Multicultural Awareness Project for Institutional Transformation: Making the Case for Universal Instructional Design

1
Multicultural Awareness Project for Institutional
Transformation Making the Case for Universal
Instructional Design

• Jeanne L. Higbee, Irene M. Duranczyk,
• David GhereUniversity of MinnesotaPaper
  presented at the Annual Meeting of the European
  Access Network (EAN), Galway, Ireland, June, 2007

2
Contact Information

• Jeanne L. Higbee, higbe002_at_umn.edu
• Irene M. Duranczyk, duran026_at_umn.edu
• David Ghere, ghere001_at_umn.edu
• Center for Research on Developmental Education
  and Urban Literacy (CRDEUL), http//www.education.
  umn.edu/crdeul
• Pedagogy and Student Services for Institutional
  Transformation (PASS IT), http//www.education.umn
  .edu/passit

3
Agenda

• History of MAP IT Theoretical Framework
• Summary of Relevant Findings
• The PASS IT Project
• The Intersection of Multicultural Awareness and
  Universal Instructional Design for Institutional
  Transformation Integrated Multicultural
  Instructional Design (IMID)
• Questions and Discussion

4
10 MAP-IT Guiding Principles

• Development of Social Skills
• Extra Curricular / Co-curricular Activities
• Educational Support Services
• Shared Cultural Values
• Culturally-Sensitive Assessment

• Institutional Governance / Organization / Equity
• Decision Making / Collaboration / Supportive
  Environment
• Professional Development Programs
• Equitable Learning Opportunities
• Ways of Knowing

5
Theoretical Framework Banks 5 Dimensions of
Multicultural Education

• Content integration
• Knowledge construction
• Prejudice reduction
• Equity pedagogy
• Empowering school culture

6
MAP IT Student Findings

• Conducted spring 2004
• Students enrolled in GC 1422 Writing Lab
• 406 of 629 students registered in the course
  responded 65 response rate
• 403 questionnaires were complete/usable
• Response choices 1 never or almost never, 2
  occasionally, 3 often, 4 almost always or
  always
• Demographics how students identified themselves

7
Student Demographics

• 48 female, 45 male, 1 transgender
• 75 native speakers of English
• 6 students with disabilities
• 42 Caucasian
• 16 Asian American 6 Asian
• 12 African American 4 African
• 6 Hispanic/Latina/Latino
• 4 Biracial/multiracial
• 1 Pacific Islander
• 0 Native American

8
MAP IT Faculty-Staff Findings

• From spring 06 administration (not same
  administration as discussed in the paper this
  data is provided in the monograph)
• 41 of 164 GC employees responded 25 response
  rate
• No demographic data collected
• Purpose To provide a multiculturalism baseline
  for transition from General College to Dept. of
  Postsecondary Teaching and Learning

9
Area Faculty/ Staff Mean Student Means
Commitment to Diversity 3.59 3.15-3.59
Organizational Structure 3.21 2.16-2.52
Professional Development 3.42 3.15
Equal Opportunities for Success 3.36 3.45
Awareness of Social Context 3.35 2.94-3.21
10
Area Faculty/Staff Mean Student Means
Acquiring Effective Social Skills 3.14 2.80-3.08
Developmental Support Services 3.37 3.37
Ideas Valued by Many Cultures 3.31 2.97
Extracurricular and Co-curricular 2.65 2.88
Culturally Sensitive Assessment 2.75-3.15 2.45-3.12
11
Areas for ConcernFrom Student Results

• At U of M, have you been discriminated against? M
  1.49, median mode 1
• Does discrimination hinder your opportunities to
  participate fully in the General College? M
  1.66, median mode 1
• Are you concerned about your safety on this
  campus? M 1.83, median 2, mode 1

12
Concerns (cont.)

• Do administrators, faculty, and staff talk openly
  and constructively with you about multicultural
  issues? M 2.80
• Do you have opportunities to interact with
  appropriate role models? M 2.87
• Opportunities for civic engagement? M 2.36
• Have you participated in university activities
  outside of class that promote multicultural
  understanding? M 2.26

13
Pedagogy and Student Services for Institutional
Transformation (PASS IT)

• Funded by U.S. Dept. of Ed.
• Goal is to enhance learning for all students both
  within and outside the classroom through
  implementation of Universal Design and Universal
  Instructional Design
• Exploring differences in course pass rates for
  students with disabilities, and also the extent
  to which separate accommodations are no longer
  necessary

14
Definition of Universal Design

• Universal Design is the design of products and
  environments to be usable by all people, to the
  greatest extent possible, without the need for
  adaptation or specialized design
• Source The Center for Universal Design (1997)

15
Not just one size fits all . . .

• Applied to higher education, the primary goal of
  Universal Design is to create inclusive,
  flexible, customizable products, courses,
  programs, activities, and environments.

16
Universal Instructional Design

• Create a respectful learning environment
• Determine essential course components
• Establish clear expectations and feedback
• Develop natural supports for learning, including
  through use of technology
• Use multiple teaching strategies
• Provide multiple types of opportunities to
  demonstrate knowledge
• Encourage contact between students and faculty
• Source North Carolina State University, 1997
  based on Chickering Gamson, 1987

17
Implementing UID

• Consider all possible students who might enroll
  in a course (or make use of a program or service)
  and design the course content, pedagogy, and
  physical space (or office or program) to ensure
  that all students will have equal access and feel
  welcomed

18
PASS IT Data

• 2005-2006 In UID classes, pass rate for students
  with disabilities was 87.8 (n 41) pass rate
  for students who do not have disabilities was
  89.8 (n 617)
• F 2006 In UID classes, pass rate for students
  with disabilities was 90 (n 59) pass rate for
  students who do not have disabilities was 92 (n
  1550)
• At the U
• of Minnesota, of the 31 students with
  disabilities, 29 did not require any separate
  accommodations

19
Next Logical Steps

• Extending implementation of Universal
  Instructional Design to think more broadly about
  access and success for students from
  underrepresented populations
• Considering misunderstandings related to the
  universal in UID
• Developing a model for Integrated Multicultural
  Instructional Design (IMID) that builds on the
  work of MAP IT and PASS IT

20
Integrated Multicultural Instructional Design
(IMID) Guiding Principles to Create Action Steps
to Enhance Students Multicultural Educational
Experiences
21
IMID Guiding Principles(see pp. 12-13 of paper)

• Value difference
• Articulate commitment to diversity
• Establish respectful and supportive learning
  environment
• Promote understanding of how contexts shape
  learning
• Determine essential course components
• Embed skill development

22
IMID Guiding Principles(cont.)

• Communicate clear expectations
• Provide constructive feedback
• Integrate multicultural perspectives
• Teach ideas valued by many cultures
• Provide natural supports
• Use diverse teaching methods
• Create multiple ways for demonstrating knowledge

23
IMID Guiding Principles(cont.)

• Use culturally-sensitive assessments
• Promote interaction among and between faculty and
  students

24
Diversity and the Postsecondary Experience and
MAP IT report available free of charge in pdf
format on the CRDEUL Web site,
http//www.education.umn.edu/crdeul