Today I was able to watch a couple more SABER presentations that I had missed. Dr. Colin Harrison from Georgia Tech and Dr. Kimberly Tanner from San Francisco State presented a session entitled “Language matters: Considering racial microaggressions in science” last October 8, 2020. Harrison was a postdoc with Tanner and began the presentation by revealing data from a pre-session poll of attendees responding to whether they had witnessed a microaggression. Harrison used the definition of D. Sue 2010 to define microaggression as: “brief, sometimes subtle, everyday exchanges that either consciously or unconsciously denigrate an individual based on their group membership” and added that they can be spoken, written, or environmental. Harrison clarified that microaggressions can target race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, religion, or features that are part of someone’s identity. Further, microaggressions are classified as microassault, microinsults, and microinvalidations as described by Sue 2010. Harrison mentioned several scenarios to analyze the microaggressions. Harrison shared data on how microaggressions can lead to psychological effects that can impede learning, engagement, and sense of belonging. Harrison mentioned that “dealing with microaggressions requires cognitive energy” to decide whether it happened and how to address it. Harrison presented data from Salvatore and Shelton 2007 in which Black participants exposed to ambiguous prejudice took longer to respond to a task than white participants. Microaggressions can also lead to isolation, stress, and depression as noted by Harrison citing data from Nadal et al. 2014. Harrison then described ways of dealing with microaggressions saying that students want microaggressions taken seriously and the burden shouldn’t fall on students. Ways of addressing microaggressions can include direct confrontation, discussion, private conversations. Harrison emphasized that it is ok not to know what to do… and to tell students this. I think this is the hardest part, and there is no way to “practice” for scenarios that may occur! I enjoyed the example scenarios and ways to deal with microaggressions that were presented. I was also surprised that in one case I felt like I would have interrupted the conversation to emphasize the potential of the student. Am I getting braver or fed up?! The options Harrison provided were all thoughtful: when do you discuss privately and when is it better to start a class-level discussion? Should you focus on the one receiving the microaggression or the one making it? I love how Harrison took a couple of minutes to discuss the importance of allies supporting marginalized groups (PEERs!). Harrison ended with non-content instructor talk categories that can be used by the instructor to promote community (from work with Tanner):
- Explaining pedagogical choice
- Unmasking science
- Sharing personal experience
- Building the instructor student relationship
- Establishing class culture
Harrison cited two articles from Tanner’s group on instructor talk. The discussion session following the presentation was full of great questions and responses. Harrison suggested dealing with microaggressions directly and practice with scenarios on your own… even in your head! Tanner also mentioned positionality of who is making the microaggression and who is receiving. Harrison suggested rephrasing the issue to help colleagues understand the harmful consequences of potential microaggressions. Interestingly, Harrison mentioned that the research suggests that addressing the microaggression is really important to remove the burden from those receiving the microaggressions even if the delivery is not perfect. Another interesting question was how can instructors gather feedback from their students to welcome comments on how microaggressions are dealt with in the courses you teach. As we hopefully diversify campuses, microaggressions may even increase, and we should be intentional about thinking about them.
