I watched another session today from the Quality Matters (QM) webinar series. Working on the BIT 295 course syllabus, map, and action form made me realize how much I like clear guidelines and want to learn from the experience of people who have been developing and implementing courses online for a long time! The session entitled “Enhancing Inclusiveness within the Quality Matters Framework” was presented by Drs. Barbara Frey and Rae Mancila. They both have a lot of experience developing online courses. The session had several goals including differentiating terms, analyzing the inclusiveness of course materials & teaching practices, identifying QM standards associated with inclusivity, and developing strategies to support and enhance inclusiveness. They began by displaying the standards and examples addressing inclusivity. The presenters used polls and brainstorming. One brainstorm I liked was asking the audience to brainstorm different types of diversity: disparities in access, neurodiversity, socioeconomic diversity… diversity of authors and images, and food insecurity! Several fantastic examples were mentioned! They also displayed an image from AMLE.org that depicted circles with different color dots that they used to define:
- exclusion – denying access to some
- segregation – providing access… but in a separate environment. Their example was putting students with disabilities in a separate classroom.
- integration – “mainstreaming” putting students in the classroom and keeping them in a bubble by not giving them all the access they need.
- inclusion – providing equal access and resources for all.
I loved this series of images and what they represent. The presenters did an excellent job providing examples to clearly differentiate and define these terms we often use… and sometimes forget. They also had a syllabus activity in which they asked participants to review a syllabus for welcoming inclusive approaches and potential barriers. They then discussed common responses including religious holidays, use of pronouns… I thought it was interesting that they addressed the late policy and explained that for non-traditional students and English as a second language learners adjustments are encouraged! Honestly, I think adjustments help all students! I am amazed by how grateful students were with minor adjustments and grace periods; further, the work they submitted was high-quality and thoughtful. Another way of making the material more inclusive was including diverse authors and imagery. I haven’t thought about diverse images! Frey then listed best practices for inclusive design and included: convenience of office hours and instructor availability, economic and time demands related to assignments, variety (of authors, perspectives, texts), OER use, variety of assessments, and concessions for religious holidays were among the suggested practices. Guidelines for a diversity statement the presenters discussed focused on:
- signaling to students an instructor’s commitment to creating a supportive environment for all students,
- personalized to the instructor and discipline,
- addressing how the instructor recognizes and values diversity,
- explaining how diversity can be an asset for learning,
- stating how issues related to diversity will be handled, and
- describing how student input will be monitored to evaluate the classroom climate.
They presented an example of a diversity statement from the University of Iowa College of Education that had several elements I had not considered! For example, “Please let me know ways to improve…” and also a sentence addressing potential conflicts with religious holidays. The presentation then paused to analyze a case study. I didn’t have access to it but enjoyed hearing the recommendations, including how the instructor should address the inappropriate behavior and how instructors should have a “civil discourse” statement! The presenters then listed discussion guidelines for students. Among the considerations, the ones that caught my attention were be personal by addressing peers by name, give proper attribution to authors, be patient & read thoroughly before replying, and be positive to ensure a non-offensive tone. They ended by reviewing the Standards and examples. They did mention a couple of things that caught my attention: they recommend creating teams instead of letting students self-select to avoid getting “the dream team” and excluding others from potential learning experiences. I had not thought about team assignment this way! They also said that knowing about and connecting with academic support services on campus is important to be able to provide clear directions and appropriate resources for students. I just emailed our academic services center this morning! Another useful suggestion was having an “embedded librarian” to help with the course. Frey integrates a librarian into course discussion forums. I think I do something similar and haven’t formalized it. I mention our superb librarian resources by name in guidelines and highly encourage participants to reach out for their research projects. Nevertheless, bringing them into conversations and discussions in the learning management system (LMS), for example, could help increase access and encourage students to reach out more often. I’ll keep this in mind for the metagenomics and BIT 295 courses! This session had several helpful suggestions and considerations that I wasn’t aware of and now plan on using! Thank you!
