Purpose & Rationale
Inclusive pedagogy focuses on fostering students' sense of belonging to an academic community (CNDLS, n. d.). It recognizes that students' and teachers' social identities directly impact the learning environment and students' learning experiences. In particular, inclusive pedagogy recognizes that students with marginalized or stereotyped identities (based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, disability, age, class, place of origin, religion, political affiliation, etc.) often feel a sense of exclusion or alienation in academic settings. This sense of 'not belonging' can have direct, negative impacts on students' academic performance as a result of the phenomena of identity threat and stereotype threat.
Students experience identity and stereotype threats when they worry about (A) their potential underperformance confirming or being seen to confirm negative stereotypes held by society about an identity group to which they belong or (B) not fitting the positive stereotype of those who excel in a group to which they wish to belong (Steele, 2010). These threats are pernicious because even when marginalized students overcome other systemic disadvantages in trying to gain parity with their more privileged classmates, they face the further pressure of stereotype and identity threats (pp. 158-159). Additionally, experimental evidence suggests that these threats can be triggered and impact performance even in absence of bad intentions (e.g. without the agency of prejudiced people; p. 42).
Experiencing identity and stereotype threats contributes to academic underperformance both by increasing students' cognitive load and by creating a quandary about how to interpret critical feedback on their work or performance. The increase in cognitive load functions as part of a vicious cycle in which stereotype and identity threat "increase vigilance toward possible threat and bad consequences in the social environment, which diverts attention and mental capacity away from the task at hand, which worsens performance and general functioning, all of which further exacerbates anxiety, which further intensifies the vigilance for threat and the diversion of attention” (Steele, 2010, p. 127-128). Additionally, students experiencing identity and stereotype threat often have a hard time trusting whether critical feedback reflects the quality of their work or a bias against their identity group. This can suppress their overall motivation and their willingness to embrace, learn from, and act upon constructive critiques.
The aim of inclusive pedagogy is, thus, to actively reduce both actual and perceived identity and stereotype threats.
What does it entail & how is it implemented?
For educators, implementing inclusive pedagogy involves:
Reflexively reducing any basis in reality for the students’ perception of identity and stereotype threat.
Nurturing students’ sense of belonging.
It is important for educators to help ensure that students’ experiences of identity and stereotype threat are not, in fact, due to actual prejudices and/or biases in the learning environment. To make the learning environment more inclusive, educators should:
It is important for educators to help ensure that students’ experiences of identity and stereotype threat are not, in fact, due to actual prejudices and/or biases in the learning environment. To make the learning environment more inclusive, educators should:
Engage in self-reflection and work reflexively to identify and counteract their own implicit biases (CNDLS, n. d.).
Establish ‘brave space’ norms in their classrooms (Arao & Clemens, 2013).
Incorporate ‘Universal Design for Learning’ (UDL) principles into the design of their courses (Eberly Center, n. d.).
Embrace cultural responsiveness in the design and teaching of their courses (Gay, 2002).
Nurturing students’ sense of belonging within a particular learning environment involves interrupting and replacing students’ internal vigilant-to-threats narratives with ones that offer “a compelling hope about belonging and success in the setting” (Steele, 2010, p. 165). Steele discusses several ways to counteract and reverse the downward spiral incited by the experience of identity and stereotype threat in the context of higher education.
Holding students to high standards while simultaneously conveying a belief in their faculties and ability to succeed. Doing so helps to motivate students, even when presented with critical feedback regarding their academic work. When ability-stereotyped students believe they are being held to high academic standards and that the educators assessing them believe in capabilities, they are much more likely to trust any critical feedback they receive on their work as stemming from educators’ desires to see them succeed. This, in turn, releases their ability to be motivated by constructive criticism.
Sharing the positive social experiences of upperclassmen with first-year students. For first-year students from ability-stereotyped groups who are experiencing the frustration and alienation of feeling ‘I’ll never belong here’, it is hopeful to learn that upperclassmen at their school shared those feelings as freshman, but have since gained a sense of belonging and happiness.
Creating opportunities for cross-group discussions that reveal the shared or universal nature of many of the stresses of college life. It is helpful for students from stereotyped groups learn that many stresses of college life—lower than expected grades on an assignment or test, an unreturned phone call or email from a teacher or administrator, luke-warm interactions with classmates, a shortage of funds, etc.—are experienced by many students, regardless of race. This can lead them to understand that their identity may have played less of a role in their experience than previously believed, allowing them to be more trusting of the university environment and less vigilant to threats.
Replacing notions of fixed intellectual capacity (“you either have it or you don’t) with an incrementally expandable theory of intelligence. If led to believe in a fixed theory of intelligence, ability-stereotyped students are more likely to interpret frustration with difficult school work as a potential sign of incapability and of not belonging. This can cause them to be less hopeful and discourage them from taking on academic challenges. Students are more likely to favorably view their personal capacities and their academic setting, even in the face of frustration over difficult work, if they believe that the ability to meet academic challenges is learnable and incrementally expandable.
Creating opportunities for students to partake in self-affirmation exercises early in their educational journeys. In self-affirmation exercises, students do something to record their values and valuable personal traits and why they are important. These records are then revisited periodically throughout the students’ academic careers. Partaking in self-affirmation acts like an immunization against identity and stereotype threat. In light of a broader perspective about one’s competence and worth, early poor performance and other identity-threatening environmental cues seem less all-important and alienating.
By creating learning environments that are truly inclusive and actively working to mitigate students’ experience of identity and stereotype threat, educators are serving the cause of social justice. They are helping to promote thriving among students with diverse identities and leveraging plurality to benefit the education of all.
References
Arao, B. & Clemens, K. (2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice. In L. M. Landreman (Ed.), The art of effective facilitation: Reflections from social justice educators (pp. 135-150). Stylus Publishing.
[CNDLS] Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship. (n.d.). Inclusive pedagogy. The Teaching Commons, Georgetown University. https://commons.georgetown.edu/teaching/design/inclusive-pedagogy/
Eberly Center. (n.d.). Teach with a heterogenous audience in mind. Carnegie Mellon University. https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/designteach/teach/classroomclimate/heterogenousmindset.html
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106-116.
Steele, C. M. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi and other clues to how stereotypes affect us. W. W. Norton & Company.