. Some resistance, notably in disciplines with traditions of professional mentoring, reflected fears of a “big-brother” take-over. Discussions around the central concept of the program – as a strictly student-to-student program (Poling, 2015; Reyes, 2011; Streitwieser & Light, 2010), in contrast to a more common model of educational peer mentoring which engages academic staff (Kirkham & Ringelstein, 2008) – provided greater clarity of purpose, especially regarding claimed benefits of university-wide equity, quality and resources, contextualized against disciplinary cultures.

Fig. 2.  Proportion of Southern Cross University UniMentor Program Female and Male Mentees Per Year.

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

77

2. An institutional push to move the program to Student Services elicited student resistance: they liked the program where it was, considering it independent from both academic schools and student administration, and thus felt they could speak more frankly. Given this student position, the program remained in the Equity & Diversity Office. An outcome reflecting the importance of the institutional relationship with the program, especially regarding student engagement and their sense of ownership and confidence. 3. Some students questioned why they should participate in such a program – is it not the university’s job to provide mentoring and support? The coordinator drew attention to the value of leveraging students’ wisdom and experience, something that staff do not have. The implicit value of peer learning (Cohen, Sampson, & Boud 2001) underpinned this program, but such student comment highlighted the need to make the premise explicit.

RECENT CHALLENGES 2014–2018 By 2014, the current coordinator commenced, supporting technology to effect efficiencies in program delivery, and growing numbers significantly – 746 student mentees and 387 mentors in 2014, 972 and 353 in 2015, and 1,068 mentees by 2017; 90% of mentees and mentors remained engaged for the full semester. Importantly, uptake by equity groups was shifting. Numbers of Indigenous students, students with a disability and with non-English speaking background remained at or above the general student population (Fig. 3). Nearly half of the mentees identify as first in family at university, although they and students of low socioeconomic status have been proportionally under-represented (Fig. 4).

Fig. 3.  Proportions of Selected Equity Groups Engaged in the UniMentor Program. University-wide Averages: ATSI (Indigenous) 2–4.3%; Students with a Disability 4%; and Non-English Speaking Background (NESB) 1%.

78

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

These trends reflect other dynamics – growing Indigenous student support, international support, and pre-entry English language support, and the recognition of first in family as a significant equity group. Two further initiatives were implemented: champions were enlisted from the University staff, and staff and student networks were developed. With widespread understanding of the program, staff promoted it in class. The network continues, challenged by staffing changes, notably among those who teach at first and third years, the important recruitment stages. Such challenges presage broader challenges to the success of the rapidly

Fig. 4.  Proportion of Mentees Identifying as First in Family (Top Chart) and of Socio-economic Status (Bottom Chart) for Recent Years (2013–2016). UniversityWide Values: First in Family 64%; Low Socio-economic Status 31%.

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

79

growing program (discussed below) and emphasize the importance of institutional and staff support for such a program. Steady growth in numbers of mentees, especially relative to mentors, reflected the increasing visibility of the program, inter-generational word-of-mouth among students, and the role of staff support. However, in 2017, student satisfaction dropped, possibly for two reasons; these may inform possibilities for maintaining an equity support scheme. 1. Organizational change and financial pressure. Australian universities are under funding pressure – the 2018 government university grant was cut significantly, along with core government funding for equity and access services. This resulted in the loss of project-based staff. Government changes to student support models and fee structures also increase financial pressure on students, notably in a rural and remote region typically with low socio-economic, Indigenous, first in family students, those with a disability, and a small growing, international cohort. All these groups face additional pressures, including financial; many are mature age students requiring employment (in a high unemployment region) to support their studies. These conditions directly impact students’ capacity to study; importantly, they limit the capacity for students to commit to voluntary activities such as mentoring. 2. Curriculum and pedagogical change. Some 40% of students are enrolled online and therefore contact with students is changing. The possibility for direct mentor-mentee contact is declining. Changes in scheduling of teaching sessions, including a tighter timetable, teaching sessions ending and commencing closer to each other, the introduction of a short teaching session, and intensive delivery modes of delivery, all place greater learning pressure on students. This is compounded by increasing IT-based curriculum delivery, which presents challenges to building a student community in regional areas. Internet access is poor in such areas, with students struggling with low download rates, unable to afford contemporary computing support. Such changes are designed to offer increased flexibility and opportunity for students, but, at a time when mentoring is increasingly necessary, may be mitigating against student engagement with the mentoring program they need.

DISCIPLINARY RESPONSES TO THE PROGRAM Throughout the life of the program, uptake for both mentors and mentees has varied across the university. This is a useful filter through which to consider the effect of the program, as it reflects both disciplinary and departmental cultures and practices. The field of education conventionally has a high request rate for mentees, while volunteering for mentoring remains low. Nursing, in contrast, has many mentors and many more mentees. Do these patterns reflect understanding and practices around the role of mentoring in these professions that impact on student interest in mentoring? If being mentored is understood to be a good thing, why

80

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

is not translated in volunteering as a mentor? In contrast, social science, social welfare, psychology, and arts attract few mentors. The first three have professional supervision traditions, so where does the disconnection with the program stem from? Is there in-house mentoring that satisfies their needs? The business program is variable. Yearly uptake of positions varies according to who the student champions are that year; there is a significant influence of strong personalities. Is this a business culture, in which peers and peer networks provide behavior drivers, or in which competition is key? Uptake in IT tends to be weak: are there weaker social communication tendencies in the IT professional culture? Two other disciplines, tourism and osteopathy present a different situation. While there is a tendency toward weaker uptake, both fields already have informal mentoring. Tourism has a significant number of international students; recognized as being culturally and linguistically diverse, sharing many of the characteristics of other equity groups, including social isolation, economic stress, and cultural marginalization, their department supports them strongly. Osteopathy is a close-knit professional group and has a strong tradition of informal mentoring. Mentoring is understood in both disciplines to be important, and active engagement with mentoring is related to a strong sense of disciplinary identity. Involvement in the fields of science and engineering is diverse and is site-specific. With few mentors engineering, a culture of support within its program fosters is a close-knit community with strong identification to one building. Marine science students differ from other science students in that they move from one campus to another, a purpose-built marine science facility some 200 km away, in their final year, and are provided mentoring by postgraduate students. Both examples are site-specific responses, reflecting the discrete nature of a profession, and linked to geography and place-based identity.

REFLECTION In 2009, one head of school commented that, […] the true value of the mentoring program is that mentors are proactive in their contact with mentees, and unlike staff members, are able to speak from a shared experience and thus can provide advice that is relevant, empathetic and cognisant of the mentee’s concerns.

That head also noted that the program is well designed to empower students to develop their independence as learners through the support of an experienced, trained, and empathetic mentor. In the same year, a student advisor in Student Services commented that before the program, university life was difficult for some new students; they knew they needed more than academic assistance. “Feedback from these students,” this advisor noted, “has been a sense of relief and an increased feeling of confidence to participate in all aspects of university life.” Other evidence, however, indicates real success. Since 2009, more firstyear mentees returned to university after first year than average (Fig. 5). In 2017, for example, 81 mentees specifically reported that having a mentor helped them stay at university, while the program average difference for returning to

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

81

Fig. 5.  Percentage Difference Between Retention Rates for All University Students and for those Engaged in the UniMentor Program; UniMentor Mentees Retention Rate is on Average 6% Greater than for Other Students.

second year is 69% for students without a mentor and 75% for those with a mentor. Furthermore, 80% of mentees report that they would recommend getting a mentor to their peers, while 89% of mentors said they would recommend becoming a mentor. All equity groups are increasingly represented in the mentee cohort. In 2017, 49 of the 233 commencing Indigenous students, for example, were matched with a mentor, an increase from 2016. This was achieved through strong partnership with the Indigenous Australian Student Support team. The vast majority (90%) continued past census date, a critical stage within the first weeks of first term, a date before which students can withdraw without financial or academic penalty. An important aspect of supporting students from equity groups to remain at university is to get them through this critical stage.

INSIGHTS – HORIZONS AND POSSIBILITIES This account details the growth of a peer-to-peer mentoring program supporting commencing students in equity groups. As both the equity population and the university population fluctuate, patterns of program engagement and success vary from year to year. The program has to adapt while maintaining its core purpose; this account identifies key influences to support success and adaptation:

• Training of mentors and mentees. • Articulating clarity of purpose. • Valuing student engagement and their sense of ownership. • Balancing university-wide equity against disciplinary needs, and leveraging disciplinary and departmental cultures and practices. • Fostering institutional relationships with the program, and supporting institutional and staff support for the program.

82

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

• Ensuring program visibility, and encouraging inter-generational word-ofmouth among students. • Being aware of the effects of organizational change, financial pressure, and curriculum and pedagogical change.

Throughout the past decade, the UniMentor program has remained true to its mission, as summed up by Terrion and Leonard (2007, p. 152): Peer mentoring is a helping relationship in which two individuals of similar age and/or experience come together … in the pursuit of fulfilling some combination of functions that are career-related … and psychosocial….

Nevertheless, the program has had to manage emerging challenges – maintaining its support, adapting to institutional change, adopting new technologies, balancing student and staff numbers, responding to changing patterns among equity groups, and becoming more self-supporting. A central question is whether the program has reached a critical stage: is there, an optimal number of participants or optimal balance between mentors, mentees, resources, and satisfaction? Should the one-model-fits-all be reconsidered. Or replaced by a model that addresses the diversity of disciplinary and professional cultures, site- or program-specific needs and opportunities more appropriate? Crisp and Cruz’s (2009) characterization of good mentoring is based on three principles: a focus on the mentee’s growth and achievement; provision of broad support; and mentoring relationships being reciprocated and personal. The program remains true to this characterization. Its primary focus is the mentee’s growth. One student noted that “it gives you a kick start to university life,” while another commented that “my student mentor made all the difference between me staying at [university], and leaving” (SCU Equity & Diversity Office, 2012). Listening to student views (Lombardo, Wong, Sanzone, Filion, & Tsimicalis, 2017; Page & Hanna, 2008), inform us that the mentors also received benefits; various studies note significant gains for both mentees and mentors (Alonso, Castaño, Calles, & Sánchez-Herrero, 2010; Amaral & Vala, 2009; Barker et al., 2012). One 2009 mentor, summarized her experience thus: It enables you to obtain valuable leadership and assertiveness training to take on the various roles in employment opportunities[,] to “give something back” and gives you a warm fuzzy feeling, knowing that somebody cares enough to share. (SCU Equity & Diversity Office, 2009)

The mentoring experience may include many forms of support (Crisp & Cruz, 2009); these are variously implemented across the educational sector, reflecting the need for mentoring to be relevant to the context. The program’s original intention was to address the generic needs of commencing students, it is apparent that the specific social, academic, and professional cultures also need to be considered. Regardless of where the benefit lies or what the focus is, Crisp and Cruz’s third characteristic, personal and reciprocal relationships, remain core to the program’s success. Student feedback persists in lauding this aspect (SCU Equity & Diversity Office, 2012):

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

83

• “I have made a fabulous friend.” • “It’s an invaluable experience to both offer someone assistance and feel the sense of connectedness.” • “You get to share some of the things you have learned over the years … and •

simply having responsibility of looking out for someone else is a tremendously rewarding experience.” “I believe in the principle of sharing experience with others … it creates a sense of community.”

Transformational benefits of peer mentoring have “great capacity to foster human and social capital within [the] programs” (Preston, Ogenchuk, & Nsiah, 2014, p. 52), and such reciprocity mirrors Colvin’s (2015) five key mentor roles: connecting link; peer leader; learning coach; student advocate; and trusted friend. Christiansen and Bell (2010) found that reciprocity in mentoring reduced feelings of social isolation, while Lin (2014) noted student perceptions that mentoring helps reduce anxiety. All these outcomes are found within the program and all reflect the successful application of key behavioral principles in mentoring: (i) demonstrate and apply positive regard; (ii) sustain progression toward autonomy; (iii) suspend judgment and focus on describing rather than judging; (iv) encourage the mentee’s responsibility; (v) enact reciprocity where the mentee’s learning is shared and mutually beneficial; and (vi) maintain a clear focus on the purpose of the relationship (Adams, 2016).

CONCLUSION Having identified what sustains successful mentoring, we reflect on Beltman et al.’s (2017) observation that, despite many mentoring programs including equity groups, research into the benefits for equity groups is absent. Our experience hints at this gap; it does not directly address this matter, merely provides insights. We are conscious of the need more rigor in running and evaluating equity mentoring programs and may have to revisit mentee selection processes, mentor recruitment, training and support, and evaluation and reporting outcomes (Beltman et al.’s recommendations 4–6). We also need to better understand the complexities of the mentor–mentee relationship (Colvin & Ashman, 2010; Holt & Berwise, 2012; Holt & Lopez, 2014; Smith-Jentsch, Scielzo, Yarbrough, & Rosopa, 2008; Terrion & Leonard, 2010). This account may best be seen, therefore, as another foundation for critical analysis, and we concur with Beltman et al., that research needs to compare the effectiveness of general versus targeted mentoring programs for students from underrepresented groups.

REFERENCES Adams, D. F., & Hayes, S. G. (2011). Integrating tutor training into faculty mentorship programming to serve students with disabilities. Learning Assistance Review (TLAR), 16(2), 7–21. Retrieved from https://nclca.wildapricot.org/tlar

84

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

Adams, P. (2016). Preparing learning teachers: The role of collaborative inquiry. Canadian Journal of Action Research, 17(1), 20–35. Retrieved from https://journals.nipissingu.ca/index.php/cjar/ article/download/241/118 Alonso, M. A., Castaño, G., Calles, A. M., & Sánchez-Herrero, S. (2010). Assessment of the efficacy of a peer mentoring program in a university setting. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 685–696. doi:10.1017/S1138741600002353 Amaral, K. E., & Vala, M. (2009). What teaching teaches: Mentoring and the performance gains of mentors. Journal of Chemical Education, 86(5), 630–633. doi:10.1021/ed086p630 Barker, T. A., Ngwenya, N., Morley, D., Jones, E., Thomas, C. P., & Coleman, J. J. (2012). Hidden benefits of a peer-mentored ‘hospital orientation day’: First-year medical students’ perspectives. Medical Teacher, 34(4), e229–e235. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.642833 Beltman, S., Samani, S., & Ala’i, K. (2017). Mentoring programs and equity groups: The Australian story. Retrieved from https://www.ncsehe.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Beltman_ Mentoring.pdf Beltman, S., & Schaeben, M. (2012). Institution-wide peer mentoring: Benefits for mentors. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 3(2), 33. doi:10.5204/intjfyhe. v3i2.124 Bichy, C., & O’Brien, E. (2014). Course redesign: Developing peer mentors to facilitate student learning. Learning Assistance Review (TLAR), 19(2), 43–57. Retrieved from https://nclca.wildapricot. org/tlar Christiansen, A., & Bell, A. (2010). Peer learning partnerships: Exploring the experience of preregistration nursing students. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19(5–6), 803–810. doi:10.1111/j.13652702.2009.02981.x Cohen, R., Sampson, J., & Boud, D. J. (2001). Peer learning in higher education: Learning from & with each other. London: Kogan Page. Colvin, J. W. (2015). Peer mentoring and tutoring in higher education. In M. Li & Y. Zhao (Eds.), Exploring learning & teaching in higher education (pp. 207–229). Berlin: Springer. Colvin, J. W., & Ashman, M. (2010). Roles, risks, and benefits of peer mentoring relationships in higher education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(2), 121–134. doi:10.1080/13611261003678879 Cornelius, V., Wood, L., & Lai, J. (2016). Implementation and evaluation of a formal academicpeer-mentoring programme in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17(3), 193–205. doi:10.1177/1469787416654796 Crisp, G., & Cruz, I. (2009). Mentoring college students: A critical review of the literature between 1990 and 2007. Research in Higher Education, 50(6), 525–545. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9130-2 Culnane, M., Eisenman, L. T., & Murphy, A. (2016). College peer mentoring and students with intellectual disability: Mentors’ perspectives on relationship dynamics. Inclusion, 4(4), 257–269. doi:10.1352/2326-6988-4.4.257 Cutright, T. J., & Evans, E. (2016). Year-long peer mentoring activity to enhance the retention of freshmen STEM students in a NSF Scholarship program. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 24(3), 201–212. doi:10.1080/13611267.2016.1222811 Department of Education and Training. (2017). 2016 Institutional performance portfolio: Southern Cross University. [Internal report].. Retrieved from https://www.scu.edu.au/staff/planningquality-and-review/statistics/institutional-performance-portfolio/ Devlin, M., Kift, S., Nelson, K., Smith, L., & McKay, J. (2012). Effective teaching and support of students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds: Resources for Australian higher education. Retrieved from http://www.lowses.edu.au/assets/ALTC%20LSES%20Final%20Report%20 2012.pdf Farley, J. A., Gibbons, M. M., & Cihak, D. F. (2014). Peer mentors in a postsecondary education program for students with intellectual disabilities. College Student Journal, 48(4), 651–660. Retrieved from http://www.projectinnovation.com/college-student-journal.html Fox, A., Stevenson, L., Connelly, P., Duff, A., & Dunlop, A. (2010). Peer-mentoring undergraduate accounting students: The influence on approaches to learning and academic performance. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(2), 145–156. doi:10.1177/1469787410365650 Hatfield, J. (2011). Mentoring in higher education and student development. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.acsd.org/article/mentoring-in-higher-education-and-student-development/

Enhancing Inclusion, Experience, and Academic Performance

85

Holt, L. J., & Berwise, C. A. (2012). Illuminating the process of peer mentoring: An examination and comparison of peer mentors’ and first-year students’ experiences. Journal of the FirstYear Experience & Students in Transition, 24(1), 19–43. Retrieved from http://www.sc.edu/fye/ journal/index.html Holt, L. J., & Lopez, M. J. (2014). Characteristics and correlates of supportive peer mentoring: A mixed methods study. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 22(5), 415–432. doi:10.1080/ 13611267.2014.983326 Hood, D. W., Hood, S., & McBride, D. (2013). Broadening participation: Academic careers workshop for underrepresented groups. Communications of the ACM, 56(3), 27–29. doi:10.1145/2428556.2428565 Hryciw, D. H., Tangalakis, K., Supple, B., & Best, G. (2013). Evaluation of a peer mentoring program for a mature cohort of first-year undergraduate paramedic students. Advances in Physiology Education, 37(1), 80–84. doi:10.1152/advan.00129.2012 Ingleby, A. (2011). Mainstreaming widening participation: Institutional transformation from small beginnings. In L. Thomas & M. Tight (Eds.), Institutional transformation to engage a diverse student body (pp. 97–106). Bingley: Emerald Publishing. James, R. D., McGlone West, K., & Madrid, T. M. (2013). Launching native health leaders: Reducing mistrust of research through student peer mentorship. American Journal of Public Health, 103(12), 2215–2219. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.301314 Kensington-Miller, B., & Ratima, M. (2015). Maori in partnership: A peer mentoring model for tertiary indigenous staff in New Zealand. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 18(6), 813–833. doi:10.1080/13613324.2013.831824 Kirkham, R., & Ringelstein, D. (2008). Student peer assisted mentoring (SPAM): A conceptual framework. E-Journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 2(2), 39–49. Retrieved from http://www.ejbest.org Lin, Y. N. (2014). Perspectives on peer-mentoring from Taiwanese science and engineering master’s students. Education, 135(1), 79–92. Retrieved from http://www.projectinnovation.com/education.html Lombardo, C., Wong, C., Sanzone, L., Filion, F., & Tsimicalis, A. (2017). Exploring mentees’ perceptions of an undergraduate nurse peer mentorship program. Journal of Nursing Education, 56(4), 227–230. doi:10.3928/01484834-20170323-07 Mitchell, B. O. (2013). Relationship of peer mentoring to academic success and social engagement for first year college students. Ph.D. thesis, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro, NC. Murakami, E. T., & Núñez, A. M. (2014). Latina faculty transcending barriers: Peer mentoring in a Hispanic-Serving institution. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 22(4), 284–301. doi:10.1080/13611267.2014.945739 Okun, M. A., Berlin, A., Hanrahan, J., Lewis, J., & Johnson, K. (2015). Reducing the grade disparities between American Indians and Euro-American students in Introduction to Psychology through small-group, peer-mentored, supplemental instruction. Educational Psychology, 35(2), 176–191. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.849324 Page, D., & Hanna, D. (2008). Peer mentoring: The students’ perspective. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 7(2), 34–37. doi:10.2304/plat.2008.7.2.34 Phinney, J. S., Torres Campos, C. M., Padilla Kallemeyn, D. M., & Kim, C. (2011). Processes and outcomes of a mentoring program for Latino college freshmen. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 599–621. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01716.x Pidgeon, M., Archibald, J. A., & Hawkey, C. (2014). Relationships matter: Supporting Aboriginal graduate students in British Columbia, Canada. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(1), 1–21. Retrieved from http://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/index.php/cjhe/ Poling, K. (2015). MySci advisors: Establishing a peer-mentoring program for first year science student support. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 8, 181–190. Retrieved from https://celt. uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/CELT/index Preston, J. P., Ogenchuk, M. J., & Nsiah, J. K. (2014). Peer mentorship and transformational learning: PhD student experiences. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(1), 52–68. Retrieved from http://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/index.php/cjhe/ Reyes, M. E. (2011). A sophomore-to-junior mentoring program that works: The SAM program at the University of Texas Pan American. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 13(3), 373–382. doi:10.2190/CS.13.3.f

86

BILL (W.E.) BOYD ET AL.

Rios-Ellis, B., Rascón, M., Galvez, G., Inzunza-Franco, G., Bellamy, L., & Torres, A. (2015). Creating a model of Latino peer education: Weaving cultural capital into the fabric of academic services in an urban university setting. Education & Urban Society, 47(1), 33–55. doi:10.1177/0013124512468006 Savelsberg, H., Pignata, S., & Weckert, P. (2017). Second chance education: Barriers, supports and engagement strategies. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 57(1), 36–57. Retrieved from https://www.ajal.net.au/ Shotton, H. J., Oosahwe, E. S. L., & Cintrón, R. (2007). Stories of success: Experiences of American Indian students in a peer-mentoring retention program. Review of Higher Education, 31(1), 81–107. Retrieved from https://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/review-higher-education Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Scielzo, S. A., Yarbrough, C. S., & Rosopa, P. J. (2008). A comparison of faceto-face and electronic peer-mentoring: Interactions with mentor gender. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(2), 193–206. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.11.004 SCU Equity & Diversity Office. (2009). Student mentoring program 2009 annual report [internal report]. Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University. SCU Equity & Diversity Office. (2012). OLT awards for Australian university teaching 2012: Application for a citation for outstanding contribution to student learning [internal report]. Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University. SCU Equity & Diversity Office. (2016). UniMentor program annual report 2016 [internal report]. Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University. SCU Equity & Diversity Office. (2017). UniMentor program annual report 2017 [internal report]. Lismore, Australia: Southern Cross University. Streitwieser, B., & Light, G. (2010). When undergraduates teach undergraduates: Conceptions of and approaches to teaching in a peer led team learning intervention in the STEM disciplines: Results of a two year study. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 22(3), 346–356. Retrieved from http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ Terrion, J. L., & Leonard, D. (2007). A taxonomy of the characteristics of student peer mentors in higher education: Findings from a literature review. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 15(2), 149–164. doi:10.1080/13611260601086311 Terrion, J. L., & Leonard, D. (2010). Motivation of paid peer mentors and unpaid peer helpers in higher education. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 8(1), 85–103. Retrieved from https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/hierarchy.do?topic=3c6c3196-1b604ee0-ab3d-7f8cf6a3a427 Vickers, M., McCarthy, F., & Zammit, K. (2017). Peer mentoring and intercultural understanding: Support for refugee-background and immigrant students beginning university study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 60, 198–209. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2017.04.015

CHAPTER 6 USING VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE TO COACH AND MENTOR FACULTY TO FACILITATE ENGAGING CRITICAL CONSCIOUSNESS Valencia Gabay, Shannon Voyles, Linda Algozzini and Grady Batchelor

ABSTRACT This chapter examines the use of virtual communities of practice to group coach and mentor educators and facilitate engaging critical consciousness. A Group Coaching and Mentoring framework became the platform in which the core elements of coaching, mentoring, metacognition, and self-regulated learning strategies were employed. These core elements were applied within virtual communities of practice to manifest self-awareness, reflective thinking, planning for action, and accountability, each of which is vital to the development of critical consciousness. Research shows that fostering critical consciousness creates spaces to address learning equity and gaps in educational achievement. Therefore, this chapter serves as a guide for educational leaders to effectively administer group coaching to raise an educator’s higher-order thinking, plan, problem solve, and co-create. The implementation of this design resulted in increased motivation and willingness among educators to apply new skills and foster new teaching experiences that shaped learning outcomes for their students.

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 87–101 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017007

87

88

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

Keywords: Group coaching; mentoring; self-regulated learning; metacognition; critical consciousness; communities of practice

INTRODUCTION The Group Coaching and Mentoring framework received the 2017 Online Learning Consortium Effective Practice award for shifting organizational culture among faculty at a fully online academic institution (Algozzini, Gabay, Voyles, Bessolo, & Batchelor, 2017; OLC, 2017). Faculty were placed in virtual communities of practice where group coaching and mentoring practices were facilitated and layered with self-regulated learning and metacognitive techniques. As a result, this design aligned individual, departmental, and organizational goals. Additionally, there was a documented increase in faculty-to-student engagement in the online classroom (Algozzini et al., 2017). For the purpose of this chapter, the authors will focus on communities of practice, group coaching and mentoring, and their role in generating critical consciousness among online educators. To do this, the authors reflect on a two-year period during which the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework was applied. This chapter starts with a review of critical consciousness and learning equity, communities of practice, and group coaching and mentoring. This is followed by a summary of the framework’s application to a fully online learning community and the design and methodologies section. Finally, this chapter closes with the findings and survey results of educators participating in virtual communities of practice and how engaging critical consciousness was developed.

LITERATURE REVIEW Critical Consciousness and Learning Equity Knowing how to effectively address the needs of a diverse population, create inclusive learning environments, and ensure that all students have access to quality education is more critical than ever. Research consistently cites engaging critical consciousness and self-reflection as tools to bring institutional change within educational systems when it comes to learning equity (Radd & Macey, 2012). The critical consciousness theory originated from philosopher, educator, and thought leader, Paulo Freire (Freire, 1974; NCCB, 2016). The theory examines one’s awareness of inequities, disparities, and oppression within one’s own surroundings and the ability to reflect on one’s circumstances, come together to discuss, and take action toward change (Mustakova-Possardt, 1998). In their article, Developing Cultural Critical Consciousness and Self-Reflection in Preservice Teacher Education, Gay and Kirkland (2003) discussed how critical consciousness should be a foundational component for preservice teacher educators. From their perspectives, to effectively teach diverse populations of students teachers need to be “culturally responsive” (p. 181). This requires reflective thinking and critical

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

89

questioning of their own assumptions and beliefs (p. 181). The authors also stated that educational outcomes are greater for students of color when self-reflective thinking and critical consciousness are applied (Gay & Kirkland, 2003). Radd and Macey (2012) expanded on the importance of critical consciousness in their brief titled, Equity by Design: Developing Critical Consciousness through Professional Learning. They describe critical consciousness as an “active state of thinking” (p. 3). When successfully done, it can yield powerful results in education reform, especially related to creating inclusion. They argued that educators engaging in reflective journaling and “critical” communities of practice were able to effectively question their own inequities, challenge their own assumptions, and determine a need for change from the status quo (p. 3). Education developers, Moore, Brantmeir, and Brocheild (2017) created a tool for educators to evaluate the level of inclusion within the courses they design and teach. While there was not a strong focus on the development of critical consciousness, the tool used guided questions and reflective thinking to engage educators to examine diversity and inclusion within a course syllabus. According to Moore et al. (2017), the syllabus was the perfect focal point for faculty to explore difficult conversations and contradictions about inclusion, exclusion, diversity, privilege, power, and possibilities for transformative change in the barrier-laden structure of college classroom. (para. 2)

In addition to the development of the tool, the developers’ main objective was to create shifts in an educator’s thinking about course design and learning, and to spark conversations about diversity in higher education (Moore et al., 2017). Critical consciousness requires an individual to scrutinize their own thought process and analyze their current circumstances. Another component to developing critical consciousness, as noted in the aforementioned studies, is the ability to conversate, solve problems, and co-create. Communities of practice offer a platform to mitigate these tasks. Communities of Practice According to Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2015) communities of practice are “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” (para. 1). The characteristics of a community of practice are the domain, the community, and the practice. Domain refers to the area of interest a community desires to pursue. The community is comprised members who share an interest in the domain. Practice denotes the work a community determines necessary to meet its goals. The overall objective of a community of practice is to improve knowledge creation through the sharing of resources or the application of tools (Wenger-Trayner & WengerTrayner, 2015, para. 2). Communities of practice act as a source of support as an organization evolves and stretches into its full potential. They are critical to an organization’s development and performance (Lesser & Storck, 2001). In doing so, communities of practice require a commitment from the participants. This commitment includes time, discussion, and trust (Wenger, Trayner, & de Laat, 2011). This allows new

90

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

members of the team to gradually learn from the other members, leading to an increase in persistence in the role (Little, Butcher, Atkinson, Still, & Vasant, 2014). The addition of new members to the group also allows for innovative ideas and solutions the other members may overlook (Lesser & Storck, 2001). There is a connection between communities of practice and the development of critical consciousness. “The development of critical consciousness happens through group dialogue, participatory action, and empowerment” (NCCB, 2016, para.10). Individuals coming together to discuss challenges or inequities in community settings foster critical thinking. When metacognitively based conversations transpire within a community, individuals learn not only about themselves but also how they process information and can overcome limitations to solve their immediate issue (NCCB, 2016). It is important to note that communities of practice are facilitated in a variety of settings. For example, a virtual community of practice may be necessary for people who are geographically dislocated. The ability to connect globally, in real time, is becoming customary for practitioners and students within higher education. The use of web-based communication and conferencing tools help virtual communities of practice become practical solutions within growing organizations (Gannon-Leary & Fontainha, 2007). Ford, Korjonen, Keswani, and Hughes (2015) documented the outcomes of using virtual communities of practice in public health and other clinical healthcare industries. Their work showed that communities of practice supported practitioners working in isolation, increased collaborative experiences, and the sharing of relevant information (para. 12). Additionally, the authors attributed the success of the communities of practice to quality leadership and facilitation (Ford et al., 2015). There are some limitations to the use of virtual communities of practices. Educators and professionals working in isolation who are comfortable with their independence may find it challenging to working collectively. Sustaining motivation and the level of engagement needed to produce transformative shifts in thinking may be hindered in virtual environments. Finally, depending on the discipline and type of information being shared, virtual learning communities of practice may present a challenge in exchanging highly innovative and specialized knowledge (Gannon-Leary & Fontainha, 2007). Therefore there needs to be an emphasis on facilitation and coaching within the community of practice. Coaching and Mentoring Group coaching defines the professional development model on which this chapter is based. The foundational aspects of coaching and mentoring are key elements in the success and facilitation of critical consciousness. Coaching and mentoring is often seen as separate actions involving one-to-one relationships between a coach and client or a mentor and a mentee, where learning should happen through processes of self-discovery, modeling, guiding, and direct instruction. For example, the Brefigroup (2018) summarized the difference between coaching and mentoring as “a coach has some great questions for your answers; a mentor has some great answers for your questions” (para. 3). The objective of coaching

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

91

is to develop a skill or enhance a performance of some kind, while mentoring is used to facilitate career development over a long period of time Grant (as cited in Passmore, 2007). According to the International Coaching Federation (ICF) (n.d), coaching is “…partnering with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their personal and professional potential” (para. 2). ICF has established eleven core competencies for coaching. These core coaching competencies can be categorized into four groupings: setting the foundation, cocreating the relationship, communicating effectively, and facilitating learning and results (ICF, n.d.). Patti, Holzer, Stern, and Brackett (2012) used a combination of the professional coaching that is typically seen in education and the personal coaching that is often seen in other areas. They refer to their method as Personal Professional Coaching (PPC). Patti et al. (2012) stated that using this model allows a safe place for self-improvement through reflection and collaboration. This model also allows for growth in emotional strength for the participants, with that emotional strength permeating all aspects of their lives. “By developing emotion skills, teachers and administrative leaders become more self-aware, self-regulated and socially aware-resulting in a more positive, student-centered learning environment” (Patti et al., 2012, p. 266). In their model, leaders participated in six coaching sessions. They had one-on-one sessions every other week for six months. They assessed themselves using a variety of self-assessments and ended each with a journal and reflection. In two case studies, Patti et al. (2012) found that using the PPC model engaged participants, focused their changes, improved their work relationships, managed conflict more effectively, and resulted in more positive climate overall. “As the coaching process develops, the changes demonstrate a shift from the individual leader to the whole organization” (Patti et al., 2012, p. 269). Group coaching is gaining recognition within the coaching profession. Group coaching uses foundational coaching skills and gleans from facilitation and training practices (Britton, 2010). And, like one-on-one coaching, the group coach holds clients accountable for setting goals with a clear, focused agenda and taking action toward meeting those goals. Additionally, group coaching allows members to learn with and from each other (Britton, 2010). This type of collaboration is essential to fostering reflection, promoting self-awareness, and enhancing critical thinking. The following paragraphs underscore the power of communities of practice and coaching, and mentoring as tools leading to increased critical consciousness and improved self-awareness among educators. This is paramount to strengthening their ability to effectively support and academically challenge all students.

BACKGROUND Research shows a shift in the landscape of higher education resulting in a “need to provide access and equity to learners and embark on innovative models of learning based in knowledge competence aided by technologies” (Majid & Dahn,

92

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

2010, p. 53). A purposeful and meaningful change model is needed to redefine an organization’s culture to ensure that educators are capable of aligning with these movements to serve a uniquely diverse population. The overall objective is to better support students who will be working in a global marketplace, which now places emphasis on lifelong learning (Majid & Dahn, 2010). In 2016, a fully online institution of higher education recognized this change in the industry. They set out to revamp their teaching strategies to increase student persistence, and support educators in meeting the needs of the students they serve. The institution, whose population is heavily comprised military and diverse working professionals, prepares students to be highly creative in a digitally fluid society. Essential core values that shape the institution’s mission include diversity, innovation, collaboration, and being adaptive and responsive (American Public University System, 2018). To meet the mission of the institution and to update the faculty teaching practices to reflect the university’s core values, one academic department underwent a unique redesign in its professional development operations. The department consisted of one faculty director and 43 full-time instructors teaching one of the university’s gateway courses. The course emphasized digital information literacy practices that support research and critical thinking application in the classroom. While instructors were trained to incorporate social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence in their instructional practice (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2005), the faculty director created an initiative that would transcend these best teaching practices. According to Braica (2013), organizations that stay relevant and work toward maintaining their progress do so by valuing change. Therefore, instructors were challenged with evaluating where they were and where they wanted to be as it related to their instructional practice and its effectiveness in addressing access to quality education among their students. Design/Methodology The Group Coaching and Mentoring framework is a comprehensive design implemented in a virtual environment (see Figure 1). Community of practice engagement and group coaching took place via web-based collaboration and conferencing tools such as Uberconference, Adobe Connect, and Zoom. Additionally, to manifest change that was intentional and relevant to the individual and the organization, the model was approached from a participatory action research perspective (Algozzini et al., 2017, p. 47). According to Reason and Bradbury (2001), participatory action research seeks to bring together action and reflection, theory and practice, in participation with others, in the pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern to people, and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and their communities. (p. 1)

When contrasting it with more traditional methods of research, the goal of participatory action research is to achieve action through research by way of cycles of reflection. Participatory action research also addresses the dynamics between relationships. In this case, the participants who are being researched

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

93

Fig. 1.  Group Coaching and Mentoring Framework. Source: Algozzini et al. (2017).

eventually evolve to also be the researcher and take part in the decision-making process and outcomes (Baum, MacDougall, & Smith, 2006). This can be paralleled to an earlier statement regarding critical consciousness: “The development of critical consciousness happens through group dialog, participatory action, and empowerment” (NCCB, 2016, para. 10). Therefore, the participatory action research method, when compared to others, leverages the main goal of shifting the culture of an organization by raising the participant’s level of self-awareness.

GROUP COACHING AND MENTORING FRAMEWORK Virtual Communities of Practice Community of Practice The framework originated with the development of two types of communities of practice. The first community of practice consisted of six seasoned faculty members who would be facilitators and mentor leads over other communities of practice. This leadership community of practice met weekly via Uberconference for at least two hours with the faculty director. The overall goal was to prepare the mentor leads to facilitate and lead their own communities of practice by deepening their facilitation and group coaching practices. Once mentor leads were established, they each were assigned to lead a group of five to six career and novice faculty. These faculty communities of practice would be the second type of community of practice. The mentor leads’ role was that of facilitator to their peers as they helped to guide them through the change

94

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

process. They met weekly with a focused agenda leading discussions on the following topics:

• Communities of practice theory • Brainstorming • Decision-making strategies • Metacognition • Self-regulated learning process • The power of questioning • Serving the twenty-first century adult learner Standardized Meetings Standardized agendas were used to ensure consistency in the resources and information being disseminated. The purpose of each meeting was listed at the top of the agenda followed by the objectives and goals. Agendas were shared with members of the communities of practice days in advanced. All meetings included an assignment of a recorder, timekeeper, and summarizer. The assignment of roles promoted active listening and participant involvement in the meetings (Algozzini et al., 2017). Pre-work was assigned to all members of the communities of practice. The expectation was that all individuals would review, explore, and prepare reflections based on their understanding and comprehension of topics before each meeting. This approach helped initiate the essential reflection necessary for critical consciousness to emerge. The agenda process supported the participatory action research method by generating insights, unique perspectives, and qualitative interpretations from multiple points of view of individuals and teams as they moved through continuous cycles of action, reflection, and evaluation. This systemized approach ensured replication and duplication of the coaching process from the faculty director to the mentor leads and then to the remaining 40 full-time faculty (Algozzini et al., 2017). Group Coaching and Mentoring When metacognitively based conversations take place within a community, people learn about themselves, and how they process information to overcome challenges. This reflective thinking is important in developing engaging critical consciousness (Freire, 1974; NCCB, 2016). After the initial tasks of the meeting were achieved, the teams moved to open discussions. Mentor leads facilitated these discussions by applying coaching skills including asking curious questions to promote reflection and processing of the individuals and the group. Asking curious questions is a hallmark of the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework. This involves asking the empowering, open-ended questions that guide individuals to evaluate their current circumstances, and make decisions and reach a conclusion on what needs to change (ICF, n.d). Mentor leads asked questions at the right time before the work began,

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

95

during the feedback loop, and after the application of new or revisited learning. The structure involved active listening, focusing on what is and is not being said by the individual or group. This was one way for frequent and consistent observations by the faculty director. The reciprocal oral discussion was a key component of the meetings. These meetings became a safe environment for leads and mentees to share challenges, triumphs, and practice, and assimilate new instructional components for application. Each meeting ended with a quick summary of the meeting to ensure that everyone had an overview of key points for further reflection, evaluation, and action. It is important to note that all faculty had a voice in the change process. Creative ideas and solutions birthed from community of practice meetings were put into effect to help shift culture, and faculty members were recognized for their contributions (Algozzini et al., 2017). Collaborative Tasks The opportunities to co-create, solve problems, and take focused action are the other components of developing engaging critical consciousness that can be fostered through collaboration (Freire, 1974; NCCB, 2016). The communities of practice participated in collaborative tasks that enhanced their reflections and growth and showcased their understanding of the professional development model and its effect on their instructional practices. These collaborative tasks include classroom observations and group multimedia presentations. Classroom observations were shadow observations in which each faculty member asked their peers from their faculty community of practice to observe their interaction in a specific area in the online classroom. In a written format, the observee asked the observers, specific questions such as “How can I improve on getting students to reply in a timely manner?” or “How can I make my forums more relatable to all students?” The observers spent one week in the observee’s classroom and provided answers to their questions to support them in making changes that would improve their classroom engagement. The group multimedia presentations were 30-minute presentations that each team created and presented to their peers during faculty meetings. These presentations focused on the growth of the individuals and the group as a whole in relation to the theories explored and their growth during the year of professional development. These presentations allowed each team to see how their peers reflected on the year-in-action with their showcase of reflection, growth, and commitment to further their development and growth. These presentations served as the visual representation of how each team grew as a result of their year of development and reflection (Algozzini et al., 2017). Qualitative Data Analysis Qualitative data analysis (QDA) was utilized throughout the application of the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework to capture two years of formative

96

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

data. Taylor and Gibbs (2010) described QDA as the process of taking qualitative data and using it to create explanations and interpretations of the circumstances or people from which it was collected. This data was strictly based on the faculty director’s informal observations of the process. Through the QDA, the faculty director was able to ascertain transformative changes that emerged as an individual and group level as faculty progressed through the framework. The use of a standardization agenda played an important role in collecting formative information, conducted using unstructured observations from the leadership and faculty community of practice sessions. Unstructured observations is a technique within ethnographic inquiry where a researcher may collect qualitative data based on the researcher’s observations and experiences while in-action or facilitating a process much like the one discussed in this chapter to engage critical consciousness (Schensul, Schensul, & Le Compte, 1999). The Group Coaching and Mentoring framework maintained a total of five qualitative data collection points for a two-year period. Summaries from prework, round-robin share-outs, curious questioning, and open discussion became the first four major data collection points that were interpreted weekly from January to December 2016 and monthly January–December 2017. This provided a window for the faculty director to determine the progress of the faculty collectively. The fifth data collection point was in a one-on-one coaching session the faculty director had with each faculty member. The faculty director gauged the growth in individual faculty members through an hour-long coaching session twice a year for 2016 and 2017. The compilation of the five qualitative data collection points fell within the ICF core competencies’ four cluster areas; setting the foundation, co-creating the relationship, communicating effectively, and facilitating learning results comprising the coaching standard aligned to the Group Coaching and Mentoring frameworks’ operational processes and procedures. The data collection process will be discussed later in the Findings section of this chapter. Participant Survey At the conclusion of the year-long professional development implementation, participants were asked to voluntarily complete a post-then-pre-survey. This evaluation design was utilized because it allows participants to reflect on changes in their knowledge base during the change process. This survey asked participants to consider themselves and their abilities after completing the professional development and reflect on where they were and their abilities before they started the year-long framework. They were asked to rate themselves on a scale of very low, low, neutral, high, and very high for each question both before and after the professional development. The survey was emailed to participants after they returned the informed consent form. Their responses were voluntary and anonymous. Participants were only identified by their role as instructors in the department. All data were gathered and analyzed in aggregate form. Once results were obtained, the answers to each question were tallied and converted to both percentages and raw numbers.

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

97

FINDINGS Faculty Director’s Perspective As noted earlier, QDA was utilized throughout the application of the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework to capture two  years of formative data. Prior to the implementation of the framework, faculty exhibited a lack of focus on increasing the performance of the adult learner in the online classroom. Faculty facilitated class discussions with the use of robotic dialog and closedended questioning that did not promote metacognitively based conversations for their students. Though encouraged to use new methods to meet the needs of various learning styles among their students, faculty hesitated to incorporate multimedia assets and digital tools that would assist their students in making better connections to the course material. During the initial implementation phase of the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework, faculty reported feeling fear surrounding the changes and new expectations. They were overwhelmed and felt as though they lacked the skills necessary for systemic change, and preferred to operate as a singleton versus a dynamic organizational unit. During the middle to end stages of implementation, faculty began to reframe their thinking. Their daily instructional practices became intentional and fortified with the use of metacognitive processes. Purposeful forum engagement was noted in classrooms consisting of student– student, student-to-content, student-to-instructor, and instructor-to-student, which fostered expanded critical thinking. Faculty worked synergistically in the collaborative community of practice teams toward a common goal of supporting each other in learning new tasks and practices. Faculty engaged in reciprocal discussion with the faculty director and peers, increasing their levels of critical consciousness by thinking beyond individual views. Expanded dialog allowed each individual to participate in active listening and collaboratively solve problems that enhanced the learning of the collective. Unstructured Participant Observations As noted earlier, four of the data collection points were gathered from the agenda design (pre-work, round-robin share-outs, curious questioning, and discussions). One-to-one coaching sessions with the full-time faculty became the fifth data collection point. Three of the ICF core competencies cluster areas were central to the inner workings within the agenda and could be witnessed as a result of the framework’s implementation: co-creating the relationship, communicating effectively, and facilitating learning results. Co-creating relationships. By the end of the first quarter of year one, 40 fulltime faculty reported enjoying collaborating with their peers and being innovative in a virtual workplace. Three full-time faculty members opted to reposition themselves to part-time faculty and eventually separation from the institution citing an unwillingness to participate. Communicating effectively. Participating in the concepts of pre-work, roundrobin discussions, role-play simulations, and asking curious questions, put faculty

98

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

on a pathway to communicating effectively in group dynamics. They applied active listening skills within other collaborative tasks, built trust and validated one another in open discussions. Facilitating learning results. Three fourths (30) of the faculty were actively engaged in the utilization of metacognitive processes, understanding the impact self-regulated learning strategies had on their own motivation, cognition, in addition to translating to the adult learners they serve. This faculty maintained a broad view of the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework, seeing its relevance and application to the real world. They reported using the tenants of the framework at home and within personal relationships. Thus, increasing their ability to move toward higher levels of conscious, thought processes in other facets of their personal and professional lives. It should be noted that one fourth (10) of the remaining faculty were in various stages of shifting from the old to a new paradigm. This group acknowledged acceptance and willingness to keep working toward internalization of the processes so shifts and changes would continue to occur. However, all ten of the remaining faculty group admitted to struggling with their own self-regulation, motivation, and metacognition, which impeded their ability to effectively utilize skills in co-creating relationships, communicating effectively, and facilitating learning results both inside and outside of the classroom. In other words, they were still works-in-progress. Results from Individuals One-on-One Coaching Sessions The faculty director provided 43 individual, one hour and 40 thirty-minute coaching sessions with faculty during year one. Year two, 40 individual, one hour and 40 thirty-minute coaching sessions were conducted. In total, 163 individual coaching sessions were conducted over a two-year period. Session notes were the fifth data collection point and provided clear indicators of the stages of transformation that each faculty member encountered. Struggles, challenges, and obstacles were elicited and given voice. Individuals determined the direction for growth and expansion, while the coach would hold them accountable for their chosen actions. Six themes of improvement emerged from the coaching sessions: 1. Change management 2. Growth mindset 3. Self-regulation 4. Metacognition/cognition 5. Accountability 6. Maintenance/sustainability Post-Then-Pre-Survey Results Results from the post-then-pre-survey showed many changes in the participants’ approaches and perspectives. When asked to rate their abilities to identify and

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

99

bridge performance gaps using self-regulated learning strategies, 27 rated themselves at neutral, low or very low before the professional development was implemented; four rated themselves as high or very high. However, after the conclusion of the professional development implementation, eight reported themselves as neutral, while 16 selected high and seven chose very high. No one rated their ability as low or very low. In a similar question, participants were asked to rate their abilities to identify and bridge performance gaps using metacognitive processes before and after the professional development. Before, two rated very low, 10 low, 12 neutral, and seven high. However, these same participants stated that their abilities after the professional development were one low, three neutral, 19 high, and eight very high. Faculty members were also asked to rate their ability to inspire students to think critically on a deeper level. When considering their abilities before the professional development, faculty rated themselves as very low one, low four, neutral 13, high 11, and very high two. After the development, their results were neutral three, high 15, and very high 13; these show a significant shift compared to before the year-long professional development. Faculty members were also asked to rate their understanding of student differences before and after their participation in the professional development teams. Before, they rated themselves as low three, neutral three, high 15, and very high 10. After the development activities, they rated themselves as neutral two, high 14, and very high 15. At the institutional level, data showed that the department that used this framework consistently displayed 98–100% engagement rates in their classrooms; meanwhile, the rest of the university departments were averaging 75% (Algozzini et al., 2017).

CONCLUSIONS This effective practice focused on creating a change in mindset within the individual and a transition in organizational constructs. While proven beneficial in virtual learning communities within higher education, the authors see this model as transferable to a wide variety of educational settings and business communities wishing to successfully partner and collaborate with diverse populations. A key component to facilitating critical conscious is the ability to collaborate, share experienced marginalization, reflect, and solve problems (Freire, 1974; NCCB, 2016). In this case, faculty through the work in their communities of practice, were able to successfully navigate through departmental challenges, foster self-awareness, and co-create. Additionally, faculty improved how they both supported and challenged their students academically. This was reflected in student classroom performance and learning outcomes. Throughout the application of the framework, reflective questioning became standard practice inside and outside the classroom. This allowed the organization and individuals to continually identify areas of growth and change which is necessary for sustainability.

100

VALENCIA GABAY ET AL.

Through a granular lens, when applying group coaching and mentoring into practice whether in the education or business setting, a group begins to cultivate awareness and raise the level of consciousness of the individual members. This occurs through the powerful questioning of the coach and the reciprocal exchanges between the individuals. This process can follow a cycle of questioning, thinking, action, and evaluation allowing the internal thought processes of the individuals to gradually shift. The individual and group begin to act and think with intention and purpose bringing a state of awareness into being. This is a foundational component to the critical consciousness theory. Adults who actively question, evaluate, and dialogue with other individuals either one-to-one or in a group setting begin the process of looking at their current status within their environment expanding their perceptions toward others. When the self views the world with a critical eye, perceptions will shift and transform over time. Therefore, through participation in the Group Coaching and Mentoring framework, both the individual and group members activate the lens of critical consciousness; they view their immediate surroundings expanding outward noting societal and global needs.

REFERENCES Algozzini, L., Gabay, V., Voyles, S., Bessolo, K., & Batchelor, G. (2017). Group coaching and mentoring: A framework for fostering organizational change. Campbell, CA: FastPencil, Inc. American Public University System. (2018). Mission and vision. Retrieved from http://www.apus.edu/ about/mission/ Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60(10), 845–857. Braica, A. P. (2013). Fundamentals of change management. Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldis” Arad Seria Stiinte Economice, 23(4), 138–149. Brefigroup. (2018). Coaching and mentoring: The difference. Retrieved from https://www.brefigroup. co.uk/coaching/coaching_and_mentoring.html Britton, J. (2010). Effective group coaching: Tried and tested tools and resources for optimum group coaching results. Mississauga: John Wiley & Sons. Freire, P. (1974). Education for critical consciousness. New York, NY: Continuum. Ford, J., Korjoen, H., Keswani, A., & Hughes, A. (2015). Virtual communities of practice: Can they support the prevention agenda in public health? Online Journal of Public Health Informatics, 7(2), e222. doi: 10.5210/ojphi.v7i2.6031 Gannon-Leary, P., & Fontainha, E. (2007). Communities of practice and virtual learning communities: Benefits, barriers and success factors. E-learning Papers No. 5, pp. 1–14. Retrieved from https:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1018066 Garrison, D. R., Anderson T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1), 1–2. Gay, G., & Kirkland, K. (2003). Developing cultural critical consciousness and self- reflection in preservice teacher education. Theory into Practice, 42(3), 181–187. Grant, A. (2001). Towards a psychology of coaching. Unpublished data. University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. International Coaching Federation. (n.d.). Core competencies. Lexington, KY: International Coaching Federation. Retrieved from https://coachfederation.org/core-competencies Lesser, E. L., & Storck, J. (2001). Communities of practice and organizational performance. IBM Systems Journal, 40(4), 831–841. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d327/ f8f0bca6fe91259b49935000aa69ad9f1048.pdf9 Little, D., Butcher, K., Atkinson, S., Still, D., & Vasant, J. (2014). A regional fellow community of practice. The Clinical Teacher, 11, 516–519.

Virtual Communities of Practice to Coach and Mentor Faculty

101

Majid, F., & Dahan, H. M. (2010). An assessment of 21st century adult learners’ needs: Issues and challenges for institutions of higher education. In Y. Ros Aizan, N. Norshidah, A. W. Rohaya, S. Norshiha & J. J. Walters (Eds.), Strategies for Malaysian education in the 21st century (pp. 53–76). Shah Alam, Malaysia: UPENA. Moore, C. S., Brantmeir, E., & Brocheild, A. (2017). Inclusion by design: Tool helps faculty examine their teaching practices, Retrieved from https://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/course-design-ideas/ inclusion-by-design-tool-helps-faculty-examine-teaching-practices/ Mustakova-Possardt, E. (1998). Critical consciousness: An alternative pathway for positive personal and social development. Journal of Adult Development, 5, 13–30. Retrieved from https://doi. org/10.1023/A:1023064913072 Newark Community Collaborative Board (NCCB). (2016). Critical consciousness theory. Retrieved from http://newarkccb.org/framework/critical-consciousness-theory/ Online Learning Consortium. (2017). Effective practice award winners. Retrieved from https:// onlinelearningconsortium.org/about/2017-olc-effective-practice-award-winners/å Passmore, J. (2007). Coaching and mentoring: The role of experience and sector knowledge. International Journal of Evidence based Coaching and Mentoring, Special Issue, 10–16. doi: 10.24384/IJEBCM/S1 Patti, J., Holzer, A. A., Stern, R., & Brackett, M. A. (2012). Personal, professional coaching: Transforming professional development for teacher and administrative leaders. Journal of Leadership Education, 11(1), 263–274. doi:10.12806/V11/I1/AB4 Radd, S., & Macey, E. M. (2012). Equity by design: Developing critical consciousness through professional learning. Retrieved from https://www.sd308.org/cms/lib/IL01906463/Centricity/Domain/ 146/CriticalConsciousness08302017.pdf Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Introduction: Inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds). Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (pp.1–14). London: Sage Publication. Schensul, S. L., Schensul, J. J., & Le Compte, M. D. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Taylor, C., & Gibbs, G. R. (2010). What is qualitative data analysis (QDA)? Retrieved from onlineqda. hud.ac.uk/Intro_QDA/what_is_qda.php Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & deLaat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Ruud De Moor Centrum. Retrieved from http://wengertrayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/11-04-Wenger_Trayner_DeLaat_Value_creation.pdf Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Introduction to communities of practice. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER 7 AFROCENTRIC MENTORING MODELS OF MARGINALIZED INDIVIDUALS IN HIGHER EDUCATION Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu

ABSTRACT Purpose of this chapter is to explore Afrocentric mentoring models of individuals in higher education. In this chapter, leadering will refer to mentoring and the influence upon followers and why and how activities and objectives are to be achieved. Issues of race, social class, disability, gender, sexual orientation, age, and geographic location play a role in faculty and leader faculty leadering. Literature review was used in investigating the phenomenon of faculty leadering from the perspectives of cross-cultural faculty leadering relationships within the field of education and Afrocentric faculty leadering models. Afrocentric philosophy, Indigenous wisdoms, and also the cultural traditions and perspectives of peoples of African heritage are assumed to offer a helpful foundation toward a nuanced explanation of culturally relevant faculty leadering within the faculties of education. A faculty leader to demonstrate professional behaviors and actions that will assists staff in professional socialization in higher education. Racism and other forms of oppression experienced by Black and other marginalized youth in societies cause many to develop fatalistic attitudes about themselves, their education, and their future. African-centered faculty leadering models should be rooted within philosophies, cultures, and principles that apply theories to praxis, unique locally and globally.

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 103–116 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017008

103

104

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

Keywords: Leader; faculty; faculty leadering; higher education; mentoring; transformation; justice

INTRODUCTION This chapter provides an exciting opportunity to advance our knowledge of the roles of faculty and leader faculty leadering in higher education. Our main reason for choosing this topic is personal interest. This chapter is significant because it contributes to the body of knowledge on the topic of the roles of faculty and leader faculty leadering. In this chapter, leadering and mentoring are used interchangeably. The reader should bear in mind that the chapter is based on literature review and the author’s experiences in higher education. This chapter has been divided into seven parts. The first part deals with Introduction. The second part deals with faculty leader in faculty leadering (traditional faculty leadering, non-traditional faculty leadering and same-gendered Coethnic faculty leadership). The third part deals with Africentric faculty leadering models grounded in Afrocentric philosophy. The fourth part deals with culturally relevant faculty leadering. The fifth part deals with social challenges that may affect higher education. The sixth part deals with justice through the transformation of society. The seventh part deals with the benefits and weaknesses of faculty leadering, followed by the Conclusion. The next section will be dealing with Faculty leader in faculty leadering.

FACULTY LEADER IN FACULTY LEADERING Nichols (2017, p. 11) is of the view that the concept of faculty involvement requires faculty to give more than advice. In addition, Nichols posits that faculty leadering ought to be viewed as an intentional and insightful process that involves interaction between two or more individuals. Again, Nichols (2017) found that Black males who enrol in supportive, race-specific community college faculty leadering and retention initiatives reach completion in higher numbers. When given the opportunity to be involved in strategic educational faculty leadering programmes to promote academic achievement, Black men enrolled in community college race and gender-specific initiatives had successful experience and achieved completion. Contrary to Nichols (2017), Green, Ammah, Butler-Byrd, Brandon, and McIntosh (2017, p. 629) point out that in higher education, African-American undergraduates tend to be less academically prepared for college. They also found that faculty leadership results in improved academic achievement and self-efficacy and helps graduate students to “fight F.A.I.R” (Feelings of Alienation, Isolation, and Racism) (McIntosh, 2017, p. 534). In support of Green, Ammah, ButlerByrd, Brandon, and McIntosh (2017), Warren-Gordon and Mayes (2017, p. 2356) found that African-American women working at predominately white institutions of higher education often have isolated and lonely work-life experiences. They are often isolated because they are the only minority and/or women in departments

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

105

or colleges and lonely because the workplace environment does not offer a safe place to vent their frustrations and triumphs. A leader in this chapter will mean someone treating people so well that they discover their potential and strive to achieve it (Abrahams & Caldwell, 2016). Leaders face social challenges involving high levels of novelty and ambiguity that call for creative problem solving, social judgment, and knowledge of the task, organization, and people (Black, Soto, & Spurlin, 2016). Mentoring/leadering programmes that assume a color-blind or post-racial attitude and thus ignore the complexities, import, and impact of race and racial identity stand to fail in taking an organization forward (Smith, 2016). Effective leaders can create effective relationships by the decision to “first seek to understand, then to be understood.” A faculty leader must treat organization members like owners and partners in the institution. Faculty leadering requires one to be professional, passionate about their work, hone their skills, take opportunities, grow, develop, and eventually find themselves a leadership opportunity and followers in the context in which they work (Bell, 2016). Faculty leaders are expected to assist others to avoid making mistakes by identifying options and evaluating the feasibility of alternatives. They must be seen as an individualized, mutually respectful relationship between a protégé and an expert invested in guiding the protégé’s professional and personal growth. At times faculty leadering can be described in terms of behaviors or activities conducted by a leader (Estepp, Velasco, Culbertson, & Conner, 2016, pp. 4–5). A faculty leadering or mentoring relationship can develop when a more experienced, senior employee (faculty leader) takes an active interest in and encourages a less experienced, employee (protégé) by providing support, direction, and feedback regarding career plans and personal development (Holt, Markova, Dhaenens, Marler, & Heilmann, 2016). For staff, faculty leadering ought to relate to increase their job satisfaction, greater promotion possibilities, opportunities for increased pay, higher self-esteem, and a heightened sense of professional competence. A faculty ought to appoint supervisors as formal faculty leaders to newly appointed academics and to share job-specific expertise with them. Harrison (2017) is of the view that forward-thinking organizations focus on the following skills on faculty leadering, namely: (a) problem-solving; (b) communicating; (c) organizing; (d) learning ability; (e) applying capabilities to the real-world; (f) talent and collaborative; and (g) knowledge management practices that support career management requirements. Among the roles of faculty is to care pedagogically about students and staff and not to “give up” on them, irrespective of their academic performance. It is a more expansive conceptualization of the student–faculty relationship that requires faculty to emotionally engage with students beyond academics. It is difficult to argue against such a notion – that faculty should care about their students and staff – but, what if we were to challenge the assertion that a Head of Department/Chair of Department should get to know his or her student and staff as a person at the very least. The potential for abuses to occur in negotiating the relational space between faculty, staff, and students can be reflected in lawsuits, broken careers, and unmet expectations (Chory & Offstein, 2017).

106

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

Entertainment media offers many examples of the questionable effects of the “cool professor” who smokes and drinks with and engages in sexual relationships with students (e.g., Donald Sutherland’s character in Animal House and Patricia Arquette’s in Boyhood). Fiction aside, Harvard administrators appear to have recognized the inherent difficulties in student–faculty non-academic relationships. They issued a policy mandate forbidding Harvard professors from engaging in sexual relationships with Harvard undergraduate students. Harvard’s move comes on the heels of other highly publicized lapses that range from individual (i.e., Northwestern) to more systemic abuses of the faculty–student relationship (Chory & Offstein, 2017). Support efforts for faculty leader will be meaningful if faculty leadership relationships are geared toward bettering institutions’ faculties. Leadership opportunities that allow faculties to contribute to societal change are important (Colea, McGowanb, & Zerquerac, 2017). Faculty leadering refers to a developmental, professional relationship between a more experienced and a less experienced individual where the expertise of the faculty leader is used to foster the career growth of a less experienced individual (Guramatunhu-Mudiwa & Angel, 2017). On the other hand, Dahlvig (2010) suggests that formal programmes or informal connections can provide a basis for establishing faculty leadering relationship. In addition, she thinks developing trust and support in faculty leadering relationships can provide a needed foundation for exploring faculty leadering elements. There are different forms of faculty leadering, for example, face-to-face or virtual faculty leadering where a structured relationship between an experienced and novice individual in which the faculty leadering takes place through the utilization of technology as a means to add value to the lives of those involved (Welch, 2017). In support of Welch (2017), Figueroa (2017, p. 144) points out that virtual faculty leadering involves the use of a computer interface that provides the ability to connect with another party. The engagement could be in the form of text base exchanges, audio, video, or any combination. The advantage of this method is that it provides more flexibility. Opting to use virtual tools to engage with students and staff also mitigate the challenge of getting to distant locations. Brunsma, Embrick, and Shin (2017) suggest that a good faculty leader ought to have traits of curiosity, discretion, and generosity of spirit, honesty, and self-reflection. The good faculty leader ought to be affective (therapist), instrumental (practical), intellectual (feedback), available (helpful), respectful (interpersonal), and not exploitative (abusive). The next sub-section deals with traditional faculty leadering.

TRADITIONAL FACULTY LEADERING In this chapter, traditional faculty leadering refers to seminal work on faculty leadering components: role modelling, psychosocial function, and professional development that represent a range of behaviors that generally characterize faculty leader and protégé relationships. Role modelling: the act of a faculty leader demonstrating professional behaviors and actions that assist staff in professional

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

107

socialization in higher education; psychosocial functions: specific activities and interactions between the faculty leader and staff that would mould the relationship for the development of work effectiveness, including aspects that will help to shape the relationship; and professional development: encouragement, provision of opportunities, and academic support for the enhancement of staffs’ growth in all aspects which can be offered by the faculty leader to them (Grant & Ghee, 2015). The next sub-section deals with Non-traditional faculty leadering.

NON-TRADITIONAL FACULTY LEADERING Explanations of non-traditional faculty leadering mean faculty leadering as a construct. In addition, a relationship develops out of mutual identification and the fulfilment of career needs by both faculty leader and staff members (Grant & Ghee, 2015, p. 765). Same-gendered Coethnic faculty leadership (available relationships between women faculty who share similar racial/ethnic backgrounds), Coethnic faculty leadership (available relationships between faculty who share similar racial/ethnic backgrounds), and non-Coethnic faculty leadership (available relationships between faculty who do not share similar racial/ethnic backgrounds) (Allen & Butler, 2014). Gender, race, social class, disability, sexual orientation, age, and geographic location and issues of power play may affect protégés and faculty leaders’ interact faculty leadering. Headley (2018) found that systemic racism and the differential treatment of Black students by teachers, administrators, and other students is a significant problem that directly contributes to the lack of achievement. Although systemic racism and differential treatment were identified as a unique differentiator between Black and White students’ learning experiences in Henry’s study, it is certainly not the only factors that affect all Black students. Again, Headley (2018) found that the reality of racism and other forms of oppression experienced by Black and other marginalized youth in Canadian societies causes many to develop fatalistic attitudes about themselves, their education and their future. Moreover, Black students are more likely to succeed in universities where institutional policies promote cohesion among the different ethnic groups. Professional development of leaders is a challenge for institutions throughout the world. US universities identified that the primary mechanisms for recognizing and rewarding teaching were: (1) annual awards for good teaching; (2) offering programmes (professional development and grants) to improve teaching; and (3) giving teaching more importance among the criteria for evaluating staff for performance review and promotion. These mechanisms were widely adopted, regardless of the type of university. For example, 86% of US universities gave awards for outstanding teachers, 76% periodically evaluated the performance of their tenured academics (though the criteria were not specified), 56% had instituted formal programmes to foster teaching improvement, 25% had revised their promotion and tenure criteria to give greater importance to good teaching, and 33% had increased the importance of good teaching in their appointment practices (Chalmers, 2011). Faculty leadering can be ascribed as a relationship between two persons, a protégé

108

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

and a faculty leader. The traditional understanding of faculty leadering is problematic in the modern world because it connotes a conservative view of learning, linear transmission of knowledge and asymmetrical power relations between participants (Pennanen, Bristol, Wilkinson, & Heikkinen, 2016, pp. 27–30). Faculty leaders are expected to check the work of staff on a basis and provide feedback to them what they have learnt. Demonstration is important for them to observe in order for them to gain leadering knowledge (Islam, 2016, pp. 33–34). The importance of faculty leadering is that it helps people build new relationships and strengthen existing ones. People become more collaborative in their performance and learning, and individuals feel more prepared to offer themselves as faculty leaders to others (Bean, Lucas, & Hyers, 2014, p. 58). Faculty leaders are expected in various professional education settings to act professionally but are also expected to become professionals. In addition, to acquiring on-the-job knowledge, skills, and abilities relevant to their faculties, these leaders need to adopt the professional values and behaviors that society associates with being a professional (Mahlangu, 2017, p. 143). Tolan, Henry, Schoeny, Lovegrove, and Nichols (2013, p. 183) suggest processes that are central to faculty leadering, namely: (a) identification of the recipient with the faculty leader that helps with motivation, behavior, and bonding or investment in prosocial behavior and social responsibility; (b) provision of information or teaching that might aid the recipient in managing social, educational, legal, family, and peer challenges; (c) advocacy for the recipient in various systems and settings; and (d) emotional support and friendliness to promote self-efficacy, confidence, and sense of mattering. Reasons for undertaking mentoring for faculty leaders is aimed at improving the job performance skills of an individual staff; extending the experience and knowledge of an individual staff for career development or promotion purposes; developing the professional knowledge and understanding of staff members; promoting the spirit of job satisfaction to aspiring staff members; and developing an enhanced view of the job (Craft, 2000, p. 10). In addition, relational improvements that stem from involvement in faculty leadering programmes, in turn, can be linked to improvements in self-worth, perceived scholastic competence, and academic achievement (Kanchewa, Yoviene, Schwartz, Herrera, & Rhodes, 2016, p. 4). The next section deals with the Africentric faculty leadering models grounded in Africentric philosophy.

AFROCENTRIC FACULTY LEADERING MODELS GROUNDED IN AFRICENTRIC PHILOSOPHY Washington, Caldwell, Watson, and Lindsey (2017, p. 102) are of the view that many of the most recognized formal faculty leadering programmes have been influenced by a Eurocentric worldview of faculty leadering assumed appropriate for all. They argue that all knowledge about Africa received by Africans have been filtered by Europeans and consequently is Eurocentric. African-centered faculty leadering interventions are to be inspired in part by beliefs that people of African descent have the wisdom of elders and other African assets to overcome the influences of Eurocentric worldview of faculty leadering.

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

109

Fairfax (2017, p. 74) is of the view that Afrocentricity is a paradigm that is birthed in African-centred intellectual critique, which is also related to African philosophy. African-centred faculty leadering models should be rooted within philosophies, cultures, and principles that apply theories to praxis, unique locally, and globally. Given that, academic knowledge production has been formulated within European cultural and philosophical foundation, out of which all academic disciplines are formulated, this knowledge production is predicated upon intellectual traditions emanating from the Greco-Roman period. Fairfax (2017) further supports the idea that African centeredness ought to represent the intellectual and philosophical foundations of human reality. Harris (1999, p. 230) explain Africentricity is a frame of reference wherein phenomena are viewed from the perspective of the African person and seeks in every situation the appropriate centrality of the African person. She suggests that there ought to be a respect for cultural differences and appreciation of similarities. Again, African philosophy can be understood as the understanding of the attitude of mind, logic, and perception behind the manner in which people think, act or speak in different situations of life. There are different models that can be employed in the faculty leadering leaders such as the following, that is, (1) training model (provides mentees with the opportunity to update their skills in order to be able to demonstrate their competence); (2) award-bearing model (validated by universities); (3) deficit model (to remedy perceived weaknesses in individual teachers); (4) cascade model (individual mentees attending “training events” and then cascading or disseminating the information to colleagues); (5) standards-based model (implementation of standards – a system of teaching and teacher education, that can generate and empirically validate connections between teacher effectiveness and student learning); (6) coaching/faculty leadering model (coaching is more skills based and faculty leadering involves an element of counselling and professional friendship); (7) community of practice model (involves more than two people); (8) action research model (involving the participants themselves as researchers); and (9) transformative model (combination of practices and conditions that support a transformative agenda) (Kennedy, 2005, pp. 236–246). Skills that must be taught to leaders should include the ability to distinguish between important and superfluous information; brainstorming multiple strategies and deciding which to utilize in the school time management and planning skills; and learning to evaluate the effectiveness of learning strategies (Black, Soto, & Spurlin, 2016, p. 89). Faculty leadering in the academic mainstream ought to be understood as a demonstration of an ethics of care. Ramos (2006, pp. 193–194) suggests that a faculty leader should have the following traits, for example:

• Self-awareness leads us to a better understanding of ourselves as leaders and professionals, of our strengths and weaknesses. • Awareness of what happens around us, to our students, at the faculty work place, in our community, and in our country and in the world.

110

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

• Changing roles means transforming our role in the faculty, in the degree that •

• •

our convictions allow it (radical changes or moderate ones), from controller to advisor, from instructor to guide, from transmitter to observer and listener, from evaluator and judge to researcher. Participation and collaboration are also key elements to the development of faculties. In our profession, more than in some others, growing together, constructing collectively and undertaking projects, innovations and enterprises are of paramount importance. Autonomy does not mean isolation, individualism or self-sufficiency. Negotiation, cooperation, sharing, promoting, listening, and respecting others and their views are essential components of participation and collaboration. Challenges take us a step forward and show us the scope of our capabilities. They lead us to professional growth. Responsibility, a quality without which autonomy is not possible, gives us freedom and empowerment; at the same time, it demands dedication, organization, time management skills, investment, stamina, perseverance, and commitment to our tasks in faculties. The next section deals with the culturally relevant faculty leadering.

CULTURALLY RELEVANT FACULTY LEADERING Douglas (2017 p. 9) view faculty leadership or faculty leadership programmes as supportive relationships or programmes that have a positive impact and promote success. It can include family, faculty, staff, and peers on every level. On the other hand, Mukeredzi (2017, p. 4) views faculty leadering as a process that facilitates career development and fosters an individual’s skill and professional growth. Faculty leaders are expected to be patient, helpful, and inspiring to their protégé (Ko, Hwa, Davis, & Yip, 2018). Good qualities of faculty leadering are the following, viz.:

• as being a good listener; • being a guide rather than an enforcer; • being accessible, being supportive; and • caring, and even being practical. Indigenous wisdoms, and also the cultural traditions and perspectives of peoples of African heritage are assumed to offer a helpful foundation toward a nuanced explanation of culturally relevant faculty leadering within the faculties of education (Smith, 2016, p. 241). When establishing suitable faculty leadering relationships is not possible, creating support networks ought to be supported by university administration. Creating opportunities for faculty to come together in safe environments can offer faculty the ability to receive support and affirmation for their professional goals (Warren-Gordon & Mayes, 2017, p. 2364). Vanwright (2017) is of the view that faculty leadering should use culturally responsive

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

111

pedagogy (CRP) to enhance teaching practices by incorporating a variety of teaching methods that will help students to be successful. Accordingly, CRP is the ability to teach in a way that validates students’ cultural, racial, and ethnic identities in a culturally relevant, student-centered, reflective, synchronized, and responsive way. Vanwright (2017) further contends that CRP can enable faculty leader-protégés’ socially, intelligently, and politically using their cultural backgrounds as a basis for understanding. Vanwright (2017) suggests that faculty leaders must know what is expected of them and they should be afforded the opportunity for ongoing professional development. They should also have the benefit of a strong support system with veteran faculty leaders during their first year of teaching in higher education. In a study done by Douglas (2017), the participant’s thoughts on faculty leaders are that faculty leadering is an investment in someone, and to help develop holistically. It is about giving direction and guidance through a process or life event. Figueroa (2017) suggests that to participate in a faculty leadering relationship one should be flexible and align individualism with various developmental stages of a mentee. Faculty mentoring can be provided informally or formally. The most common approach is the “one to one” engagement. This traditional approach to faculty leadering involves an exchange of sharing and listening between two people at a minimum and it may occur over time and evolve.

Positive supervisory and faculty leadering initiatives, which foster effective workplace relationships, are one strategy to effectively address the acute need to develop and strengthen human and institutional resources. This is necessary to allow people and institutions to reach measurable goals and achieve sustainable results when improving institutions of higher learning (Nilesa et al., 2017, p. 90). The next section deals with the social challenges that may affect higher education.

SOCIAL CHALLENGES THAT MAY AFFECT HIGHER EDUCATION Faculty leadering can provide a stepping-stone to success, especially for groups facing barriers that include oppression in higher education (Walker, 2006, p. 62). Roysircar, Thompson, and Boudreau (2017, p. 343) view leadership as a universal phenomenon, that is, wherever there are people, there are leaders. People’s underlying beliefs, values, attitudes, and schemas influence the extent to which they view someone as a good leader. Since people in different institutions of higher education and cultures tend to hold different implicit assumptions, it would seem only natural that what means to be a good leader and faculty leader differs across cultures. Thus, it cannot be assumed that successful leader faculty leadering in one country and institution would be successful in another country and institution. When Africans ascend to leadership positions, such an event might mean that higher education institution has gained an advocate for racial and ethnic justice, access to the organization, and intercultural respect among its members. Furthermore, these leaders serve as role models for racially similar individuals,

112

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

empowering their full participation in fields that have not historically granted free access to oppressed groups (Roysircar et al., 2017, p. 344). Creating homogenous faculty leadering relationships is a problem for higher education institutions where there are so few African-American females to pair with other African-American women. African-American women are often paired with European-American men and women. These relationships are limiting and often unsuccessful because of barriers, such as the lack of access to information, tokenism, stereotypes and attributions, socialization practices, norms regarding cross-gender/race relationships, and reliance on ineffective power bases (WarrenGordon & Mayes, 2017). Some leaders in faculties were trained in research universities where they were socialized to value research, scholarship, and expertise in their academic specialization. Teaching and time spent with students were not emphasized and were sometimes looked on as the domain of those who were not smart enough to excel at research. In addition, some faculty were not trained to teach let alone to provide emotional support, personal development advice, and so on, being expected of faculty today (Chory & Offstein, 2017). Brunsma, Embrick, and Shin (2017) found that there are too few faculty of color in all disciplines, and too few women in many fields in higher education. Their findings suggest that the professoriate, predominantly at research universities is unappealing to women and students of color. Hart-Johns, Courser, and Hilary Kirk (2012) are of the view that higher education may experience challenges with faculty leadering such as the following:

• Diverse organizational structures, missions, staffing patterns, governance priorities, philosophies of change, and very importantly styles of leadership. • Lack of functional understanding of trust and confidentiality between a faculty leader and a mentee. • Faculty leaders also need considerable support to support their mentees. Hague and Okpala (2017) found that factors that present barriers to AfricanAmerican women’s advancement into leadership positions in higher education are the lack of socialization to faculty life, and the inefficiency to articulate a feasible research schedule. The women in their study indicated that a lack of faculty leadering was a factor that affected their advancement. Guramatunhu-Mudiwa and Angel (2017) advise that faculty leaders have to be aware of cultural perceptions that may build or destroy their cross-cultural relationship in faculties. This also underscores that faculty leadering that is cross-racial and cross-cultural involves risk taking, exposes vulnerabilities, and possible abuses by all those involved in faculties. High levels of trust and personal comfort need to be secured so that staff can express opinions without repercussions and fear. The first step is to acknowledge that racial and cultural differences matter and to acknowledge the existence of racism, racial macroaggressions, and subtle forms of racism. In cross-racial and cross-cultural faculty leadering, issues of race, gender, power, and privilege influence the relationship and these have to be addressed. A good faculty leader focuses on self as dynamic and as an instrument

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

113

that helps others evolve, develop, and live meaningful lives in higher education (Saunders, 2018). Again, Saunders (2018) view a good faculty leader as someone having the ability of understanding the self and others by focusing on the higher education status and expectations, and striving for good versus evil world that is shared different groups. Lynch (2006) claims that faculties at universities have marketed themselves in the public sphere and justified public subsidy for their activities because they seem to serve the public good. However, some faculties are transformed into powerful consumer-oriented corporate networks, whose public interest values are questionable. What is happening in some faculties is that they are being asked to produce commercially oriented professionals (profit driven or motivated by profit) rather than public-interest professionals (for the public good or service to the public). In economically unequal societies, only those with sufficient means can make choices and those who are poor have no choices at all (Lynch, 2006, pp. 1–3). The pressure in faculties comes when they are forced to move education from a public service to a tradable service. It is the ideology of the World Trade Organisation General Agreement on Trade and Services, whose purpose is to liberalize all service in all sectors of the economy globally (Lynch, 2006, p. 4). For example, Central Europe countries share challenges associated with the transition to a post-socialist society, such as rapid liberalization and the “big bang” transformation to a market economy. In addition, systemic changes in higher education (expanding numbers of students, and other deep systemic changes as a result of the formation of the European Higher Education Area within the Bologna process) were spread over a much longer period in the West. Moreover, in spite of a long tradition in environmentally oriented efforts in Central Europe (CE) states, all of these countries struggle with sustainable development challenges in different areas and levels of decision making, which slows down the implementation of Education for Sustainable Development at the higher education level in comparison to the West (Dlouha, Glavica, & Barton, 2017). The next section deals with the benefits and weaknesses of faculty leadering.

BENEFITS AND WEAKNESSES OF FACULTY LEADERING This section will be looking at the benefits and weaknesses of faculty leadering. Jones, Hardcastle, and Agnich (2006) found that there are benefits and weakness in faculty leadering processes. Some of the benefits are that faculty leadering can bring about a sense of belonging, and can create a climate that promotes trust and respect between junior and senior faculty. It can also be a source of personal satisfaction for faculty leaders. Staff members will benefit most from flexible programmes designed to address the changing needs. Staff members will also benefit from faculty leadering even by someone they do not like personally. However, the most successful relationships are those demonstrating both personal and professional compatibility. The next section deals with the weaknesses of faculty leadering.

114

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

WEAKNESSES OF FACULTY LEADERING Jones et al. (2006) identified the following weaknesses of faculty leadering:

• “Expectation that faculty leadering alone, without a change in institutional culture, will resolve faculty leadering problems is unrealistic.” • “Mentees who do not understand the expectations for faculty leadering will sometimes develop unrealistic expectations of what a faculty leader can do.” • “Not knowing what to do when a faculty leadering relationship is not working.” A good faculty leader ought to have skills such as communicating, goal setting, self-assessment, verbal, listening, social-emotional, cognitive, connectedness, emotional management, patience, adaptability, confidence, problem solving, self-regulatory, coping, spiritual strength, and perseverance (Ziobro, 2018, p. 61). The next section deals with the conclusion.

CONCLUSION This chapter has explored ideas about faculty and leader faculty leadering in higher education. The idea of purpose of faculty leadering should include a deliberate plan of action to provide support for those who were marginalized and under-represented in faculties. Faculty leadering can offer valuable opportunities to both Black and White faculty leaders and mentees to succeed in higher education where institutional policies promote cohesion among the different ethnic groups. As an alternative for higher education to sustain a caring, just and diverse higher education environment, faculty leadering should be used as a vehicle of reducing risky behaviors in higher education.

REFERENCES Abrahams, D.A., & Caldwell, A. (2016). The Leader-Mentor-Learner Role of Faculty in Business Student Education. International Business and Management, 12(3), 1–8. Allen, A., & Butler, B. R. (2014). African American women faculty: Toward a model of coethnic faculty leadership in the Academe. Journal of Progressive Policy & Practice, 2(1), 111–122. Bean, N. M., Lucas, L., & Hyers, L. L. (2014). Faculty leadering in higher education should be the norm to assure success: Lessons learned from the faculty leadering program, West Chester University, 2008–2011, Faculty Leadering & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 22(1), 56–73. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2014.882606 Bell, D. (2016). Becoming an inspirational leader in your chosen field. CILIP Update, 2016 (Mar), p. 19. Black, H., Soto, L., & Spurlin, S. (2016). Thinking about thinking about leadership: Metacognitive ability and leader developmental readiness. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2016(149), 85–95. doi:10.1002/yd.20164 Brunsma, D. L., Embrick, D. G., & Shin, J. H. (2017). Graduate students of color: Race, racism, and faculty leadering in the white waters of academia. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 3(1), 1–13. Chalmers, D. (2011). Progress and challenges to the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 25–38. doi:10.1080/ 07294360.2011.536970 Chory, R. M., & Offstein, E. H. (2017). “Your professor will know you as a person”: Evaluating and rethinking the relational boundaries between faculty and students. Journal of Management Education, 41(1), 9–38.

Afrocentric Mentoring Models of Marginalized Individuals

115

Colea, E. R., McGowanb, B. L., & Zerquerac, D. D. (2017). First-year faculty of color: Narratives about entering the academy. Equity & Excellence in Education, 50(1), 1–12. Craft, A. (2000). Continuing professional development: A practical guide for teachers and schools (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer. Dahlvig, J. (2010). Faculty leadering of African American students at a predominantly white institution (PWI). Christian Higher Education, 9(5), 369–395. doi: 10.1080/15363750903404266 Dlouha, J., Glavič, P., & Barton, A. (2017). Higher education in Central European countries e Critical factors for sustainability transition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 151, 670–684. Douglas, T. M. (2017). African American males, faculty leadership, and university success: A qualitative study. Online Theses and Dissertations, p. 483,. Retrieved from https://encompass.eku.edu/etd/483 Estepp, C. M., Velasco, J. G., Culbertson, A. L., & Conner, N. W. (2016). An Investigation Into Mentoring Practices of Faculty Who Mentor Undergraduate Researchers at a Hispanic Serving Institution. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 1–21. Fairfax, C. N. (2017). Community practice and the Afrocentric paradigm. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 27(1–2), 73–80. Figueroa, O. (2017). Virtual faculty leadering: Practitioner strategies for students underrepresented in industry. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 7(2), 144–151. Grant, C. M., & Ghee, S. (2015). Faculty leadering 101: Advancing African-American women faculty and doctoral student success in predominantly White institutions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28(7), 759–785. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2015.1036951 Green, T. D., Ammah, B. B., Butler-Byrd, N., Brandon, R., & McIntosh, A. (2017). African–American faculty leadering program (AAMP): Addressing the cracks in the graduate education pipeline. Faculty Leadering & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 25(5), 528–547. doi: 10.1080/13611267.2017.1415807 Guramatunhu-Mudiwa, P., & Angel, R. B. (2017). Women faculty leadering in the academe: A faculty cross-racial and cross-cultural experience. Faculty Leadering & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 25(1), 97–118. Hague, L. Y., & Okpala, C. O. (2017). Voices of African American women leaders on factors that impact their career advancement in North Carolina Community Colleges. Journal of Research Initiatives, 2(3). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.uncfsu.edu/jri/vol2/iss3/3 Harris, F. (1999). Centricity and the faculty leadering experience in academia: An Africentric faculty leadering paradigm. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 23(4), 229–235. Hague, L. Y., & Okpala, C. O. (2017). Voices of African American women leaders on factors that impact their career advancement in North Carolina Community Colleges. Journal of Research Initiatives, 2(3), 1–9. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.uncfsu.edu/jri/vol2/iss3/3 Harrison, A. E. (2017). Exploring Millennial Leadership Development: An Evidence Assessment of Information Communication Technology and Reverse Mentoring Competencies. Case Studies in Business and Management. 4(1), 25–48. Hart-Johns, M., Courser, M., & Kirk, H. (2012). Lessons learned and implications from a cross-site evaluation of faculty leadering with system-involved youth. Rockville, MD: Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference Service. Headley, R. (2018). The learning experiences of members of an Africentric Support Group at a small urban-based Nova Scotian University. Ph.D. thesis, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS. Holt, D. T., Markova, G., Dhaenens, A. J., Marler, L. E., & Heilmann, S. G. (2016). Formal or Informal Mentoring: What Drives Employees to Seek Informal Mentors? Journal of Managerial Issues, XXVIII (1 - 2 Spring/Summer) 67–82. Islam, M. T. 2016. Teacher development approaches and strategies in BRAC nobodhara school. International Journal of Learning & Development, 6(1), 25–41. Jones, K. W., Hardcastle, V., & Agnich, L. (2006). A guide to faculty leadering “we know how to be professionals, but we don’t know how to be professors”. Comment made by a recently-tenured faculty member in the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences, made during a focus group discussion of faculty leadering. Department of History and Advance VT Fellow, 2006– 2007, Department of Science, Technology, and Society and Associate Dean for Outreach and External Affairs, College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences & Department of Sociology, and Graduate Assistant for the Faculty Leadering Project. Louisville (United States of America). Kanchewa, S. S., Yoviene, L. A., Schwartz, S. E. O., Herrera, C., & Rhodes, J. E. (2016). Relational experiences in school-based faculty leadering: The mediating role of rejection sensitivity. Youth & Society, 31(2), 1–22.

116

VIMBI PETRUS MAHLANGU

Kennedy, A. (2005). Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Journal of In-service Education, 31(2), 235–250. Ko, A. J., Hwa, L., Davis, K., & Yip, J. C. (2018). Informal faculty leadering of adolescents about computing: Relationships, roles, qualities, and impact. Proceedings of the 49th ACM technical symposium on computer science education, New York, NY (p. 6). https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1145/3159450.3159475 Lynch, K. (2006). Neo-liberalism and marketisation: The implications for higher education. European Educational Research Journal, 5(1), 1–17. doi: 10.2304/eerj.2006.5.1.1 Mahlangu, V. P. (2017). Professional development of adult learners through open and distance learning. In S. L. Renes (Ed.), Global voices in higher education (pp. 131–145). London: Intech Open Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68818 Mukeredzi, T. G. (2017, April–-June). Faculty leadering in a cohort model of practicum: Faculty leaders and preservice teachers’ experiences in a rural South African School. SAGE Open, 1–15. Retrieved from http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Nichols, M. P. (2017). Community college completion: A qualitative study of African American community college faculty leaders and past African American male participants in an academic faculty leadering initiative. Dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Nilesa, P., Ojemenia, M. T., Kaplogweb, N. A., Voetenc, M. J., Staffordd, R., Kibwanab, M., Dengd, L., …, Squiresa, A. (2017). Faculty leadering to build midwifery and nursing capacity in the Africa region: An integrative review. International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences, 89–95. Retrieved from http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijans Pennanen, M., Bristol, L., Wilkinson, J., & Heikkinen, H. L. T. (2016). What is ‘good’ faculty leadering? Understanding faculty leadering practices of teacher induction through case studies of Finland and Australia. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 24(1), 27–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2015.1083045 Ramos, R. C. (2006). Theoretical discussion papers: Considerations on the role of teacher autonomy. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal Number 8. Colombia: Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, Facultad de Cienciasy Educación. Roysircar, G., Thompson, A., & Boudreau, M. (2017). “Born black and male”: Counseling leaders’ self-discovery of strengths. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 30(4), 343–372. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09515070.2016.1172204 Saunders, A. aka Pete. (2018). Waking up while black: How a Jamaican border-dwelling Bredda makes meaning of his Camino De Santiago pilgrimage. Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA. Smith, P. A. (2016). Color-conscious paradigms of adult and educational leadership development through culturally relevant mentoring: Africentricity, and critical spirituality explored, Adult Education Research Conference. Retrieved from http://newprairiepress.org/aerc/ 2016/papers/38. Vanwright, T. (2017). Culturally responsive practices that benefit African American males. Ph.D. thesis, University of Houston, Houston, TX. Warren-Gordon, K., & Mayes, R. D. (2017). Navigating the academy: An autoethnographic approach to examining the lived experience of African American women at predominantly white institutions of higher education. The Qualitative Report, 22(9), 2356–2366. Walker, J. (2006). A Reconceptualization of faculty leadering in counselor education: Using a relational model to promote mutuality and embrace differences. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, 45, 60–69. Washington, G., Caldwell, L. D., Watson, J., & Lindsey, L. (2017). African American rites of passage interventions: A vehicle for utilizing African American male elders. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 27(1–2), 100–109. Welch, S. (2017). Virtual Mentoring Program within an Online Doctoral Nursing Education Program: A Phenomenological Study. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship. 14(1), 128–130. Ziobro, N. F. (2018). Investigation of preschool teachers perceptions, understandings, and practices related to resilience pedagogy: A qualitative single case study. Dissertation, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ.

CHAPTER 8 THE USE OF AN ACADEMIC MENTORSHIP MODEL TO ENHANCE THE TRANSITION, RETENTION, AND SUCCESS OF DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION Gerry M. Rayner and Juliey Beckman

ABSTRACT As participation in higher education widens with concomitant increases in the number and diversity of commencing students, so does the need for programs that will support their transition and retention. In response to this need, a growing awareness of the value of mentorship in Australian universities has resulted in the introduction of peer mentoring programs for students in many institutions. Mentorship, however, can take many different forms. This chapter reports on a model of academic (faculty) mentorship for commencing science students belonging to a range of defined disadvantaged groups. The program was initially funded by an internal grant, with voluntary participation by eligible students. At the end of the first semester, participants overwhelmingly endorsed the program as having enhanced their transition experience and improved their prospects for academic progress and retention. Despite reduced funding, the program was retained over two subsequent years with slight modifications based on student feedback, together with consideration of its most

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 117–130 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017009

117

118

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

effective elements. The success of this academic mentorship program demonstrates the potential value of such approaches in the university retention and success of disadvantaged students. Keywords: Academic mentorship; diversity; low socio-economic status; disadvantage; transition; retention

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Worldwide increases in higher education participation have generated greater need for programs that support the transition and retention of commencing students and in particular students from defined disadvantaged groups than has been previously required (Altbach, 2010). In an Australian context, this requirement has gained urgency given the Australian Government’s endorsement of recommendation by Bradley, Noonan, Nugent, and Scales (2008) that by 2020, students from low socio-economic status (SES) should comprise 20% of higher education enrolments. A comprehensive body of research into academic success indicates that low SES students, as well as those with a disability or with poor levels of English proficiency, are considerably more likely than fellow students to become disenfranchised from their studies (James, Baldwin, Coates, Krause, & McInnes, 2003; Nelson, Kift, Humphreys, & Harper, 2006; O’Dowd, 1996). Reasons for this include difficulty adjusting to the style of university teaching (Krause, Hartley, James, & McInnis, 2005). For disadvantaged students, including first in family and those of low SES, the establishment of effective and suitable mentorship is an important element of the targeted support identified by the Australian Government (2009) as required to increase the likelihood of them completing their studies. The notion of mentorship has, at its roots, the theme of academic advising, which Kuhn (2008) considers to have undergone three distinct eras since its inception in the seventeenth century. Since the 1970s, the discourse around mentorship has grown considerably (see Crisp & Cruz, 2009 for a comprehensive review), culminating in the development of distinct organizational models that support mentorship programs (Habley, 2004). Contemporary university mentorship models generally conform to one of two types: (i) broad-scale campus orientation programs (e.g., peer buddy systems); (ii) unit-focused peer-assisted coursework tuition, commonly implemented as peer-assisted study sessions or peer-assisted learning programs (Heirdsfield, Walker, & Walsh, 2008; Weisz & Kemlo, 2004). One potential issue with peerbased, undergraduate mentorship programs is that peers may often be only one or two years older than the students they are advising. In such situations, peer mentors are unlikely to have sufficient life experience, emotional maturity, skills, and/or patience to effectively assist disabled students or those with particularly demanding needs (Guide, 2008). Unsuccessful peer matching, due to issues associated with perceptions about ability, superiority, affluence, and resultant power

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

119

imbalances, has been shown to undermine the value of mentorship (Haring, 1999). These factors, together with student criticisms of the poor scholarly ability and low level of interest of peer mentors (Heirdsfield et al., 2008), demand that careful planning be exercised in implementing peer-based programs, particularly for some types of students. Effective mentorship has considerable potential to enhance student academic success by developing confidence for current and future learning (Johnson, 2007; Sambunjak, Straus, & Marusic, 2006). There are many theoretical underpinnings that quantify the features of positive mentorship, including the scope of the approach, aspects of the mentor’s attributes and the model of application (Jacobi, 1991). Here, we outline and report on an academic mentorship program, akin to the Habley’s (2004) Dual Model, developed specifically to enhance the orientation, retention, and success of students from defined disadvantaged groups. The appointment of an academic staff member as mentor, rather than student peers, was a key consideration of the program. In the context of higher education, this model of mentorship aligns with that of Blackwell (1989, p. 9), who described it “as a process by which persons of superior rank, special achievements and prestige instruct, counsel, guide, and facilitate the intellectual and/or career development” of students.

MENTORSHIP FRAMEWORK Design Rationale A number of factors determined the framework ultimately adopted for this mentorship program, including the limited lead time available for program development, funding constraints, perceived deficiencies with other models (see Haring, 1999 for a review) and the relatively small number of students (20–30) predicted to be involved. All mentoring was provided by a foundation year tutor with substantial teaching experience and training appropriate for the role and who was supervised and guided by the year level academic coordinator (Fig. 1). Based on a number of factors, a multidimensional mentorship model was adopted for the program. First, it aimed to address the range of academic, professional, and personal issues commonly confronted by transitioning disadvantaged students. Second, mentorship took on different forms of interaction depending on the needs of participants. These included one-on-one weekly meetings with the mentor, networked mentorship (e.g., Swoboda & Millar, 1986), with participants meeting collectively in weeks 4, 8, and 12 of semester or additional support via email, phone, or on a casual, drop-in basis. One-on-one mentorship enabled advice and support to be tailored specifically to each student’s situation and needs. The group gatherings facilitated social networking and gave students an opportunity to share their orientation and transition experiences with their peers. Similar multidimensional mentorship programs have been identified by Scott (2008) as being key to transition success and this type of approach was used to address the particular requirements of students in this program.

120

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

Fig. 1.  Science Academic Mentorship Program (SAMMP) Framework.

Based on receipt of a small (A$9000) grant from the ACCESS Monash, a pilot academic mentorship program was implemented for students commencing a science degree. Students whose personal circumstances met one or more of the University’s defined equity or personal disadvantage groups were eligible to participate. These included students with a disability or long-term illness, indigenous Australians, those relocating from rural areas, students who had suffered financial disadvantage, were mature-age entry, had long-term difficult personal circumstances and/or were Australian citizens with a non-English speaking language background. In the week prior to start of semester 1, a brief information leaflet containing a synopsis of the program, its aims, contact details, and an invitation to join was mailed to all students enrolling under the university’s Special Entry Access Scheme. Each participant was offered a weekly, 20-minute meeting with the mentor and three focus group meetings, hosted in weeks 4, 8, and 12 of semester 1. Students were also encouraged to contact the academic mentor via email, phone, or on a dropin basis should they need assistance or advice. The mentorship program included time and study planning, stress management, and other life skills. However, it did not include tutorship for coursework, professional counseling, or financial support, although the academic mentor made referral to appropriate staff or services when appropriate. The setting of appropriate boundaries is considered to be a key element of successful academic mentorship models (Jackson et al., 2015). Summary information about the types of student enquiries and their concerns was recorded by the mentor over the course of the program. Subsequent participant cohorts were (anonymously) surveyed regarding their perceptions and level of engagement in the program, so as to assess its overall relevance and

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

121

effectiveness. The unit coursework, exam, and final marks of participants in the pilot program were compared with those of non-mentored students using analyses of variance and student t-tests. A follow-up evaluation of the academic mentorship program was conducted three years after its commencement. Program participants still able to be contacted were invited to complete a short Likert-type scale survey comprising one open-ended question. The survey asked participants to reflect on the value of the program, now that they were further advanced in their studies, with many expected to have graduated or be completing their final year. Students were sent an email from the mentor with a link to Survey Monkey assuring them that all information would be anonymous, with comments read only by the unit chair. Program Outcomes In the pilot mentorship program, of 33 eligible and invited students, 25 had made contact with either the mentor or program leader by the end of week two of semester. They were sent personalized emails of introduction to the program and 19 subsequently attended a formal introductory appointment with the mentor and thereafter sought ongoing weekly contact under the auspices of the mentorship program. Participant numbers in the two years following the pilot program were 50 and 35, respectively. In week three of the pilot program, a follow-up email was sent to all students who had initially enquired about the program but not made direct contact with the mentor. Most of those students elected not to participate fully in the program, but remained in sporadic email or drop-in contact when they required specific advice or assistance. Primary Student Concerns A high proportion of participants expressed concern about their own personal situations and the private challenges they faced, which were dealt with on an individual basis. Students’ main concerns about university, voiced during meetings held in the first two weeks of semester, included (i) campus navigation, timetabling, transport and making the best use of University services and facilities; (ii) expectations about study and revision; (iii) difficulties in commencing how to approach independent study and lack of study skills; (iv) getting the most out of lectures – concentration, summarizing, and note-taking; (v) engaging in and completing coursework tasks; and (vi) making friends and avoiding loneliness. In regard to the last concern, many students indicated that although they had met friendly peers during the orientation period, contact had often not been maintained due to large numbers of students attending lectures. By the end of week three, a small number of participants who had previously expressed confidence about their studies began to voice concerns about being considerably overwhelmed and increasingly worried about their progress. Various combinations of the quantity of coursework, approaching assignment submission deadlines, lengthy practicals and tutorials, and the requirement for submission of work at the end of classes rather than being given time to submit later, were all factors that students reported as deleterious to their confidence.

122

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

During weeks four to six of semester, a high proportion of program participants enquired about dropping or deferring certain units, and wondered about the repercussions of such on their progression. In the first year, when the program was conducted, four participants stated that they were considering withdrawing from or deferring their university course. In one-on-one meetings with the mentor, these four students all expressed feelings of isolation and nominated that a sense of disappointment in their overall transition experience and their initial results to date were the main reasons for their withdrawal considerations. During this time, a notably high proportion of participants expressed doubts about their academic ability. Interestingly, their apprehensions often coincided with a looming deadline for a major coursework submission, such as an essay. The academic mentor provided students who were contemplating withdrawal with various alternatives to consider before they made a final decision. These included the option of withdrawal from a single unit, applying for extensions for assignments or assessments, or getting through as best they could and looking ahead to the forthcoming easing of their work load. These students were all very appreciative of these discussions, as it became evident that most had mistakenly thought that persisting was an “all or nothing” choice, without the other options outlined above. Two of the four students who were intending to withdraw continued their studies with their unit load reduced by half, one participant dropped a unit and one persisted with their initial course workload. By the second half of semester one, all program students, with the exception of the severely disabled and those who had relocated from home to attend university, had become noticeably less reliant on the weekly contact with the mentor. Program Effectiveness Over the three years that the program was implemented in the faculty, participants consistently rated the mentorship program very highly. In anonymous and voluntary surveys over subsequent years, mean participant ratings of the program’s overall value (out of 100%) to them were 89% (n  =  10) and 85% (n = 12), respectively. Program participants reported that it not only had considerable value in assisting their transition to University and engagement with their studies (Table 1), but also increased the likelihood that they would complete their course. In terms of final grades for the unit of study, mentorship program participants gained a higher proportion of distinctions and high distinctions compared to non-mentored students, notwithstanding the considerable differences in sample sizes (Fig. 2). These results are consistent with an increasing body of research and scholarly literature reporting greater retention and academic success of faculty-mentored minority students compared to non-mentored minority students (Campbell & Campbell, 1997; Cooke, 2016; Dyer-Barr, 2010). Longer-term Impacts of the Mentorship Program A survey of eight participants of the inaugural mentorship program showed that three years after commencing their degree, they still rated the mentorship

123

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

Table 1.  Program Participant Survey Response Summary (% Agree or Strongly Agree). Question

(%)

Did the level of contact suit your needs?

100

Were your issues and/or questions addressed adequately?

100

Were answers given within a useful timeframe?

100

If you had not been given the opportunity to have regular contact with a staff member, would the transition from school to Uni have been more difficult for you?

100

Did the personal contact help you stay on track academically?

100

Did the personal contact help you settle into Uni life? Would you make use of the program if it continued into second semester?

100 86

Fig. 2.  Final Grade Distributions of Mentored Versus Non-mentored Students (Gray-scale Columns Represent Mentored Students: n = 15; Open Columns Represent Non-mentored Students: n = 765; N, fail; P, pass; C, credit; D, distinction; HD, high distinction).

program very highly. In response to a question that asked students “Now that it’s a few years on, in reflecting on your first year at University, to what extent did the mentorship program help in your transition to University?” On a scale from 1 (unhelpful) to 10 (invaluable), students gave the program a mean rating of 9 out of 10 (N = 7, range: 7–10). Seven of the eight students would strongly recommend or recommend the mentorship program to new first-year students. Also, three-quarters of these respondents considered that the initial contact with the

124

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

academic mentor improved or strongly improved the likelihood of them staying at University.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The academic success of students who participated in this academic mentorship program, together with its overwhelming endorsement obtained through surveys and qualitative feedback, collectively demonstrate the program’s effectiveness in enhancing participants’ transition, engagement, and academic achievement. Two participants captured this eloquently when they stated: The transition is enormous for everyone but considering the difficulties I had last year it made my transition a bit more precarious. It was excellent receiving the letter that I was eligible to participate in the program – to know that I was able to be in regular contact with a person who understood uni life, that someone would know my name and understand my needs, and that I could call on them if I had an issue was exactly what I needed. It was not only the change of university itself but a number of other issues at the time which made the transition to Uni hard for me. It was good to be able to tell someone this, know that I was not the only one having trouble adjusting and receive advice as to who to see and where to go to find out information that could help me further.

Examples of the students’ feedback regarding the value of individual, face-toface mentorship were: It’s much easier when you talk to a person physically, rather than seek help online. Helped to know that I’m not alone in the same boat, struggling to keep up.

The considerable success of this mentorship program may reflect a particular combination of variables that emerged as intrinsic characteristics, such as its close affiliation with students’ course of study, the small group size, and the availability of a suitably trained and discipline-aligned mentor. Placing the program within a department, rather than it being located more centrally (but in a discipline sense more remotely) in administration or student services appeared to promote confidence among participants that they were valued members of the science cohort. It is possible that this generated a greater sense of belonging to the university community than they might otherwise have developed. Engendering a sense of local community has been identified as an important component for enhancing student satisfaction and learning (Christie, Tett, Cree, Hounsell, & McCune, 2008). In regard to this, one participant commented that University seems like a big faceless organisation compared with school, so having a mentor was like putting a face to it (so to speak) and also meant I was able to ask questions and get answers without spending ages to find out where I had to go to ask the questions I had in the first place.

The small number of participants in the program enabled the mentor to facilitate the group meetings as informal, round-table communal discussion groups. The room configuration meant that all attendees participated in the one discussion, thus ensuring that no student could feel left out. In regard to this, one participant observed that:

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

125

Going to the group meetings also helped as it made me realise that I wasn’t the only one that wasn’t necessarily having the easiest transition. It also created the opportunity to get to know a few people and that is really important when you know no one on campus and feel pretty much completely alone.

The rationale for introducing an academic staff member as mentor for students from disadvantaged backgrounds was to ensure that they were given access to a mature but easily approachable and patient person with suitable skills and attributes (e.g., age and experience). The choice of a suitable role-model is crucial to the overall likelihood of success and the results from this mentorship program align strongly with similar programs based around an academic mentor who has the requisite range of life skills and experience (Gardner, 1981), making them well placed to aid a student’s transition and development of independent learning skills. With regard to this, a number of students gave very strongly worded, positive feedback about the personal qualities of the program mentor. For example, two participants stated that: The simple aid of having someone who has been in the same shoes, and is willing to answer all mundane questions without complaint is reassuring when old routines and familiarities are turned on their head. There was someone to go to when I didn’t know what I was doing, even with the silliest questions which the uni may assume that we know the answers too. It also made me feel like someone at Monash cared about whether or not I was going okay. As already mentioned the mentor helped me lower my stress levels. On top of this, she helped me learn the ways in which student/ tutor or student/lecturer interactions are managed at uni.

Despite a very high percentage (86%) of student respondents indicating an interest in participating in the program if it was continued into the second half of the year, budgetary constraints precluded this. Nevertheless, many of the participants maintained contact with the academic mentor, adding weight to the conclusion that students valued the program. The most consistent contact was maintained by disabled students (due to immediate and ongoing needs) and those from rural or isolated locations. One response typified student feelings about why some of them chose not to participate in the mentorship program after their first semester of study. This student noted that: I don’t think I would (need this) because I feel that I have now adjusted to Uni and know my way around enough to be able to find my own help and answers to questions I have. At least now if my circumstances change outside of Uni I know where to find the right people to ask if I need to make changes to my subjects or need any other sort of help.

Academic success, as a measure of the mentee’s progress, may or may not reflect the influence of mentorship. It is possible that the students would have gained similar coursework and exam results without mentorship, although that suggestion is somewhat negated by a number of student responses to that question. These include, for example: In the weekly meetings we discussed my week in terms of study, i.e. am I on top of things? This helped to stay on track because it motivated me because I wanted to be able to say yes to that question (‘Are you on track academically?’) When I was having trouble I had someone to talk the issues through with who gave me some ideas how to get through the tough sections and keep relatively on track.

126

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

Getting the Right Mentor The persistence and eventual success of students who were seriously contemplating withdrawing from their university studies suggest that providing a mentor who is involved in curriculum design and in the broader delivery of unit content, and thereby has an appreciation for the peaks and troughs of coursework submission requirements, may have been instrumental in facilitating their retention. The mentor was thus able to provide mentees with subjectand course-specific information, elements belonging to the formal curriculum, and additionally to the values and beliefs not formally taught at university – the so-called hidden curriculum (Margolis, Soldatenko, Acker, & Gair, 2001). In respect to this, one participant in the program observed that: the night before I was feeling so overwhelmed and down that I had made my mind up that I was going home and if the unit coordinator had not introduced me to the mentor and said I should see if she could help first I would have withdrawn that day. I had already gone to the faculty office and found out how to go about it. I hated being at university and I felt completely lost, overwhelmed and just didn’t feel like I could cope. Having the mentor there to go to when I wasn’t sure about something to do with work or just to talk to made a massive difference. I can honestly say that if I hadn’t had the opportunity to cry in her office or just have her listen I would not be about to sit semester one exams; instead I would have withdrawn.

All inaugural program participants continued their undergraduate studies, with two transferring into courses at other universities. In fact, two students (one who wanted to completely withdraw mid-semester in the inaugural program) went on to successfully apply and participate in the Monash University Study Abroad program, with both spending a semester studying overseas. Reflections about this model of mentorship from participants in the inaugural mentorship program were overwhelmingly positive. Examples of participant feedback included: I realise I may have been a bit unique in terms of the problems I encountered with adjusting to university and Melbourne life, but I think it was students like me that truly needed the mentorship program when transitioning into Monash. I am very thankful for the program as the mentor made my transition into Monash life immeasurably easier, and I probably wouldn’t be overseas finishing my degree right now without her and the program. It really helped with the transition to Uni, especially coming from the country. Also, the mentor was able to help me out with Q’s about my course/classes, and if not she knew someone, or where to find the answers. She was really encouraging with my tests and things like that and also great with personal issues. We also had the opportunity to meet other people within the program which was good because especially 1st year science classes are so big it’s hard to meet people, as just as you become good friends the semester ends and your no longer in their classes anymore! I think it was a success, and by having that extra link to the uni may help those that may be obliged to drop out of uni to continue with their study.

The results of this program in positively impacting the retention and academic success of disadvantaged students are consistent with those reported in other bespoke, small-scale mentorship programs and more broadly with national and international studies. It reinforces the value of what Cuseo (2003) called “intrusive academic support,” and he further contends that: Academic advisors are in the ideal position to “intrusively” connect students with academic support professionals, who can provide students with timely assistance before their academic

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

127

performance and persistence are adversely affected by ineffective learning strategies. (Cuseo, 2003, p. 8)

While the long-term impact of successful mentorship on personal growth and academic development remain to some degree unquantifiable (Jacobi, 1991), the financial benefits can be evaluated. Marrington, Nelson, and Clarke (2010) estimated that the withdrawal of only one undergraduate after completing the first year of a three-year degree would result in a financial loss of at least A$30,000 to the University. Thus, the financial return to the University through increased rates of student retention and concomitant fee contributions considerably outweighs the program’s initial level of funding. In regard to the development of graduate attributes and general positive consequences for faculty, it is worth noting that in an evaluation of more than 100 studies of mentorship programs as a business investment, Megginson, Clutterbuck, Garvey, Stokes, and Garrett-Harris (2006) apportioned benefits in terms of improved motivation, performance, and skills development as approximately 40% to the mentee, 27% to the mentor and 33% to the employing body. Our academic mentorship program also generated a “pay it forward” response, with a high proportion of mentored students expressing a desire to share their experience of the program with future students from disadvantaged backgrounds. The practice of mentees returning to mentor or guide commencing students is considered to be a powerful tool in higher education (Vega, 2009). In the initial two years of the program implementation, new contacts with the mentor were made sporadically by students who had not followed up on the initial offer of joining the program, until they needed specific help or advice. Such a pattern may mean that these students did not recognize the value in the initial offer, felt they did not require ongoing mentorship, or that the dissemination of information about the program was inadequate. More direct and diverse approaches, such as advertising during student orientation and into the first weeks of semester may better deliver the message to students about opportunities to participate in such programs in future. Flexibility is Key to Success In order to maximize student transition, engagement, and academic success, mentorship programs need to be flexible and tailored to the requirements of the individuals involved. While highly valued, the individual attention imparted to each student requires a substantial time investment from the mentor, and the personal and emotive nature of some mentor–mentee discussions occasionally caused them to run over the allocated time. It also became evident that a one-size-fitsall approach to the mentor–mentee interactions did not suit all students. In the second year of the program’s running, it was modified to include more frequent group meetings, to enable the sharing of the transition and initial university experience, facilitate student–student networks for social and academic support, and alleviate the intensity involved in one-on-one academic mentorship. The group meetings were intentionally facilitated to focus on students as individuals, and based on student feedback and comments, very similar high levels of satisfaction were achieved as that for the inaugural program.

128

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

The additional emphasis on the social component of academic mentorship may have further alleviated the isolation that is strongly felt by individuals in these target groups. Two participants opined that: The main thing for me was the development of friendships. It helped me to make more friends who I can share a lot with.

For some students, the friendships formed over the course of the mentorship program generated long-lasting support networks. For example, one participant indicated that: The mentorship program was a fantastic way to settle into Uni life. Starting as a Mature-Aged student after a considerable break was daunting and it helped to meet like-minded students to discuss the issues we were all facing. I made great friends through the program, friendships which have continued throughout my degree, in spite of us all taking our separate academic paths.

The impacts of this mentorship scheme demonstrate the benefits of an appropriately structured, multidimensional program and indicate that academic mentorship may remain considerably undervalued in terms of both student outcomes and economies of scale. Our findings are consistent with those of Benson, Heagney, Hewitt, Crosling, and Devos (2012), who highlighted the value of a proactive approach to embedding academic contact with disadvantaged students. Indeed, Owen (2002) argued that such support should not be seen as some sort of discretionary extra, but rather as an essential component of the educational framework provided by universities. This model of academic mentorship demonstrates that a small initial investment in easing transition and orientation to higher education has enormous potential to generate better learning outcomes and longer-term retention of disadvantaged students in post-secondary education. As Smith (2013, p. xiv) contends, mentors are an essential resource for “at-risk” students to thrive in college. Mentors could unveil the hidden curriculum of higher education to students, which could ultimately help them reach their full potential.

It is likely that effective mentorship programs such as the one described in this chapter illuminate the hidden curriculum described above and through this inculcate in such students a genuine sense of belonging at university, enabling them to progress and succeed. The success of this academic mentorship program strengthens the argument for academic mentoring to form an identified component of the academic role. One model for this might be to have discipline-based academic mentors, collaborating with one another and reporting to a central, faculty-based coordinator.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge Monash University for funding the inaugural academic mentorship scheme, and the School of Biological Sciences for

The Use of an Academic Mentorship Model

129

continued support and funding that enabled the program to continue for three years. We especially thank all students who participated in this academic mentorship program, and for their valued perceptions and thoughtful feedback.

REFERENCES Altbach, P. G. (2010). The realities of mass higher education in a globalized world. In D. B. Johnstone, M. B. d’Ambrosia & P. J Yakoboski (Eds.), Higher education in a global society (pp. 25–41). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Australian Government. (2009). Transforming Australia’s higher education system. Canberra, Australia: DEEWR. Benson, R., Heagney, M., Hewitt, L., Crosling, G., & Devos, A. (2012). Social inclusion and the student experience: What are the implications for academic support? Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 14(2), 11–28. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5456/WPLL.14.2.11 Blackwell, J. E. (1989). Mentoring: An action strategy for increasing minority faculty. Academe, 75, 8–14. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education Employment and Work­ place Relations. Retrieved from http://www.deewr.gov.au/highereducation/review/pages/ reviewofaustralianhighereducationreport.aspx. Accessed on March 15, 2018. Campbell, T. A., & Campbell, D. E. (1997). Faculty/student mentor program: Effects on academic performance and retention. Research in Higher Education, 38(6), 727–742. Christie, H., Tett, L., Cree, V., Hounsell, J., & McCune, V. (2008). A real rollercoaster of confidence and emotions: Learning to be a university student. Studies in Higher Education, 33(5), 567–581. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802373040 Cooke, J. E. (2016). A case study on the impact of a mentorship program on low socioeconomic status students at a four-year urban university. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Crisp, G., & Cruz, I. (2009). Mentoring college students: A critical review of the literature between 1990 and 2007. Research in Higher Education, 50(6), 525–545. Retrieved from https://doi. org/10.1007/s11162-009-9130-2 Cuseo, J. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections and systematic interventions. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/364gYt. Accessed on April 2, 2018. Dyer-Barr, R. M. (2010). The role and prevalence of faculty mentoring among African American and Latino undergraduates in different institutional contexts: A mixed methods study. Ph.D. thesis,, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL. Gardner, J. (1981). Developing faculty as facilitators and mentors. In V. A. Harren, M. N. Daniels & J. N. Buck (Eds.) Facilitating students’ career development: New directions for student services, no. 14 (pp. 67–80). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Guide, A. I. (2008). Building effective peer mentoring programs in schools. Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Habley, W. R. (2004). The status of academic advising: Findings from the ACT Sixth National Survey (NACADA Monograph Series, No. 10). Manhattan, KS: National Academic Advising Association. Haring, M. J. (1999). The case for a conceptual base for minority mentoring programs. Peabody Journal of Education, 74(2), 5–14. Heirdsfield, A. M., Walker, S., & Walsh, K. M. (2008). Enhancing the first year experience: Longitudinal perspectives on a peer mentoring scheme. Proceedings Australian association for research in education. Research impacts: Proving or improving, Fremantle, Australia. Jackson, D., Peters, K., Andrew, S., Daly, J., Gray, J., & Halcomb, E. (2015). Walking alongside: A qualitative study of the experiences and perceptions of academic nurse mentors supporting early career nurse academics. Contemporary Nurse, 51(1), 69–82. Retrieved from https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10376178.2015.1081256

130

GERRY M. RAYNER AND JULIEY BECKMAN

Jacobi, M. (1991). Mentoring and undergraduate academic success: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 61(4), 505–532. James, R., Baldwin, G., Coates, H., Krause, K., & McInnes, C. (2003). Analysis of equity groups in higher education 1991–2002. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training. Johnson, W. B. (2007). Student-faculty mentorship outcomes. In T. D. Allen & L. T. Eby (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. 189–210). Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Limited. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/ b.9781405133739.2007.00012.x Krause, K. L., Hartley, R., James, R., & McInnis, C. (2005). The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from a decade of national studies. Canberra, Australia: Australian Department of Education, Science and Training. Kuhn, T. L. (2008). Historical foundations of academic advising. In V. N. Gordon, W. R. Habley & T. J. Grites, et al.(Eds.), Academic advising: A comprehensive handbook (pp. 3–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Margolis, E., Soldatenko, M., Acker, S., & Gair, M. (2001). Peekaboo: Hiding and outing the curriculum. In E. Margolis (Ed.), The hidden curriculum in higher education (pp. 1–20). New York, NY: Routledge. Marrington, A., Nelson, K. J., & Clarke, J. A. (2010). An economic case for systematic student monitoring and intervention in the first year in higher education. Paper presented at the 13th Pacific Rim first year in higher education conference, Adelaide, Australia. Megginson D., Clutterbuck, D., Garvey, B., Stokes, P., & Garrett-Harris, R. (2006). Mentoring in action: A practical guide for managers. London: Kogan Page. Nelson, K., Kift, S., Humphreys, J., & Harper, W. (2006). A blueprint for enhanced transition: Taking an holistic approach to managing student transition into a large university. Paper presented at the 9th Pacific Rim first year in higher education conference, Gold Coast, Australia. O’Dowd, M. (1996). Young people at risk: Empowerment and perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Monash University, Clayton, Australia. Owen, M. (2002). Sometimes you feel you’re in niche time. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3, 7–23. Sambunjak, D., Straus, S. E., & Marusic, A. (2006). Mentoring in academic medicine: A systematic review. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(9), 1103–1115. doi:10.1001/ jama.296.9.1103 Scott, G. (2008). University student engagement and satisfaction with learning and teaching. Review of Australian higher education: Request for research and analysis. Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Smith, B. (2013). Mentoring at-risk students through the hidden curriculum of higher education. Plymouth: Lexington Books. Swoboda, M. J., & Millar, S. B. (1986). Networking-mentoring: Career strategy of women in academic administration. Journal of the National Association of Women Deans, 49, 8–13. Vega, C. (2009). Helping those who need it the most: Medical education focussed on poor and disenfranchised communities. Virtual Mentor, American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, 11(11), 870–873. Weisz, M., & Kemlo, L. (2004). Improving student learning through peer support. Paper presented at the 8th Pacific Rim first year experience in higher education conference, Brisbane, Australia.

CHAPTER 9 A “CRITICAL FACTOR”: FACILITATING THE SUCCESS OF STUDENTS FROM LOW SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS BACKGROUNDS AT AUSTRALIAN REGIONAL UNIVERSITIES THROUGH TECHNOLOGY Marcia Devlin and Jade McKay

ABSTRACT This chapter reports on the findings from an Australian study exploring how best to facilitate the success of students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds who are studying at regional universities. Interviews with 69 successful students from low SES backgrounds and with 26 stakeholders experienced in supporting these students were carried out across six regional universities. The chapter focuses on one of the key findings to emerge from the study – the criticality of the technology use in facilitating the success of these particular equity group students. The ways in which the use of technology enables flexibility and facilitates connectedness for students are foregrounded as research-based strategies for improving practice within universities. Keywords: Regional students; higher education; student success; technology; equity students; completion

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 131–144 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017010

131

132

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

INTRODUCTION In recent decades, the Australian government has focused on the success of students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds in higher education. This has translated to an increased concentration by academics and researchers on the access, participation, retention, and success of students from equity backgrounds in general and, more specifically, students from low SES backgrounds. The Australian government has shown a clear intention to improve the outcome of students from low SES backgrounds and those from regional areas with a $500 million-plus flagship equity program to improve higher education access for students from disadvantaged backgrounds (Towers, 2016). A recent study by the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE) showed that the percentage of students from low SES backgrounds has increased in the period over 2008–2015; however, the same cannot be said for remote and regional students who remain underrepresented and whose numbers actually fell in the same period (NCSEHE, 2017a). Beyond lower participation rates, regional students have also been associated with lower prior achievement, university underperformance and lower completion rates. Completion rates for regional students from 2006 to 2014 was 69%, and 60.1% for those from remote areas, compared to 73.5% for the traditional student cohort (NCSEHE, 2017a). Despite these concerning figures, few studies explore students affected by both low SES background and regionality. To address this gap, the study from which this chapter emerged sought to explore the factors that best facilitate the success of students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities. The study identified technology as a critical factor in enabling student success by offering students two key features: (1) flexibility in terms of anywhere, anytime access for students with complex lives and competing priorities and (2) connectedness to the university, peers, and staff for these students who are often isolated geographically and/ or through online modes of learning. Importantly, the study also found that to foster these benefits, technology must be accessible, reliable, and personalized and that the digital literacy of students must be appropriately developed. This chapter first sets the scene of the higher education landscape in Australia regarding equity, diversity and inclusion and then discusses the extant research surrounding the importance of technology for equity and diverse student groups. It further presents the findings relating to the “critical” success factor of technology for low SES background students at regional universities and the best practice in relation to facilitating their success.

LITERATURE REVIEW Students Affected by Financial Disadvantage and Regionality The reasons for the divergence in completion rates and outcomes between regional students and those of the general student population are the result of a range of complex factors explored in the literature. Stone (2017) summarizes these factors as proactive engagement, expectation management, levels of student

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

133

preparedness, teacher-presence, feelings of belonging, teaching and learning approaches, structured contact between students and the institution, learning analytics and embedded support. These factors have also previously been identified by researchers as critical to student retention, completion, and outcomes/success (see Burke, Bennett, Burgess, Gray, & Southgate, 2016; Devlin, Kift, Nelson, Smith, & McKay, 2012; Li & Carroll, 2017; NCSEHE, 2017a; Nelson et al., 2017). Efforts to redress this divergence have meant that Australian universities and researchers focused on how best to facilitate the access, participation, retention, and success of equity students. While the literature on students from low SES backgrounds in higher education abounds (Devlin et al., 2012; NCSEHE, 2017b), fewer studies look at students doubly affected by low SES background and regionality. Where they exist, these studies canvas a range of issues affecting these groups, including levels of preparedness (Andrewartha & Harvey, 2014), enabling programs (Andrewartha & Harvey, 2014), access and participation (Gale & Parker, 2013; Gale & Tranter, 2011; Koshy, 2016), aspirations and expectations (James, 2000), transition (Abbott-Chapman, 2011; Kift, Nelson, & Clarke, 2010), the impacts of financial disadvantage and regionality (James, 2001), factors affecting retention and success (Devlin & McKay, 2016), and the financial and sociocultural factors impacting their success (Nelson et al., 2017). The Importance of Technology for Non-traditional Student Cohorts One of the key contributors to student success for equity students and diverse cohorts is technology (Devlin et al., 2012; Devlin & McKay, 2016). Technology is said to enable and enhance access, participation, retention, and success (Stone, 2017). According to Stone (2017), equity students – including those from low SES backgrounds and regional and remote students – are represented strongly in online undergraduate programs in Australian higher education. In their Australian study exploring students from low SES backgrounds, Devlin et al. (2012) identified the use of technology as critical to effective teaching and support. Specifically, they identified technology as facilitating interactivity and connection and enabling personalized learning approaches (also see Devlin & McKay, 2016). Devlin (2013) claims that opportunities for participation and success through the use of appropriate technologies are critical to ensure that access to high quality learning is not restricted only to students who fit traditional notions of a tertiary student. She argues that all students are not necessarily young, fulltime, recent school leavers from middle-class backgrounds who study on campus, as is often assumed. The reality is that the current student body is diverse and technology can have a transformative impact on the learning experiences of students from different equity groups. For example, online learning is helping to widen access for many students previously unable to access higher education (Ilgaz & Gulbahar, 2015; Moore & Signor, 2014; O’Shea, Stone, & Delahunty, 2015; Signor & Moore, 2014). Further, the flexibility offered by online learning enables students to balance study with work, family and carer responsibilities, and is more affordable (Devlin et al., 2012; Devlin & McKay, 2016; Park & Choi, 2009).

134

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

The research proposes that appropriate technological use, tools and materials can go some length to affirming diversity. Lock and Kingsley (2007) suggest that: One of the most empowering uses of digital tools occurs when teachers possess the skills to identify, develop and apply technology to recognize and validate the diverse backgrounds of their students. As teachers increase their repertoire of technology skills, they should also become familiar with avenues for locating materials to support the needs of ethnically, culturally, linguistically, and ability-diverse students. The Internet can play a crucial role in helping teachers transform their curricula by providing space for a diversity of voices, perspectives, and experiences. (pp. 52–53)

Students these days are generally considered familiar and comfortable with a range of technologies (Prensky, 2007), and studies show that many of these students expect technology to be part of their learning experience (Rickman & Grudzinski, 2000). Not surprisingly then, tertiary institutions are increasingly leveraging the online skills learners have by embracing online and blended learning models alongside traditional models in the provision of higher education (Devlin & McKay, 2016). However, while students have been found to be embracing new technologies, specifically because they grant them greater convenience, flexibility, and anytime/anywhere access (Devlin & McKay, 2016), it is important to not make assumptions about students’ digital skills and capacity.

THE STUDY The objectives of the study from which this chapter is derived included determining the major, high-level factors that contribute to retention and completion for students from low SES backgrounds who are studying at regional universities as well as successful approaches to increasing student success. To achieve this, an inductive qualitative approach was adopted and evidence was gathered through:

• a review of quality, peer-reviewed research and relevant literature; • interviews with 69 successful students from low SES backgrounds approaching completion of their studies at regional universities; and • interviews with 26 staff deemed “experts” in how these students succeed. The central questions driving the study were: 1. What helps low SES domestic students at Australian regional universities to stay at and succeed in university, despite the challenges and obstacles they may face? 2. What program and other improvements might universities make to better support and encourage low SES, domestic, regional university students to stay in and complete their study? The study deliberately sought to interview students identified as “successful” in their studies (those in their final year of study); an approach previously tested and validated (see McKeown, Macdonell, & Bowman, 1993; Morda, Sonn, Ali, & Ohtsuka, 2007). Once ethics approval was gained by all six institutions involved,

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

135

the study recruited 70 “successful” low SES background, domestic, and regional university students. A total of 70 student interviews were carried out across six institutions (from the Regional Universities Network in Australia); however, one respondent was eliminated, resulting in a total of 69 interviews. Students were asked semi-structured questions related to what helped them succeed, including major success factors, financial circumstances, mode of study, teaching and learning, technology, support services, support people, resources, health and wellbeing, assessment, sense of connection, and student’s own motivation and resilience. A total of 26 interviews were also carried out with staff from six institutions. The inclusion criteria entailed that key stakeholders were connected with regional universities and had experience of what contributes to success for low SES students at regional universities. Staff respondents were identified by senior members of the project team. They were recognized as occupying key roles in the support, teaching and/or research of/on these students. Staff were asked semi-structured questions that focused on major, high level success factors, strategies to facilitate success, how to assist students to overcome barriers, student expectations and preparedness, and the importance of technology.

KEY FINDINGS The Devlin and McKay (2016) study identified eight critical factors relating to the best practice and facilitating the success of students from low SES background students at regional universities. These were: 1. Student attitude, motivation, determination and resilience. 2. Family support. 3. Financial security and sustainability. 4. Reliable technology. 5. Understanding and responding to students’ particular circumstances and needs. 6. Facilitating students being and feeling connected to university. 7. Student preparedness for the realities of university study. 8. An inclusive approach to learning and teaching. One of the key findings to emerge, and the focus of this chapter, is the importance of technology for facilitating the success of low SES background students at regional universities. Technology was found to enable two critical success factors: (1) flexibility in terms of anywhere, anytime access for students with complex lives, and competing priorities; and (2) connectedness to the university, peers, and staff. These are discussed below. Prior to discussing these findings, however, it is necessary to provide a frame of reference to understand the contextual influences stemming from low SES background and regional status, in order to fully appreciate why technology is such a critical factor for these students. These contextual influences include students’ own family responsibilities and the impacts of being the first in family to attend university.

136

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

Family Responsibilities Many students from low SES backgrounds studying at regional universities are parents and many have other carer duties. Previous studies have documented the challenges many students face –and particularly those from low SES backgrounds – in trying to balance academic study with family responsibilities (Devlin et al., 2012). A total of 72.5% of students interviewed discussed the challenges around their family responsibilities and the impact this had on their persistence and success. First in Family Influences Students from low SES backgrounds studying at regional universities are often the first in their family to attend university (Gofen, 2009). In this study, all students selected for interview were the first in their immediate family to attend university, with neither of their parents having attended university. Forty-two percent of stakeholders and 16% of students raised the issue of students being first in family, touching on the consequences of this including: feelings of belonging in higher education, their understanding of academic expectations and their levels of preparedness for study.

FINDING 1: TECHNOLOGY ALLOWING FLEXIBILITY AND LIFE MANAGEMENT Flexibility has previously been identified as a positively influencing factor in the academic experiences of non-traditional students (Devlin et al., 2012; Howley, Chavis, & Kester, 2013). Studies suggest the significance of open and flexible access (Schuetze & Slowey, 2002), flexibility in the curriculum (Miller & Lu, 2003), flexibility from academic staff (Devlin et al., 2012), and flexibility relating to expectations, timetables, and deadlines (Devlin et al., 2012; El Mansour & Mupinga, 2007). The issue of flexibility was a prominent theme in both stakeholder and student interviews. A total of 38% of students and 46% of stakeholders stressed the importance of flexibility to student success. This related to

• assessment dates, deadlines; • study load (part-time/full-time); • access to teaching staff; • ability to defer; • online learning allowing students to access materials in their own time, ability • •

to study at one’s own pace, the option to study from home and save on travel costs; generous open times for the campus and computer labs; and special consideration, extensions for assessments.

Flexibility was particularly critical for the 65% of students balancing paid work and study and the 72.5% of students managing carer duties and/or other

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

137

family responsibilities. Staff advocated the benefits of maximizing flexibility for non-traditional students, urging colleagues to realize that flexibility can mean the difference for them in terms of their persistence and success: We probably need to be more flexible in the way that we deal with these students. I think we’re notoriously bad for being inflexible as institutions. A lot of it has got to do with the scale of student numbers, enrolments. It tends to make us think that we can’t bend the rules or we can’t be very flexible without completely letting the whole place down. But I do think we need to be more responsive to individual needs and circumstances in a whole range of different ways. (USQ_STK_121)

Students spoke about the flexibility of online learning, enabling them to continue studying, for example, while being ill in hospital or while making the four-hour commute to campus. Some were insistent that without the flexibility enabled by technology, they would not be able to continue with their studies. Flexibility was especially critical for those balancing work, family responsibilities and/or disabilities: Online is very flexible. I can’t commit to going to a class … But yeah, that’s probably the critical factor, is it’s portable, I can do it on my iPad, I can access it wherever I go. I’ve sat in doctors’ waiting rooms when I was unwell…and done readings on my phone. That’s the critical thing, definitely. (UNE_STU_024)

Stakeholders also addressed the positive impact of flexibility offered through technology: I can use an example of a student whom I know at the moment, who is a female, late twenties, a single mother of two, engaged in a nursing programme. She is only able to participate in that programme because of the availability of … Internet at home, where that student can exercise their carer responsibilities for young children more or less at the same time while engaging with the academic material, and across a range of times during the day, not at a fixed tutorial time or a fixed lecture time. (FED_STK_004)

Students expressed that teaching staff who were responsive and sensitive to their circumstances and complex priorities were exhibiting a degree of “respect” that impacted fundamentally on their learning experience. One student stated these staff were “good people, they’re people you look up to” (USC_STU_043), while another insisted that having “positive educators [was]…one of the most important things. That’s really, really what has helped me through” (FED_ STU_006). Another student valued that her tutors understood that someone like her “can have four jobs” and that these students do have complicated lives “outside of uni” (FED_STU_002). In considering strategies to cater to a diverse student population, Elliot (2013) foregrounds a range of barriers to traditional on-campus study, including geographic isolation for remote students, high mobility of students, financial barriers, family issues and disability-related factors. Flexible learning methods using digital technologies can function to expand the options for such students, and hold “the potential to include and engage students with multiple and complex needs that typically prevent access to traditional university programs” (Elliott, 2010, “Concluding comments”, para. 4). Online education has been shown to be critical for higher education – particularly for regional universities with significant

138

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

diversity in the student cohort (Taylor & Newton, 2013). Ellis and Goodyear (2013) claim that students now have increasingly varied needs, expectations and demands and online learning can cater to this diversity. It is not surprising then that 59% of students in the study identified access to education online as pivotal to their persistence and success. Having online options was especially critical for those with disabilities or health issues that limited their ability to travel to and attend classes. A significant part of this was having materials uploaded and thus accessible to them anytime and anywhere. Students reported this as being “invaluable” (USC_STU_053) and the online tools ensuring they did “not have any disadvantage going forward” (USC_STU_046). Technology was seen as valuable for many students because of the opportunities and choices it granted them. Without online education options, many of them would have been completely excluded from higher education. The perceived high value of online learning to regional students at geographical distance from a campus and/or with family responsibilities was clear in their statements: […] years ago I wanted to university study but I didn’t live close enough to a university to be able to do it …. Whereas this way, even if I had been further north or out west … I could have still done this study. (USQ_STU_122) I wouldn’t have been able to study on campus … so it would’ve been a near impossibility for me to get a law degree had I not had the option of studying externally. (UNE_STU_021) With an external offering you can work around work, family, that sort of thing. So it’s the flexibility that it gives you. So, I think that would be the number one thing. (USQ_STU_133)

Students referred to online offerings as a “game changer” (USQ_STU_141) in their lives, particularly for those living in remote, rural areas. Students reported that online learning ensured they would not have to “settle” for the limited options available in their regional, remote areas; they could aspire to do and be more. The study identified the importance of flexibility in the lives of these students and the capacity of technology to deliver that flexibility. Technology was seen to create opportunity and choices for students, enabling them to access higher education study and to better balance their multiple priorities and study when it suited them through anytime, anywhere access. Both stakeholders and students underscored the importance of this flexibility and the power of technology to positively impact the experiences of students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities.

FINDING 2: CONNECTEDNESS FOSTERED BY TECHNOLOGY The study from which this chapter is derived found that students being and feeling connected to university was critical to their success. This connectedness related to the university, its staff and fellow students and was found to have a positive impact on persistence. Technology was identified as an important tool for facilitating this connectedness. In total, 53 students (77%) and 16 stakeholders (61.5%) identified connectedness as a major, high level factor in facilitating success.

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

139

Given the prevalence of distance education and online learning offered by regional universities, a significant issue was the lack of perceived connectedness experienced by students who were undertaking an online mode of study. These students felt “fairly disconnected” (CQU_STU_082) and one claimed, “Being a distance student you don’t get that camaraderie that comes with being on campus” (CQU_STU_083). The specific factors that the study identified as affecting feelings of connectedness identified by both students and stakeholders include:

• easily accessible information; • staff availability; • the quality of relationships with teachers; • contact time/face-to-face opportunities (for example, Skyping with lecturers for those who are online learners); • social events (for example, orientation); and • timely responses to student emails/questions. The need to facilitate connection for remote and online students, in particular, was a prominent theme in interviews, with one student explaining: I’ve made use of Facebook as far as connecting with other students goes. Being able to just connect with them sometimes and say oh my goodness that was an incredibly challenging unit, did anyone else have trouble with this particular thing just because we don’t have that face-to-face connection that on-campus students have … So I’ve made use of that and that’s made a difference to my ability to push forward. (USQ_STU_121)

One stakeholder spoke about how technology-enabled connections to be made as well as relationship building: […] making sure that there is a relationship built which is decidedly much, much harder if it’s a distance education student you’ve never seen. Technology can help with that, really it can. (SCU_STK_032)

One stakeholder foregrounded social media as a way to foster that connection: “I use Facebook, because they’re all on Facebook and they all know how to use Facebook and I’m responsive. So they’ve got my instant messenger” (SCU_ STK_032). Indeed, social media, such as Facebook, was seen as having an important role to play in the connectedness students had with their peers and to the university itself. Students said the use of social media meant that they did not “feel quite so alone while studying as an external student” (UNE_STU_027), and that it “made a difference just to be able to connect because up until then you do feel very, very isolated” (USQ_STU_121). Stakeholders similarly viewed social media and Web 2.0 technologies as beneficial to fostering connection and building “up those relationships” (CQU_ STK_043) between students and staff and amongst students themselves. One stakeholder stated that educators need to ask: “How do … we get that connection so a student does feel a sense of belonging, and a sense of being valued and a sense of being connected to the institution?” (SCU_STK_031).

140

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

Connection was also fostered when they found staff approachable and available, and able to provide timely support and instruction. This was identified as significant for students studying online, who often felt isolated: I have been able to get in contact with the teaching staff in order to just do a quick ten-minute Skype … as opposed to doing it via email. But I’ve also found the emails are really good. I’ve never waited any more than a two-day turnaround for a response to an email about questions, so that’s really helped as well. (UNE_STU_026) The way they always have the lectures up and the way the lecturers are always so…easy to reach even though I’m not on campus. That’s been one of the biggest things. (UNE_STU_030)

Students also valued early contact from the institution upon commencing their studies; a finding that was supported in the recent study by Nelson, Readman, and Stoodley (2016). In particular, the receipt of welcome packs and emails positively impacted students’ feelings of connection and belonging. Stakeholders similarly commented on the benefits of early efforts to foster connection: It’s that connection with people really early, as soon as they’ve made a decision, accepted an offer, and then taking that through to orientation and to what’s offered to students. (SCU_ STK_031)

Support which continued beyond the first year, however, was also deemed to be critical to ensure a sustained connection: “I feel like I have a greater connection with them … because they’re always checking in, how’s my study going, this and that” (USC_STU_048). Stakeholders championed connectedness as ultimately making “students feel at home” (CQU_STK_042). Facilitating students feeling a sense of connection to the university impacted positively on their experience and persistence. Technology was found to be an important tool for facilitating connectedness particularly by enabling interaction with both students and staff through social media. Early engagement was perceived as valuable in connecting students to the institution and others, as were staff who were approachable, available and responsive.

CHALLENGES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY The use of technology is dependent on students actually having access to the internet. In fact, 96% of stakeholders identified accessibility as a key determinant of student success, claiming that access to reliable technology can affect feelings of connection and the overall learning experience. Accessibility was just one of the many challenges identified as important for institutions and academics to consider. The other challenges raised in interviews are now elucidated. Despite the many benefits of technology touched on above, stakeholders and students also pointed to a raft of challenges, particularly for students who were studying wholly online and who were, therefore, at higher risk of isolation than those physically on campus. One student stated it was important for the university to “bring the campus” (US_STU_122) to online students. According to Martin (2016), while access to the internet is a given, this assumption cannot be made for students from low-income backgrounds. Access

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

141

is thus unequally distributed and this is a complexity that institutions and educators need to be aware of. Students were particularly vocal about the importance of access with 81% stressing its criticality. One student said, “Internet is absolutely crucial to study” (FED_STU_010). For students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities, access to internet can be hindered by both financial disadvantage and remoteness. One student spoke about how “costly” it was “to have really good internet at home” (SCU_STU_066) while another said their “financial circumstances” limited their ability to access resources “online” (USC_STU_057). To access the internet, free wifi and download learning materials or submit assessment tasks, some students had to often travel long distances to their local campus libraries, council libraries, shopping centers, or the closest McDonalds restaurant. Students underscored the necessity of free internet/wifi (13%) at their campuses as well as 24-hour access to computer labs (12%). Stakeholders similarly stated: We have a specific scheme for students to be able to be given computers … free of charge to students so they can take them home and use them. (FED_STK_001) when we’re so dependent upon online delivery of programmes, universities need to be a bit more responsive to the needs of students who might not have good internet access. (USQ_STK_121)

Selwyn, Gorard, and Williams (2001) claim there exists a polarized scenario related to students who have access to technology and those who do not, claiming: […] income is a highly significant factor in whether or not individuals have access to IT, with high-income households (i.e., $75,000 or higher) being 9 times more likely to have access to a computer and 20 times more likely to have access to the Internet than those at lowest income levels. Similar disparities exist in terms of … urban as opposed to rural areas. (p. 261)

While this research is US-specific, the study confirms the importance of access to technology for students from low SES backgrounds at regional Australian universities. Beyond just access, another issue foregrounded is that staff often make assumptions about the capacity of students’ digital skills. We found that technology-enhanced learning can only achieve its optimal potential when it coincides with appropriate capacity building and skill development of students where required.

THE ENDURING VALUE OF FACE-TO-FACE LEARNING While online learning and distance education is on the rise, research identifies face-to-face learning as continuing to be important to learning and the overall student experience (Fink, 2013; Jaggars, 2014) and this was reinforced by participants in this study: 39% of students and 19% of stakeholders highlighted the importance of the face-to-face experience, often championing an intersection of face-to-face and digital experiences. Even those students studying online stated that they appreciated staff who attempted to create “face-to-face” experiences

142

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

through innovative technological tools. One stakeholder stated, “regardless of how sophisticated the online environment” is for students, they can still feel “they’re sort of on the outer, they’re remote” and that face-to-face opportunities with staff – even once – could have a huge impact on fostering a sense of “connectedness” and eliminating isolation (UNE_STK_014). Academic staff employed the use of Skype sessions, developed introductory videos of themselves and the unit and recorded lectures so that off-campus students were able to “see” their lecturers and feel part of the study experience and class.

CONCLUSION The larger study on which this chapter is based set out to determine specific approaches and high-level factors that can assist students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities to succeed, as well as provide relevant policy advice for higher education decision makers. One of the key and “critical” factors identified by stakeholders and students interviewed as part of the study was technology. The study highlighted the importance of flexibility in the lives of these students and the capacity of technology to deliver that flexibility. Technology was seen to create opportunity and choices for students, enabling them to access education per se and then to better balance their multiple priorities and study when it suited them through anytime, anywhere access. Both stakeholders and students underscored the importance of this flexibility and the power of technology to positively impact on the experiences and success of students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities. The study also foregrounded that facilitating students feeling a sense of connection to the university impacted positively on both their experience and persistence. Technology was identified as an important tool for facilitating connectedness particularly by enabling interaction with both students and staff through social media. Early engagement was perceived as necessary in connecting students to the institution and others, as were staff who were approachable, available and responsive. These findings have clear implications for academics and institutions to consider. In relation to the technology use, there is a clear need for tertiary institutions to invest in the professional development of educators to ensure their capacity with technology so as to optimize the engagement and success of equity students. This professional development might also include awareness raising about issues affecting students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities, relating to first in family challenges, feelings of belonging and connection. Based on these findings, we argue that technology must be accessible, reliable, and personalized to cater to the needs of students from low SES backgrounds at regional universities. Importantly, the digital literacy of students must also be appropriately developed, so as to ensure students have the capacity to utilize technology as effectively as possible. Realizing the full potential of technology to improve the experience and success of these students is essential and must remain a key goal for institutions experiencing increasing numbers of non-traditional students.

Facilitating the Success of Students from Low SES Backgrounds

143

REFERENCES Abbott-Chapman, J. (2011). Making the most of the mosaic: Facilitating post-school transitions to higher education of disadvantaged students. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38(1), 57–71. Andrewartha, L., & Harvey, A. (2014). Willing and enabled: The academic outcomes of a tertiary enabling program in regional Australia. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 54(1), 50. Burke, P. J., Bennett, A., Burgess, C., Gray, K., & Southgate, E. (2016). Capability, belonging and equity in higher education: Developing inclusive approaches. Report submitted to the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia. Devlin, M., Kift, S., Nelson, K., Smith, L., & McKay, J. (2012). Effective teaching and support of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds: Resources for Australian higher education. Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.lowses.edu.au Devlin, M., & McKay, J. (2016). Teaching students using technology: Facilitating success for students from low socioeconomic status backgrounds in Australian universities. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 92–106. Ellis, R., & Goodyear, P. (2013). Students’ experiences of e-learning in higher education: The ecology of sustainable innovation. New York, NY: Routledge. El Mansour, B., & Mupinga, D. M. (2007). Students’ positive and negative experiences in hybrid and online classes. College Student Journal, 41(1), 242. Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. Gale, T., & Tranter, D. (2011). Social justice in Australian higher education policy: An historical and conceptual account of student participation. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 29–46. Gofen, A. (2009). Family capital: How first generation higher education students break the intergenerational cycle. Family Relations, 58, 104–120. Howley, C., Chavis, B., & Kester, J. (2013). “Like human beings”: Responsive relationships and institutional flexibility at a rural community college. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 28(8), 1. Ilgaz, H., & Gülbahar, Y. (2015). A snapshot of online learners: e-Readiness, e-Satisfaction and expectations. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(2). Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Choosing between online and face-to-face courses: Community college student voices. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(1), 27–38. James, R. (2000). Socioeconomic background and higher education participation: An analysis of school students’ aspirations and expectations. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training. Retrieved from http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/150146 James, R. (2001). Participation disadvantage in Australian higher education: An analysis of some effects of geographical location and socioeconomic status. Higher Education, 42(4), 455–472. Kift, S. M., Nelson, K. J., & Clarke, J. A. (2010). Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE: A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1–20. Li, I. W., & Carroll, D. (2017). Factors influencing university student satisfaction, dropout and academic performance: An Australian higher education equity perspective. Perth, Western Australia: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), Curtin University. Lock, R. H., & Kingsley, K. V. (2007). Empower diverse learners with educational technology and digital media. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(1), 52–56. Martin, C. (2016, February 11). Many low-income students use only their phone to get online. What are they missing? The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/many-lowincomestudents-use-only-their-phone-to-get-online-what-are-they-missing-54213 McKeown, B., Macdonell, A., & Bowman, C. (1993). The point of view of the student in attrition research. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 23(2), 65–85. Miller, M., & Lu, M. Y. (2003). Serving non-traditional students in e-learning environments: Building successful communities in the virtual campus. Educational Media International, 40(1–2), 163–169.

144

MARCIA DEVLIN AND JADE McKAY

Moore, C., & Signor, L. (2014). Engaging diverse student cohorts: Did someone say completely online? International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(4), 364. Morda, R., Sonn, C. C., Ali, L., & Ohtsuka, K. (2007). Using a student-centred approach to explore issues affecting student transition. Enhancing higher education, theory and scholarship, proceedings of the 30th HERDSA annual conference, 8–11 July, Adelaide, Australia. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. (2017a). NCSEHE focus: Successful outcomes for regional and remote students in Australian higher education. Perth, WA: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education. (2017b). NCSEHE focus: Successful outcomes for low SES students in Australian higher education. Perth, WA: National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), Curtin University. Nelson, K., Readman, K., & Stoodley, I. (2016). Shaping the 21st century student experience at regional universities. Final Report. Office for Learning and Teaching, Australian Government, Australia. O’Shea, S., Stone, C., & Delahunty, J. (2015). “I ‘feel’ like I am at university even though I am online.” Exploring how students narrate their engagement with higher education institutions in an online learning environment. Distance Education, 36(1), 41–58. Park, J. H., & Choi, H. J. (2009). Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 207–217. Prensky, M. (2007). How to teach with technology: Keeping both teachers and students comfortable in an era of exponential change. Emerging Technologies for Learning, 2(4), 40–46. Rickman, J., & Grudzinski, M. (2000). Student expectations of information technology use in the classroom. Educause Quarterly, 23(1), 24–30. Schuetze, H. G., & Slowey, M. (2002). Participation and exclusion: A comparative analysis of nontraditional students and lifelong learners in higher education. Higher Education, 44(3–4), 309–327. Signor, L., & Moore, C. (2014). Open access in higher education–strategies for engaging diverse student cohorts. Open Praxis, 6(3), 305–313. Stone, C. (2017). Opportunity through online learning: Improving student access, participation and success in higher education. The National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education (NCSEHE), Curtin University, Perth, WA. Taylor, J. A., & Newton, D. (2013). Beyond blended learning: A case study of institutional change at an Australian regional university. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 54–60. Towers, K. (2016, 18 May). Low-SES, regional students struggle with university admission. The Weekend Australian. Retrieved from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/ lowses-regional-students-struggle-with-university-admission/news-story/8c1f5098a596b80b28 966fc72a58f81f

CHAPTER 10 A STRATEGY FOR ENHANCING ACADEMICS’ CULTURAL LENS: THE KNOWING YOUR STUDENTS REPORT Meloni M. Muir, Helen Drury, Garth Tarr and Fiona White

ABSTRACT The authors report on a study that examined how academics in two faculties (Business and Science) at a large, research-focused university use information about student diversity to inform their teaching. Ninety-nine Science academics completed an online survey regarding their knowledge of their student cohort’s demographic, cultural, language, and educational backgrounds at the beginning of semester. They then received a concise two-page, course-specific document, Knowing Your Students (KYS) report, summarizing aspects of their students’ diversity. At the end of the semester, 44 of the same staff completed a second survey with open-ended questions regarding how they used the report information in their teaching and curriculum design. The report was new to Science while Business academics had received the reports for three years. To compare Science with Business, Business academics also completed the second survey. Academics across both faculties had a very positive response to the reports and engaged with the information provided. Provision of the report to Science academics brought their self-assessed knowledge of their student cohort’s diversity to a level comparable with that of Business. This chapter shares how KYS reports improved academics’ knowledge of

Strategies for Facilitating Inclusive Campuses in Higher Education: International Perspectives on Equity and Inclusion Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 17, 145–162 Copyright © 2019 by Emerald Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2055-3641/doi:10.1108/S2055-364120190000017011

145

146

MELONI M. MUIR ET AL.

student diversity, and challenged them to respond with suitable curriculum and pedagogical changes. Keywords: Student diversity; knowing your student; curriculum design; pedagogical change; cultural competence; teaching analytics

INTRODUCTION Globalization of the education market and government policies aimed at encouraging increasing non-traditional student enrollments have resulted in a dramatic increase in tertiary admissions over the last 50 years (Barro & Lee, 2013; Marginson, 2016; United Nations Educational, Social and Cultural Organization, 2015) and particularly in recent years (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2018). Globalization means that many students are now studying outside their country of origin, often in a second or third language (OECD, 2017), while others are re-entering tertiary institutions to undertake an additional undergraduate or post-graduate degree to enhance their employability (e.g., at least 26% of Australian university graduates were engaged in full-time study in 2017; Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching, 2018). This trend has led to student populations becoming increasingly diverse (Bowes, Thomas, Peck, & Nathwani, 2013). Although there is ongoing debate about the demographic categories and measurement of diversity (Harvey, Longerbeam, & Miller, 2013; Mukherji, Neuwirth, & Limonic, 2017; Zhang, Xia, Fan, & Zhu, 2016), in general, “structural” diversity (Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pederson, & Allen, 1999), or the diverse composition of university student populations, can be observed in terms of student backgrounds, encompassing age range, gender identity, sexuality, disability status, ethnicity, socio-economic, cultural, and language backgrounds as well as previous learning experience and preparedness for study (Maringe & Sing, 2014; Nieto & Bode, 2018; OECD, 2017; Shaw, Brain, Bridger, Foreman, & Reid, 2007; Vertovec, 2014). While structural diversity alone is not enough to bring about educational benefits, engaging with student diversity at all levels has been shown to result in positive educational outcomes, for example, cognitive and intellectual benefits in areas such as critical thinking and problem solving (Bowman, 2010; Chang, Denson, Sáenz, & Misa, 2006; Gottfredson et al., 2008; Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002; Hu & Kuh, 2003). Diversity experiences can also aid in preparing students for a multicultural society, providing them with greater social awareness and the complex thinking and communication skills required to address social problems related to inequality (Hurtado, 2007). Although classroom diversity can enhance learning and social outcomes, it can present pedagogical challenges. At the tertiary level, teaching qualifications and experience can vary greatly among academics and may not always be taken into consideration when teaching is assigned for large, diverse student cohorts. Furthermore, change in university teaching practices has been slow compared to the relatively rapid increase in student diversity (Arkoudis & Tran, 2010; Dewsbury, 2017; Marr, Curry, &

Knowing Your Students

147

Rose-Adams, 2014). Thus, universities and academics continue to contend with how to enable success of an increasingly diversified student cohort (Budge, 2010; Northedge, 2003a; Rolls & Northedge, 2018; Santoro, 2009; Wingate, 2015). In Australia, the Bradley Review (2008) provided the impetus for universities to increase student diversity. This was a national review of the Australian tertiary education system focused on assessing whether the sector was preparing the country to compete effectively in the future global economy. One of its conclusions was that Australia would need more highly qualified graduates to meet the challenges of technological advancement, globalization, and critical global issues. To this end, the Bradley Review recommended an increase in participation of under-represented groups, such as Indigenous people, students from low socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds and those from rural and remote areas. Two key targets of the review adopted by government were to (i) increase the percentage of individuals between the ages of 25 and 35 years with undergraduate tertiary qualifications to 40% or greater by 2025 and (ii) increase the representation of undergraduate students from low SES backgrounds to 20% by 2020 (Parliament of Australia, n.d.). The Australian government supported these targets through uncapping and funding of university places, providing student income support and scholarships, while at the same time, requiring institutions to monitor targets. The University of Sydney, Australia’s oldest university established in 1850, is a large, public, research-focused institution with more than 50,000 students contributing to a richly diverse learning community. Students come from urban and rural settings, 130 countries and speak more than 80 languages (University of Sydney, Annual Report, 2017). They range from recent high school graduates to mature aged individuals and have varied prior learning experiences and expectations. However, information regarding student diversity has been relatively limited or unavailable to individual academics. Academics are faced with large course1 enrollments (in some cases, lectures of 500 students and course enrollments of more than 2,000) with minimal commensurate staffing increases, which means that there is often limited one-to-one interaction with students (Maringe & Sing, 2014). In addition, sessional staff, who receive little in the way of professional development, are increasingly used for teaching (Hitch, Mahoney, & Macfarlane, 2018). In this environment, it would be difficult for any academic to really “know” their students. Yet, to teach diverse student cohorts effectively and inclusively, it is important to understand who our students are and engage with this diversity in the classroom (Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, & Hayek, 2007). As Brookfield notes (2006, p. 6), We may exhibit an admirable command of content, and possess a dazzling variety of pedagogical skills, but without knowing what’s going on in our students’ heads, that knowledge may be presented and that skill exercised in a vacuum of misunderstanding.

University academics are often more aware of how to integrate disciplinespecific knowledge into their teaching rather than apply appropriate pedagogical theory and practice in the context of increasing diversity. This is despite institutional and national initiatives to support the development of inclusive curricula,

148

MELONI M. MUIR ET AL.

particularly targeting the first year experience and student retention (Devlin, Kift, Nelson, Smith, & McKay, 2012; Kift, Nelson, & Clarke, 2010; National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, 2013; Shaw et al., 2007; Thomas & May, 2010). Also, increasing pressures on everyday academic practices often mean that time and resources for systematic and sustainable curriculum change are largely unavailable. Although it would be beneficial to “know” who our students are, these constraints may hinder academics from seeking out or using student diversity information to change their pedagogical approaches or curriculum design. Curriculum change and revitalization for enacting inclusivity have to come from several directions. Universities must “create synergy within and across organizational systems through alignment of structures, politics, curricular frameworks, faculty development policies, resources, symbols, and cultures” (Williams, Berger, & McClendon, 2005, p. 3). At the individual level, academics’ willingness to engage in inclusive curriculum renewal is a function of their discipline identity, personal experience of diversity, beliefs about teaching and learning, and the purpose of education (Roberts, 2015). Curriculum change has also been conceived more broadly in terms of adoption of innovation in teaching (Freeman, 2012; Jones, 2002) where change depends on the perceived benefits, compatibility with current curriculum and pedagogy, complexity and risk involved, ease of implementation, and importantly, availability of institutional support and incentives. In terms of adopting inclusive teaching practices, models of intercultural sensitivity have been used to describe academics’ behavior along a continuum from assimilation, where difference is not recognized and curriculum innovation is minimal, to transformation where diversity is used as a pedagogical resource to change traditional practices (Aragon, Dovidio, & Graham, 2017; Sawir, 2011). Despite the challenges involved in inclusive teaching, there is now a large collection of research and practice in the area for universities, faculties, and academics to access (e.g., Rolls & Northedge, 2018), particularly in meeting the educational needs of students in a globalized world. The University of Sydney has a commitment to prepare students to be global citizens (University of Sydney Strategic Plan, 2016). To achieve this, we need to assess academics’ knowledge about their students and their preparedness for teaching more inclusively. It is imperative that academics be supported in developing more inclusive curricula and learning environments by encouraging their concern for not only what they teach but how they teach (Danowitz & Tuitt, 2011; Williams et al., 2005). In 2010, an initiative was undertaken in the Business faculty at the University of Sydney to provide academics with a concise and timely report, the Knowing Your Students (KYS) report, comprising course-by-course student diversity information. In 2014, the KYS report was also provided to Science academics. Resources were not available for staff training on the use of the information in the report. Therefore, it was unclear whether having easily accessible, current information about a specific cohort’s educational and cultural diversity would mean that academics would be willing to engage with it or know how to use it effectively. To assess these concerns, we designed a new scale, the Staff Awareness of Student Diversity Scale (SASDS) and invited academics receiving the KYS report to complete the SASDS online.

149

Knowing Your Students

This study aims to investigate how the provision of focused information on student diversity influences both staff awareness and their teaching practices. Our research questions were:

(1) Does access to the KYS report improve academics’ knowledge of their student cohort? (2) What new information did academics find regarding their cohort from the KYS report? (3) In what ways can access to information about student diversity effect change in academics’ teaching? (4) What type of support would academics want or value if information about student diversity were more readily available?

METHOD Participants Ninety-nine academics from the Faculty of Science completed a SASDS before receiving their first KYS report at the beginning of semester. Of this group, 44 completed a second SASDS at the end of the same semester. In comparison, 46 academics from the Faculty of Business completed a SASDS after receiving their KYS report. Table 1 shows that the academics who participated represented the entire spectrum of experience from early career academics to full professors, with varying years of experience teaching a particular course. Participants were also distributed throughout the various sub-disciplines, disciplines, or schools within each faculty. Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee.

Table 1.  Characteristics of Participants According to their Academic Position and Experience Teaching their Courses. Position Level A (Teaching Fellows) Level B (Lecturer) Level C (Senior Lecturer) Level D (Associate Professor) Level E (Professor) Number of years lecturing Less than one year 1–3 years More than 3 years Number of years teaching this course First time teaching this course Taught this course once before Taught this course multiple times

Business (n)

Science 1 (n)

Science 2 (n)

4 19 12 7 4

15 21 24 21 18

6 9 12 10 7

2 8 36

14 10 75

3 6 35

12 4 30

26 13 60

11 4 29

150

MELONI M. MUIR ET AL.

Measures and Materials The Staff Awareness of Student Diversity Scale This instrument was developed to measure academics’ knowledge of, and views on, student diversity within the courses in which they teach. The SASDS consists of 20 items on a continuous measure (where 0 = No knowledge and 10 = Full knowledge) as well as the opportunity to add open-ended responses on each item (Fig. 1). In addition, three open-ended questions completed the instrument for Business academics and for the second SASDS administered to Science academics. In this chapter, quantitative analysis of 11 items relevant to the KYS report will be provided as well as qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. This is a mixed methods approach using concurrent triangulation of data (Creswell, 2014). KYS Report The KYS report was developed to provide academics with timely, accurate student diversity information in a readily accessible format to promote early shaping of course content and inclusive teaching for each unique course cohort. The report contains a range of student information extracted from Sydney University databases, including gender, nationality, languages spoken, degrees and majors, and current courses, and courses completed successfully. Procedure After Science academics completed the SASDS, the KYS report was emailed to them early in semester (week 2) and an update report was sent after the last day for student withdrawal from a course without financial penalty (last day of week 4). At the end of the same semester, Science academics recompleted the SASDS to gauge what they had learned about their students, how this information correlated with what they thought they knew as indicated in their first SASDS, and

Fig. 1.  An Example How Questions Were Presented in the SASDS.

151

Knowing Your Students

the way(s) in which they had used, or would use, the information to change their teaching practices and course curriculum. Business academics received their KYS report as usual at the start of the semester, and then asked to complete the SASDS. The open-ended responses by both Science and Business academics comprise the qualitative data. An inductive approach to data analysis was used where responses were compared in terms of language choices and common patterns identified and coded. These codings were then categorized into broader themes (e.g., see Hatch, 2002 for an outline of this procedure). Data analysis was carried out independently by two of the researchers who then reached consensus on the theme analysis. Statistical analysis of the quantitative data was performed in R (R Core Team, 2018). The hypothesis tests performed are one-tailed t-tests, under the null hypothesis of no difference in self-assessed knowledge between the two groups and the alternative hypothesis is that there is a significant increase in self-assessed knowledge.

RESULTS Quantitative Findings A comparison of responses to the SASDS in the first Science survey (before staff received KYS reports) and second Science survey (after staff received KYS reports) are reported in Table 2. Also included are the SASDS results for Business. A pairwise comparison of means between the first Science survey and the Business survey indicates that mean knowledge ratings for Business are higher for all items. Comparing the first and second Science surveys, there is a statistically significant increase in academics’ knowledge of student diversity for all items, bringing Science academics’ knowledge to levels comparable with Business. Qualitative Findings Frequency of open-ended comments on the SASDS items decreased from the first to the second Science survey. Science participants in the first survey provided almost three times as many comments as Business (approximately 300 vs 100) on how they acquired knowledge about student demographics and areas of study. After receiving the KYS report, Science comments on the second survey were numerically similar to those of Business. Analysis of comments on the SASDS items from both faculties suggested that participants acquired their knowledge of student diversity from discussions with their students and colleagues, their past experience and knowledge of students’ current and previous courses. Science participants based more of their knowledge about students’ degrees and their past academic success on students’ current or previous courses, whereas Business participants based this more on discussions with students. Both groups highlighted discussions with students as their source of information about students’ demographic background in such areas as home language and country of birth. In terms of students’ previous courses and

M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

6 3.3 3.6 3.2 3.4 2.8 4.1 3.2 3.3 4.2 2.6 3.1 2.2 2.9 2.6 3.3 4.4 3.2 6.5 3.5 2.0 3.2

7.9 2.2 6.1 3.4 7.1 2.6 5.9 3.6 6.9 3.9 6.5 3.3 6.9 3.2 7.5 3.1 8 2.2 8.7 1.9 3.4 3.5

Science 2 (n = 44) 7.8 2.5 7.1 2.8 6.6 3.4 5.9 3.5 5.9 4.3 7.4 2.9 7.4 2.9 8.3 2.3 6.9 3.6 7.6 3.1 3.7 3.4

Business (n = 46)

0.9

8.7***

2.32**

3.87***

0.4

−1.95*

−1.75*

1.3

6.86***

6.63***

−1.08

4.72***

1.47

0.06

2.98**

8.33***

−0.78

1.48

−0.13

Science 2 versus Business t-stat

7.59***

4.3***

3.42***

Science 1 versus Science 2 t-stat

Note: M, SD, and n are used to represent mean, standard deviation, and sample size, respectively. The t-statistics reported are two-sample t-tests comparing the two groups. Significance codes are for one-tail tests: *** represents p