Open for antiracism: supporting educators to use open education for antiracist teaching

Definitions

OFAR is informed by three approaches to education that combine theory and action: open pedagogy, antiracist pedagogy and culturally responsive teaching and learning (CRTL). While each approach has its own focus, they share a concern that educators should enact change through the active participation of learners. This perspective can be broadly described as critical pedagogy, with social justice being an explicit aim of education. This is often associated with the work of Paulo Friere: “The oppressed must be their own example in the struggle for their redemption” (Freire, 1971). Indeed, some scholars find the roots of open pedagogy in Freire’s claim that “we make the road by walking“ (Cronin, 2017; Horton and Friere, 1990).

Context

Community colleges serve a larger proportion of minoritized, first-generation, low-income and working adult students than other higher education sectors (College Board, 2016). California Community Colleges (CCCs) provide a diversity of 116 institutions in which to pilot the OFAR program. Serving two million students, CCCs comprise the largest system of higher education in the USA, and are the largest provider of workforce training in the country (California Community College, 2020). Twenty-five percent of all community college students in the USA attend a CCC.

The CCCs boast a diverse student population. Seventy-two percent of California’s black undergraduates are enrolled in a CCC, making this the primary source of higher education for black Californians. Seventy-seven percent of black students attend part-time, because of employment, family and other commitments and 63% of these students leave without completing a credential or transferring (Campaign for College Opportunity, 2019). Latinx students account for 44% of CCC students, with 58% of these students leaving without completing a credential or transferring (Campaign for College Opportunity, 2019).

With CCCs’ tuition the lowest in the nation (College Board, 2016), textbooks can cost more than a course. These expenses are disproportionately experienced by marginalized groups. Black students borrow money more frequently than white students. Both Latinx and black students are more likely to pay for their own education than others who receive family support (Nusbaum, 2020). Thus, the cost of higher education reinforces socioeconomic inequities.

Conventional wisdom in the field of open education holds that using OER to remove the cost of textbooks reduces equity gaps by ensuring that all students are able to access instructional materials. A University of Georgia study (Colvard, 2018) found that when OER was introduced, grades for all students increased, and grades for Pell recipients and nonwhite students increased at a greater rate. The study concludes “OER is an equity strategy for higher education: providing all students with access to course materials on the first day of class serves to level the academic playing field” (Colvard, 2018, p. 273).

When open pedagogy is used, students report increased agency as scholars contributing to knowledge rather than passively consuming information. They report developing improved critical thinking skills, which may be due to their roles as curators and synthesizers of information (Clinton-Lisell, 2021, p. 260).

Building on the background described above, two propositions motivated the OFAR program design:

1. faculty want to change their classroom practices to be antiracist and need guidance on promising practices and a place to explore with their peers; and

2. OER and open pedagogy can be effective tools to transform classrooms to be antiracist.

Open for antiracism program design

OFAR is designed to provide training and support for faculty who wish to make their teaching antiracist by leveraging OER and open pedagogy. The program lasts approximately one academic year. The first four weeks consist of a facilitated, asynchronous online workshop available in Canvas Commons and focused on four major questions:

The workshop uses small- and large-group discussions throughout to build community as potentially sensitive topics are explored. Each participant produces an action plan describing what they will change in their classes and how they will use OERs and engage students in knowledge creation. Furthermore, they are asked to consider longer-term goals that could be achieved beyond the current semester and how they could engage others to expand their reach. Open pedagogy is modeled in the workshop through small-group assignments in which participants craft questions for the large group, as well as through multiple peer feedback opportunities.

Throughout the implementation phase, participants meet in peer groups with coaches, attend workshops on “nuts and bolts” of OER and attend webinars featuring inspirational researchers and practitioners on topics related to antiracist classroom practices, instructional materials and activism for equitable outcomes.

In recognition of the significant commitment and desired professional growth, faculty receive a stipend for successfully completing the intensive four-week workshop and receive a more substantial payment for completing the subsequent semester-long phase of the program. This includes implementing their action plan with students, participating in program research, sharing their learning and course modifications at their institutions and presenting their project through showcase webinars at the end of the program.

Procedure

In the fall of 2020, CCC faculty received an invitation to participate in OFAR through various statewide email lists. These included those of the Academic Senate, Distance Education Coordinators, California’s Zero Textbook Cost Degree grantees and the California Virtual Campus Pathways OER/ZTC participants.

In Year 1, over 300 applications were submitted for 17 available spaces by faculty from 75 out of 116 CCCs. To ensure a diverse pool of participants, applications requested information about participants’ gender, ethnicity, years of teaching and experience with open education and antiracist or culturally responsive teaching practices. Furthermore, applicants identified why and how they might transform their classrooms to be antiracist and what impact they hoped their participation would have on their students and institutions.

Applications were sorted by the seven regional state zones designated by CCCs to ensure geographic distribution of participants across California. A weighted rubric was used to evaluate candidates. Participant demographics included 59% faculty of color and 41% white. English, Social Sciences, and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics accounted for 83% of participants’ disciplines. Career Education fields were represented including Administration of Justice, Business, Early Childhood Education, and Emergency Medical Technician (Table 1).

Data collection and analysis

An evaluation was conducted to identify how the program influenced teaching practices and students’ learning experiences in the classes implementing strategies learned in OFAR. The experiences of faculty were documented using a mixed-methods approach; triangulating information from surveys administered to faculty (Appendices 1 and 2) and students (see Appendix 3), semi-structured interviews and informal discussions with faculty. The following research questions guided data collection:

All faculty participants completed two online surveys (pre/post) to provide feedback about the program’s orientation, pedagogical practices and training and perceived impact on their teaching and learning. Survey responses informed the development of a semi-structured interview protocol focused on learning about faculty’s overall experience in the program including their observations and reflections on the perceived effectiveness and impact of the pedagogical practices they implemented in their own teaching and students’ learning.

A convenience sampling of willing faculty and the program’s ability to host ten interviews was used to select a subset of faculty to participate in semi-structured interviews. Each faculty was interviewed once for approximately 1 h.

Two hundred and five students with at least one from each participating community college completed a survey designed to understand students’ learning experiences in classes where faculty implemented strategies learned through OFAR.

Analyses occurred throughout the data collection process. Fixed choice items in faculty and student surveys were aggregated and summarized. Open-ended survey items and semi-structured faculty interviews used an inductive thematic content and narrative analysis. Faculty interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and read several times to identify themes and categories within the context of focused evaluation questions.

Faculty profiles

Results from the pre-survey indicated that most faculty had experience with OER, commercial textbooks and materials available through their institution’s library. Nearly half were new to incorporating open pedagogy into their classes and a fifth had no experience integrating OER or antiracist teaching practices. About one-third indicated that their institution did not provide any regularly scheduled training or resources related to open pedagogy, antiracist teaching practices, OER or CRTL.

Faculty who chose to participate in interviews were excited about their acceptance into a program focused on preparing them to incorporate OER, open pedagogy and antiracist content and practices. Participants said their motivation to apply to OFAR came from the program’s intentional focus on antiracist curriculum, a recurring theme across interviews and informal feedback. Faculty Experiences in Program:

The program’s facilitators modeled open pedagogy, which effectively engaged participants in the process of learning about OER, open and antiracist pedagogy in the four-week facilitated OFAR course and subsequent implementation phase. Faculty appreciated having a voice and choices in how they approached reflections on the concepts imparted by the program, how they wanted to receive feedback, and being invited to create a public product. One participant observed:

We had reflections each week on what we were learning, and [the facilitators] allowed me to turn mine in as oral recordings and videos, which I loved. I felt like they were modeling open pedagogy by allowing that. I thought that was a really smart and effective way to teach.

Program participants also valued peer-learning opportunities. Interaction with faculty from different disciplines allowed them to hear different perspectives and learn different approaches. Instructors also appreciated monthly speakers who took them beyond the basics of OER into a deeper understanding of issues that affect institutions and communities.

The majority of faculty noted that assigned reflections increased their confidence to speak about race and introduce antiracist curriculum early in their course to engage students. Others described increased confidence to be vulnerable with students when discussing issues around race. As two faculty shared:

OFAR gave me the starting point to the confidence I needed to be frank and vulnerable with my students, [especially] when it comes to race and privilege and how they themselves engage, perhaps perpetuate, and benefit from racism. To ease [students] into [difficult conversations], I share my experience with them. [I tell them], “I benefit from racism. I benefit from colorism.” [My students] know from day one, I identify as Latina. I'm very light skinned and have benefited from that.

OFAR allowed me that space, especially as a faculty of color, to reflect on how my students of color also experience education. I can’t be an antiracist educator, or a de-colonizer or an abolitionist and then create oppression in my own class. For me, this journey was more than just recreating my class. It was really about recreating myself. I learned a lot about myself, and the type of teacher and instructor I want to be.

Faculty’s perceived impact on teaching

In the postfaculty survey, 90% indicated that the program improved their teaching practices. Interviews with faculty revealed that they felt incorporating students’ perspectives and lived experiences into the classroom were keys to CRTL and open pedagogy. As one faculty illustrated:

My goal was to “openly” license a Black Lives Matter module I created. [Through OFAR], I ran across the idea of open pedagogy and learning how to create resources with students. I ended up adding a discussion board to the Black Lives Matter module that asks [students] to post their own pictures, things that they have seen if they participated in Black Lives Matter, something that they did themselves. [The work that students uploaded] would be a living document of their participation in Black Lives Matter, in the movement. They loved it.

Additionally, many faculty were excited by the concept of renewable assignments, which allow both instructors and students to work collaboratively to create resources that contribute to a larger body of knowledge outside the classroom. The idea of renewable assignments pushed faculty to think more deeply about open licensing of student work. As one interviewee shared:

I know that the kids have unique stories that aren’t in archives, so I want them to be archivers [and] creators. [OFAR] has expanded my tool kit to be able to do that. The whole concept of licensing things to showcase student work was very new to me and I think it was new to a lot of the faculty participants; there was a bit of a learning curve. Getting comfortable with how to generate those open licenses makes me feel good about putting things online. As a historian, I am glued [to] this idea of open pedagogy, and involving students in the text-making process.

Several faculty mentioned community agreements as a critical tool for introducing antiracist pedagogy and setting expectations for having challenging but respectful conversations in the classroom.

Lastly, numerous instructors indicated making their course policies and procedures more flexible, realizing that not all students begin with the same resources and students’ lives are disrupted in different ways. As one interviewee highlighted:

[OFAR has] made me more empathetic; it has even changed my policies. When I first started teaching, I had this absolute; I don’t take any late work. I don’t care what happened. I had this binary way of looking at the world. Now I say to my students, “Listen, there are due dates here, they’re important” and I explain, “Here’s why they’re important.” Then, I say “If you submit something seven days late, I might impose a 10% penalty, but just tell me.” I now accept almost everything because I believe that every single student is here to be as successful as they can be, and I recognize that we’re all on a journey and at different starting places –so it’s made me much more empathetic.

Faculty perception of impact on student learning

Over half of faculty survey respondents reported that changes to their teaching practices significantly enhanced the learning environment. Over 80% believe the level of student engagement was significantly or slightly higher than in previous classes and students appeared more engaged and empowered. One faculty interviewee shared:

I had a [bi-racial] student say, “I didn’t know there were words to describe what I’m experiencing. [The class] really opened my eyes to who I am and my place in society. I’m now learning how to talk about this issue in ways that I didn’t know how to talk about before.” I was, “Oh, wow! Wow!” It felt good that he felt validated. It’s really rewarding in a lot of ways because I see [students] learning things that I know and I understand, but for them it’s brand new. [What students are learning] is explaining their world in a way that’s authentic to them. This is happening even with White students, or the LatinX students. This is happening across the board. Students are making some strong strides in acknowledging how privilege and oppression are very complex.

Student experience

At the end of the spring 2021 semester, instructors were asked to administer a 22-item online student survey to identify whether students’ experiences in their classes differed from past courses or others they were enrolled in. A total of 215 students completed the survey. Over 80% of student survey respondents reported that they felt more active or slightly more engaged than in other classes. As one student shared:

The professor really encourages his students to get to know one another, to get to know him, and engage in the classroom all together. In other classes, it has been much more difficult for me to reach [out] for help. However, his approach to getting to know his students and building a rapport with them makes it much more encouraging for me to reach out when I need to, without being afraid.

A follow-up question asked students why they reported the way they did. The primary reasons were:

• faculty made an effort to engage students;

• the specific content covered in the course; and

• the interactions required with other students in the course.