Chelsey Nardi from the University of Colorado Denver is a doctoral candidate and presented at JMBE on their article about antiracist opportunities. The overview Nardi presented summarized the article:
- Capitalism may not be an antiracist driver of diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI)
- Faculty are one level of systemic change
- Study scope may limit the reach of DEI efforts
- Active learning does not equal inclusive teaching
- Language and communication matter
Nardi focused in the recorded session on the finding that “active learning does not equal inclusive teaching.” She also mentioned that authentic research experienced with unpaid hours in lab has become unrealistic. This is a consideration that has been on my mind lately, especially with the time and financial commitments students need to make. Nardi shared resources for open textbooks and institutionalizing funding for learning assistants and research support. Nardi explained that group work has “inherent challenges” and that “isms” might influence group dynamics and promote exclusion. Nardi’s research highlighted the importance of setting expectations and gather feedback from participants. I thought it was thought-provoking that “many problems of practice are symptoms of a larger problem” such as a student having unmet access needs.
Nardi talked about graduating as a first-generation student, working several shifts, and having a challenging graduate experience. Nardi was involved in a Title IX and exploitation/bullying situation. Nardi left science and felt excluded and was motivated to further the equity and inclusion conversation. Nardi advised:
Find a framework or philosophy that helps you move forward.
Chelsey Nardi
For Nardi, Ibram X. Kendi’s book was this framework. Nardi spoke about how this book and philosophy has motivated her. She collaborated with Dr. Kara Lukin at the University of Colorado Denver to construct a survey about Flipgrid using peer-reviewed questions about measuring students’ perceptions of inclusion after using Flipgrid. Nardi’s call to action is to use the PDSA cycle: plan, do, study, and act. Nardi described what happens at each stage: planning an intervention for a problem of practice or something you want to improve, do your intervention, study the impact, and act on the results to make an improvement. Nardi used the Flipgrid example to go through one cycle of the PDSA to improve access. Nardi acknowledged her advisor Dr. Bud Talbot. Nardi also shared that they work with Empirical Education Inc. I went to their website and was intrigued about their research. During the question and discussion session, Nardi spoke about flexible due dates, partner work, and having conversations with students to provide individualized support. I appreciate Nardi’s response about communicating and not being afraid to “break classroom policies” (even our own) to support students. Noticing behaviors of students and having compassionate conversations are helpful supportive behaviors. One attendee asked about the trade offs between adaptive and accessible software and open textbooks. Nardi mentioned that PULSE is a great example of many perspectives, agencies, and institutions coming together to advocate for greater change. Nardi advocates for evaluation of programs and projects to collect data on impact. Interestingly, Nardi emphasized focusing on learning objectives that really matter and reducing stress and focusing on deep learning. As we prepare for a spring semester, I need to keep this in mind!
