Cultivating Equity and Inclusion in a Diverse Educational ... · September 22-23, 2015 . New Orleans, Louisiana . Welcome, Context Setting, and Role of Advisory Boards Belinda Biscoe

Cultivating Equity and Inclusion in a Diverse

Educational World

The Central and South Central Comprehensive Centers at the University of Oklahoma (OU)

Third Annual Regional Advisory Boards Meeting

September 22-23, 2015 New Orleans, Louisiana

Welcome, Context Setting, and Role of Advisory Boards

Belinda Biscoe Boni SC3 Director, C3 Principal Investigator, and OU Associate Vice President for Outreach

Acknowledgement

http://www.neworleanscvb.com/

Diversity in Today’s Educational World Race/ethnicity

Socio-economic status

Gender/sex

Culture

Religion

Physical/mental ability

Sexual orientation

English language proficiency

The Comprehensive Centers provide front line TA

to state education agencies (SEAs) for the U.S. Department

of Education (ED).

5

OU-led Comprehensive Centers

Regional Advisory Boards Each center has its own Advisory Board.

Regional Advisory Boards are required by Title II, Section 203 of the Educational Technical Assistance Act (ETAA).

Membership includes the Chief State School Officers (CSSOs), or such officers’ designees or other state officials, in each state the center serves.

Other members are selected by the governors of each state in consultation with the CSSO.

Membership is proportionate to the student population in each state.

Regional Advisory Boards Membership includes not more than 15 other members,

such as representatives of local education agencies (LEA) and

regional educational agencies (urban and rural); representatives of institutions of higher education; parents; practicing educators, including classroom teachers,

principals, and administrators; representatives of business; and policymakers, expert practitioners, and researchers with

knowledge of, and experience using, the results of research, evaluation, and statistics.

Regional Advisory Boards “DUTIES.—Each advisory board … shall advise the comprehensive center—

A. concerning the activities … [relating to delivery of services];

B. on strategies for monitoring and addressing the educational needs of the region, on an ongoing basis;

C. on maintaining a high standard of quality in the performance of the center’s activities; and

D. on carrying out the center’s duties in a manner that promotes progress toward improving student academic achievement.”

--ETAA Title II Sec. 203(g)(2)

Regional Advisory Boards

C3 Advisory Board Membership

State Number of RAB Members

Colorado Chief + 5

Kansas Chief + 4

Missouri Chief + 6

Regional Advisory Boards

SC3 Advisory Board Membership

State Number of RAB Members

Arkansas Chief + 3

Louisiana Chief + 5

New Mexico Chief + 3

Oklahoma Chief + 4

Preview of Day 1

Donna Richardson C3 Director and C3/SC3 TA Manager

Welcome from Louisiana

Hannah Dietsch Louisiana Department of Education Assistant Superintendent of Talent

Getting Acquainted and Reacquainted

Kerri Adams C3/SC3 Budget & Quality Assurance Coordinator

Kyle Lankford

C3/SC3 Communications Coordinator

Introductions Please tell us your…

Name

Title and Organization

State

Getting Acquainted and Reacquainted

Active Listening and Perspective Taking

Kathleen Wong (Lau) University of Oklahoma Outreach

Public and Community Services Division Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies Director

BREAK

Keynote Presentation

Paul C. Gorski George Mason University

Integrative Studies Associate Professor

LUNCH

Provided by EDUTAS Educational Technical Assistance Services at the

University of Oklahoma

Keynote Presentation (Continued)



BREAK

Intergroup Dialogue Introduction



© Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies Dr. Kathleen Wong(Lau University of Oklahoma OUTREACH 25

Business/Civic Case for Cultural Diversity & Aggregate Cognitive

Complexity (Scott Page, 2010; Fortune, 2012)

• The very diversity in which we invest dollars and careers does not necessarily lead to aggregate cognitive complexity.

• People from differing ethnic or cultural backgrounds may acquire the same training, skill sets and experience as people from the prevailing culture. In that case, they’ll likely think about things in the same way, and the deeper differences disappear.

• Research at University of Michigan clearly demonstrates that diversity of life, world views & perspectives which mostly comes from racial, ethnic diversity leads to more consistently innovative and responsive, agile solutions. – Teams of experts versus diverse teams with some expertise

What is Intergroup Dialogue?

Intergroup dialogue is a facilitated, face-to-face encounter that strives to create new levels of understanding, relating, action between two or more social identity groups who have a history of conflict or potential conflict.

Primary Differences Among Discussion, Debate & DIALOGUE

• Debate – Listening to gain advantage, presenting

winning evidence • Discussion

– Serial monologuing, everyone has a chance to present perspective

• Dialogue – Listening for understanding, speaking to gain

understanding – Translating one’s experience and the

experiences of others

IGD Facilitators-Special Role

• Make room for other people to discover and process their own experiences and perspectives.

• Make room for other people to discover and process the experiences and perspectives of others.

IGD Facilitator Competencies

• Awareness • Content Knowledge • Intercultural Communication Skills

–Intergroup social support –Intergroup empathy guidance

Intergroup Dialogue Research • Empathy is dialogic

– Empathy is an exchange – Empathy is relational – Empathy can occur at the individual level and at social

identity group level – Empathy can occur through distancing (new)

• Your story is so shockingly different than mine. Can’t imagine how it would feel, but then have empathy for your situation.

– Empathy motivates individuals to bridge differences and take social action across groups

[Wong(Lau), 2010,edited volume on research from multiversity intergroup dialogue project, University of Michigan]

Empathy: An Intergroup Process

• Empathy-The ability to put oneself in the place of the other.

Social psychology (Batson’s work) • Cognitive empathy-

– perspective taking • Emotional empathy-

– parallel empathy-feeling similar feelings of the other – Reactive empathy-feeling on behalf of an other’s

circumstance

Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies

Can Flounder- But Be Transparent,

Perspective Take & Give • Individuals who screw up, maybe pass on a

discriminatory comment but then 5 minutes later go back after finishing a point.

• Explain what they think happened, struggle with how they didn’t say anything, process it and give perspective on how hard it is to talk about it

• These people gain trust longitudinally and are seen as bridgers. Even the student who said or thought something discriminatory also learns and feels more welcome in class.

9/22/2015 32

Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies

You Do NOT Have to Be Perfect

• Research shows that it is role modeling, acknowledging the possible “Other’” perspective has an impact in creating safe space.

• You do not have to have the perfect nonverbals. You can be rather introverted and not very animated. It will still work

• HOWEVER, you need to not be overly emotional and make it ABOUT you. It is NOT about you.

9/22/2015 33

Outcomes for Perspective Taking

• Increases in: –Cognitive complexity – Innovation in problem solving –Ability to communicate effectively

across groups –Ability to have productive intergroup

conflict –Motivation and persistence in

complicated tasks.

• ICEBERG MODEL of Culture & Communication – Verbal & Nonverbal (accent, tone & pitch of voice, skin

color, hair texture, proxemics, taking up space, posture, weight, height, eye contact, smiling, clothes & artifacts)

– Beliefs, Values, Attitudes & Experiences

Intercultural Communication (ICC)

Beliefs, Values & Attitudes • We usually state the ideology of what we think we value

and believe. • Most of these three are unconscious. They emerge during

conflict or crisis. Ex: I believe that all people are equal. I assign a value of goodness, high morality to those who believe this. My attitude towards people who don’t value equality is withdrawal (won’t go to coffee or hang out with this person). Or attitude could be to engage and argue. Or it could be that this is an issue I don’t think about much, don’t assign a strong value either positive or negative so can engage normally with people who behave otherwise.

Diversity and Inclusion: A Combined Approach to Addressing Inequity Organizational diversity refers to the demographic makeup of an organization with an understanding that different groups and cohorts have both similar and divergent characteristics. Some of these differences and similarities are shaped by the understanding of:

– historical accumulations and historical exclusions at the local, regional, national and global levels at the systemic level.

– social psychological processes that enforce the idea that inequity is random, isolated or based on essentialist traits which makes us believe that stereotypes are real.

(Roberson, 2006; Gidley, Hampson & Wheeler, 2010; Hurtado, 2001, 2010) Dr. Kathleen Wong(Lau), Director- Southwest Center for Human Relations College of Continuing Education, The University of Oklahoma

Organizational inclusion refers to the degree to which any individual and/or groups are accepted and treated as an insider with full agency to make decisions, engage in conflict, bear responsibilities, and influence the everyday business and long-term business of an organization. Inclusion refers to the level at which an organization is prosocial to ensure equitable experiences and opportunities for all members of an organization. Inclusion focuses on: • Processes, practices and production at the level of individual

(interpersonal), intergroup (social identities between groups), intragroup (within groups), organizational, cultural, social and political.

• Institutionalized policies, systematic assessment, resource distribution and capacity building that actively shape organizational process, practices and production.

Diversity and Inclusion: A Combined Approach to Addressing Inequity

(Roberson, 2006; Gidley, Hampson & Wheeler, 2010; Hurtado, 2001, 2010) Dr. Kathleen Wong(Lau), Director- Southwest Center for Human Relations College of Continuing Education, The University of Oklahoma

Dr. Kathleen Wong(Lau), Director- Southwest Center for Human Relations College of Continuing Education, The University of Oklahoma

Deficit-Oriented Questions • Why do so few Black male students enroll in college?

• Why are Black male undergraduates so disengaged in campus leadership positions and out-of-class activities?

• Why are Black male students’ rate of persistence and degree attainment lowest among both sexes and all racial/ethnic groups in higher education?

• Why are Black male students’ grade point averages often the lowest among both sexes and all the racial/ethnic groups on many campuses?

• Why are Black men’s relationships with faculty and administrators so weak?


Anti-Deficit Reframing • How were aspirations for postsecondary education

cultivated among Black male students who are currently enrolled in college?

• What compels Black undergraduate men to pursue leadership and engagement opportunities on their campuses?

• How do Black male collegians manage to persist and earn their degrees, despite transition issues, racist stereotypes, academic under preparedness, and other negative forces?


Anti-Deficit Reframing

• What resources are most effective in helping Black male achievers earn GPAs above 3.0 in a variety of majors, including STEM fields?

• How do Black men go about cultivating meaningful, value-added relationships with key institutional agents?


Perspective Taking Case Study



Small Group Dialogue

C3/SC3 Staff Facilitators

Research Overview



Disproportionately Disciplined BA

SED

ON

A R

EPO

RT B

Y ED

WAR

D J S

MIT

H AN

D SH

AUN

R H

ARPE

R

Implicit Bias (not explicit) in Determination of Disciplinary Actions

Although discriminant analysis suggests that disproportionate rates of office referral and suspension for boys are due to increased rates of misbehavior, no support was found for the hypothesis that African American students act out more than other students. Rather, African American students appear to be referred to the office for less serious and more subjective reasons (Skiba, 2000).


Implicit Bias (not explicit) in Determination of Disciplinary Actions Coupled with extensive and highly consistent prior data, these results argue that disproportionate representation of African Americans in office referrals, suspension and expulsion is evidence of a pervasive and systematic bias that may well be inherent in the use of exclusionary discipline (Skiba, 2000).


Implicit Bias (not explicit) in Determination of Disciplinary Actions Research suggests that when given an opportunity to choose among several disciplinary options for a relatively minor offense, teachers and school administrators often choose more severe punishment for Black students than for White students for the same offense (Losen, 2010).



• Suspension of preschool children, by race/ethnicity and gender (new for 2011-2012 collection): – Black children represent 18% of preschool enrollment, but

48% of preschool children receiving more than one out-of school suspension; in comparison, white students represent 43% of preschool enrollment, but 26% of preschool children receiving more than one out of school suspension.

• Boys represent 79% of preschool children suspended once and 82% of preschool children suspended multiple times, although boys represent 54% of preschool enrollment.

CIVIL RIGHTS DATA COLLECTION- Data Snapshot: School Discipline


• Disproportionately high suspension/expulsion rates for students of color: – Black students are suspended and expelled at a rate three

times greater than White students. On average, 5% of white students are suspended, compared to 16% of black students.

• American Indian and Native-Alaskan students are also disproportionately suspended and expelled, representing less than 1% of the student population but 2% of out-of-school suspensions and 3% of expulsions.



• Disproportionate suspensions of girls of color: While boys receive more than two out of three suspensions, Black girls are suspended at higher rates (12%) than girls of any other race or ethnicity, and most boys.

• American Indian and Native-Alaskan girls (7%) are suspended at higher rates than White boys (6%) or girls (2%).



Intersections of Race, Ethnicity & Poverty

Of all 4th graders retained at the end of the 2009-10 academic year,

– 56% were black. – 49% of those held back in 3rd grade

were black. Those findings come even though African-American students represented less than one-fifth of the entire universe of students in the K-12 data set collected from districts.



Racial Identity Saliency Key to Success of Students of Color

& Mixed Race Students Racial Identity Salience is the awareness, critical consciousness of a primary social identity of race (can include discriminatory experiences as well as positive experiences). A healthy racial identity salience contributes to significant positive academic and personal outcomes for students of color in: • students’ academic, personal, and social identity

development • cognition, particularly cognitive complexity • academic achievement and motivation/persistence Hurtado, S., & Guillermo-Wann, C. (2013). Diverse Learning Environments: Assessing and Creating Conditions for Student Success – Final Report to the Ford Foundation. University of California, Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.

9/22/2015 Southwest Center for Human Relations Studies 56



Large Group Share Out



Housekeeping and Adjourn

Mark Turner C3/SC3 Logistics Coordinator

See you in the morning!

We will reconvene in this room at 8:30 a.m.

Welcome Back and Agenda Overview

Donna Richardson C3 Director and C3/SC3 TA Manager

Reflections from Day 1



National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and State Educator

Equity Profile Data Belinda Biscoe Boni

SC3 Director, C3 Principal Investigator

Kerri White SC3 Arkansas/Louisiana TA Coordinator

Jennifer Watson C3/SC3 Literacy Consultant

Sarah Hall SC3 Associate Director and

New Mexico/Oklahoma TA Coordinator

C3 and SC3 8th Grade Math Kerri White

SC3 Arkansas/Louisiana TA Coordinator

Orientation to NAEP Data Handouts Region-Specific, Aggregated Reports

Three administrations of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): 2009, 2011, and 2013

Regional Average, National Average, Changes Over Time

8th Grade Math and Reading (4th Grade Math and Reading for each region are available as additional handouts, and all data sets are available electronically.)

Reports generated using the NAEP Data Explorer http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ by E-TEAM at OU

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/

The achievement of African American males and females, ELLs, and

students with disabilities is in single digit percentages.

SC3 Regional Performance

Scores of Hispanic males, Hispanic females, and

students eligible for the National Lunch Program

are only marginally better.

American Indian females have consistently improved performance over the last three administrations of

the NAEP Math Test.

Females are improving in Math performance over time!

Go Girls!

Unfortunately, males’ scores are trending downward

during this 3-year period.

C3 Regional Performance

Although these differences are small, they become statistically significant when the 2007 data

are included in the trends.

C3 Regional/National Comparison “All Students” outperform

national peers. Yay! (Also all males, all females, American Indian, ELL and non-ELL, and eligible and non-eligible for NSLP outperform

national peers.)

But in 2013, several student groups

(African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, White, and students with disabilities)

underperformed compared to national peers.

SC3 Regional/National Comparison When grouped together,

American Indian students in the region continue to outperform their peers

nationally.

And American Indian females are continuing to improve at a faster rate than their peers.

But American Indian males in the SC3 region are losing their advantage. They are not performing as well nor improving at the same rate as their peers nationally.

SC3 Regional/National Comparison ELL Students in the SC3

Region are improving at a faster rate than ELL

students across the nation! WooHoo!

And now surpass the national

percent of ELLs proficient or

above!

However, as noted earlier, these are still

single digit percentages.

The gap between students with disabilities and

students without disabilities is wider in the C3 Region than the gap

between these two groups across the nation…

C3 Regional/National Gap Over Time

And it’s getting wider.

2009 2011 2013 Gap between Disability and Non-Disability (C3 Region)

31.0 32.2 34.0

Gap between Disability and Non-Disability (Nation)

27.3 28.4 30.2

Your “Nugget” Observations With a partner, review the 8th Grade Math NAEP Data for your Region (C3 or SC3).

What “nuggets” can you “mine” in these data that surprise you?

What “nuggets” can you “mine” in these data that are confirmations for you?

C3 and SC3 8th Grade Reading


C3 Regional/National Comparison


The percentage of Proficient or Above for C3

readers, as a whole, remains higher than the national

percentage. YAY!

C3 Region American Indians achieve well above the proficiency

percentages of the national percentage .

Hispanic students are moving up

steadily.

But, the most recent data show that Asian students, both male

and female, have reversed their trends of scoring ABOVE their national peers to slide

12.3% below the nation’s Asian readers. Whaaaat??!!!


And, despite being above national

achievement rates for ALL students, white C3 readers continue to achieve below the national percentage

of proficient readers.


The disparity in reading achievement between C3 National Lunch Program

students and their non-eligible counterparts – which has been wider than the nation’s disparity – is still a

26.6 percentage point gap.


SC3 and the “Gender Gap” in Reading

Group SC3 % Proficient

or Higher National % Proficient

or Higher Regional-National Change Difference

2009 2011 2013 2009 2011 2013 2009-2011 2011-2013

All Male 19.9 20.4 22.4 27.5 28.8 30.8 -0.7 0.0

All Female

27.4 29.2 30.7 37.3 38.3 41.7 0.8 -1.9

There is now no difference between the national growth

rate of percent proficient and the regional rate.

The ladies are

lagging behind.


Group SC3 % Proficient or Higher

National % Proficient or Higher

Regional-National Change Difference

2009 2011 2013 2009 2011 2013 2009-2011 2011-2013

Hispanic Male

13.1 15.1 16.5 13.9 16.3 18.3 -0.3 -0.6

Hispanic Female

17.6 18.7 19.9 20.6 21.8 25.2 -0.1 -2.2

Regional Hispanic males are still under the national

growth rate of percent proficient.

But not as much as

their female

classmates.





2009 2011 2013 2009 2011 2013 2009-2011 2011-2013

Asian/Pacific Islander Male

41.0 39.7 34.8 39.9 42.0 44.5 -3.5 -7.3

Asian/Pacific Islander Female

46.0 48.0 48.9 50.6 52.2. 59.2 0.4 -6.1

Both male and female regional readers have not kept pace with national gains for percentage of Proficient Asian/Pacific

Islanders readers.

Girls in the region once improved

faster than their peers

in other regions.





2009 2011 2013 2009 2011 2013 2009-2011 2011-2013

African American Male

8.7 7.9 9.0 10.2 11.0 12.4 -1.0 -0.9

African American Female

11.4 12.7 16.1 17.0 19.3 21.6 -1.0 1.1

Both male and female regional readers are catching up with the

national growth percentage of proficient

African American readers.

Girls are doing it faster.


Your “Nugget” Observations With a partner, review the 8th Grade Reading NAEP Data for your Region (C3 or SC3).

What “nuggets” can you “mine” in these data that surprise you?


State Educator Equity Profiles Sarah Hall

SC3 Associate Director and New Mexico/Oklahoma TA Coordinator

Orientation to Educator Equity Profile Data Handouts State-specific Reports

Based on 2011-2012 data

Schools with high and low concentrations of students from low-income families

Schools with high and low concentrations of minority students

Reports retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/resources.html

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/resources.html

Educator Equity Profile Comparisons


In Oklahoma, students in High Poverty Schools are almost twice

as likely to be taught by first year teachers as students in Low

Poverty Schools.


Each state must determine whether the Educator and

Classroom Characteristics of this profile are reflective of the State’s definition of “Excellent Educator.”

In Louisiana, a large number of High Poverty Schools and High

Minority Schools are Public Charter Schools that do not require certification or licensure.


Sometimes, States have different definitions for these Characteristics, so an apparent difference between

states may not be meaningful.

But a discrepancy within a state

probably is meaningful.

Educator Equity Profile Comparisons In contrast to the previous

comparison, sometimes discrepancies between states

($52,609 vs. $41,581) ...

… are just as meaningful as

discrepancies within a state ($49,658 vs.

$45,953).

Your “Nugget” Observations With a partner, review the Educator Equity Profile Data for your Region (C3 or SC3).

What “nuggets” can you “mine” in these data surprise you?


Fish Bowl (Dialogue Modeling)



Fish Bowl Prompt Consider yesterday’s case study (based on research), Paul Gorski’s presentation on inequity, research on inequitable discipline of students of color and NAEP data and Educator Equity Profiles.

Discuss how this information contributes to your understanding of educational inequity.

How does this understanding inform multifaceted strategies to address these inequities?

BREAK

Data Small Group Dialogue


Data Gallery Walk Share Out



Data Gallery Walk Share Out 1. Each person should identify 2-3 insights with significant relevance for

him/her from the previous dialogue.

2. After each person has shared, the group should select 2-3 insights with significant relevance for the group, perhaps because of their uniqueness from other perspectives or because of their commonality among members.

3. List them on chart paper, leaving a column on the right for people to leave comments.

4. Gallery Walk Instructions:

A. Docent: Leave one table facilitator at the group’s location to explain the insights to visitors.

B. Visitors: As each group moves from place to place, individuals may leave reactions, validations, questions, and comments on Post-It notes in the space provided.

Group A Insights

Less time in the classroom (suspension) means less time for learning

Inexperienced teachers surrounded by inexperienced teachers are less likely to have strategies for learning

LUNCH

Provided by EDUTAS Educational Technical Assistance Services at the

University of Oklahoma

Perspectives and Recommendations



Needs and Recommendations Share Out

Kerri White SC3 Arkansas/Louisiana TA Coordinator


Needs and Recommendations Share Out 1. List “Needs & Recommendations” on one piece of chart paper for the

group, and indicate whether your group represents C3 or SC3.

2. Stick all pieces of chart paper to the wall.

3. Each person should have a sheet of sticky dots.

4. Share Out Instructions:

A. Take a walk around the room, reviewing the needs and recommendations of other groups.

B. Add a sticky dot next to those that you would “second” but didn’t list on your own chart paper.

Group A Needs & Recommendations

- PD on race/ethnicity - Additional resources in

HP/HM schools - Culturally relevant

curriculum resources

Group B Needs & Recommendations

- PD on race/ethnicity - Incentives for high

performing teachers to go to high need schools

C3 SC3

Personal Reflection

Kathleen Wong (Lau) and Paul C. Gorski

Personal Reflection How does your perspective on equity and inclusion

impact your role in education? Advocate Design policy and practice Garner community support Provide professional learning Manage curriculum and instruction Collaborate with business, health and human services

organizations, or other social service organizations Other

Evaluation

Adam Gibson OU Educational Training, Evaluation,

Assessment, and Measurement (E-TEAM) Senior Research Associate

Logistics and Travel Notes

Mark Turner C3/SC3 Logistics Coordinator

Kerri Adams

C3/SC3 Budget & Quality Assurance Coordinator

Final Closing Remarks

Belinda Biscoe Boni SC3 Director, C3 Principal Investigator, and OU Associate Vice President for Outreach

Donna Richardson

C3 Director and C3/SC3 TA Manager

Thank you!

Central and South Central Comprehensive Centers 1639 Cross Center Drive

Norman, Oklahoma 73019-5050

Portions of this presentation may have been developed under a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Education; however, the contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. © 2012-2015 The University of Oklahoma

Documents

Cultivating Equity and Inclusion in a Diverse Educational ... · September 22-23, 2015 . New Orleans, Louisiana . Welcome, Context Setting, and Role of Advisory Boards Belinda Biscoe