10 Perspectives on Equity in Education

Jimmy Casas, Onica L. Mayers, Jeffrey Zoul, Jimmy Casas, Onica L. Mayers, Jeffrey Zoul

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000395686
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Éducation
• Subtopic: Éducation multiculturelle

In this third volume of the Routledge Great Educators Series, ten of education's inspiring thought-leaders come together to bring you their perspectives on how to improve equitable outcomes in your school or classroom, so that all students have what they need to succeed. You will learn how to overcome barriers to equity of access; embrace a student's cultural capital; attract and retain a diverse talent pool; incorporate intersectional identities in an inclusive classroom; implement more equitable assessment practices; build resilience and equity through chess; advance equity in early childhood programs; abolish a culture of competition and work toward a culture of cooperation; and increase stakeholder commitment to racial equity. Appropriate for K–12 educators at all levels, the book provides strategies, insights, and inspiration to help you lead for equity and make real changes in your classroom, building, and community.

1

Equity in Education

The Underlying Impact—Recruitment to Retention

Onica L. Mayers

Equity Defined

Equity does not mean the same thing to every organization. Having a common language is important in establishing a baseline for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) work. The baseline for diversity relates to backgrounds and perspectives; inclusion relates to equal rate, belonging, allowed to contribute. Fundamentally they bleed into each other but organizationally they have different implications based on the organizational structure.

When you hear the word “equity”, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Don’t think long and hard…what is your first thought? Some thoughts shared on this perspective were:

• Determining who needs what to be successful, by providing all that they need, how they need it, and in a way that they are able to receive it so we can learn from those needs and use this knowledge in the future.
• Giving people what they need to succeed, which is the opposite of equality. Equity would not allow for a cookie cutter or one-size-fits-all model, but would remain cognizant of who is actually determining what it is that people actually need, absent of the determining person’s perception or privilege.
• Giving each person what they need in that moment to be successful, which requires having the right mindset and being purposeful in action and reflection.

The common thread to note is an emphasis on individual success. The mere task of defining the word “equity” is in itself a challenge. Just as no two schools or students are the same, no two people are going to define equity using the same words, however, it is the hope that the connotation of what equity stands for in education that has common threads interwoven. Equity work for all intents and purposes must not be considered ad hoc; to the contrary, it should be the centerpiece of what we do, and the why behind what we do. A true commitment to equitable education will require that all stakeholders in the process recognize that, in fact, it is a process, one that is a marathon and not a sprint, and undoubtedly not a box to be checked. But, by all means, there is an end in sight, even when running a marathon. We insult those in the underrepresented groups when we know that we have organizations that systematically shut them out and we are somehow content with taking a long period of time to help resolve inadequacies.

For me, a former classroom teacher, instructional coach, assistant principal, elementary school principal, and now director of human resources, equity is being aware of unconscious bias, beginning with hiring diverse talent, and moving beyond that to creating experiences and environments, schools included, that shape whether people—staff and students—remain and thrive.

“Systemic equity [exists when]…systems and individuals habitually operate to ensure that every student has the greatest opportunity to learn, enhanced by the resources and supports necessary to achieve competence, excellence, independence, personal and social responsibility, and self sufficiency for school and for life” (Bradley, 2000). That said, we know that the most important factor in ensuring systemic equity exists for students daily is the teacher in the classroom.

Equity moves the needle beyond arbitrary status hierarchies where status differences are solely based on what someone happens to be born as, rather than their competence or ability. An equity-centered approach is responsive to the cultural identities of students, staff and the community served. We would be derelict in our responsibilities if we did not reflect on our culturally responsive practices and ensure that our students can see themselves reflected in the staff and leadership, as well as their backgrounds, languages, culture and learning styles incorporated in the curriculum. We must work to reduce cultural misunderstandings and deepen our knowledge of understanding the diversity of belief systems and values in the communities we serve.

Do We Have an Equity Issue in Schools?

Bill de la Cruz shared that brick and mortar schools as we know them in the traditional sense were designed to educate a homogenous group of students; a homogenous group of White students in a system based on equality versus equity (cited in Snyder, Trowery & McGrath, 2019). That system not only centered around a mostly White population of students, but also around a White population of men as the educators. Today, we are at the crossroads of attempting to modify the system as we know it to be equity focused, equity as it aligns to supporting the diverse needs of students and those who teach them, as well as the inclusive environments for both groups as well. This reckoning requires transparency supported with action. This is where we are now, and what are we going to do about it?

To meet the moment, we have to be stronger than our excuses. A review of the traditional design of schools will uncover that DEI practices are undermined. Many would agree that equity or inequity in education is perhaps the primary civil rights issue of our time. And can we truly discuss equity without reframing our current standards to include diversity, equity and inclusion? The inequities in education have been evident for generations, yet today, as the rubber meets the road, we can no longer maintain the unsatisfactory status quo. If not now, when?

Adopting an equity mindset is paramount to the success of any organization’s attempt at transformational change, and schools are not exempt. The Guiding Principles for Equity Education emphasized that, “striving for equity often requires fundamental structural changes that go beyond temporary initiatives or surface-level changes” (Snyder, Trowery & McGrath, 2019). What we are facing today is the stark reality that if we do not work together to address the need for equitable education, we could potentially widen the gap before we narrow it.

Recruitment to Retention

In our realm of education, diversification of the workforce through the organization hierarchy is attainable. We must intentionally promote the full engagement of diverse employees by facilitating experiences of belonging, being valued for one’s uniqueness. We cannot simply hire based on algorithmic hiring methods that perpetuate inherent biases. It starts with recruiters and hiring managers having sensitivity training.

Attracting, advancing and retaining diverse talent to better meet the needs of our diverse customers—our students and their families—is our responsibility as school leaders. But it begs the question, are the recruitment efforts aligned with this goal? It goes without saying, or maybe not, perhaps it is not as crystalized as it needs to be—that we should embrace and truly encourage all of our employees’ differences, including personalities, values, passions and personal interests which highlight their uniqueness.

To create such experiences and environments requires having the right people in the right places, from leadership to support staff. This requires work, and equity work must be seen through a lens in which all decisions are made. It begins with recruitment efforts which might mean that the manner in which we hire teachers, campus leaders and central office administrators must change. And yes, change is a constant, but in education, change is not so readily embraced. How do we begin the paradigm shift to embrace the changes needed to restructure our hiring processes?

Hiring with DEI in mind begins with the leadership of the organization asking if there are current diversity goals, and subsequently, if the current hiring processes reflect a commitment to ensuring that the measurable outcomes are met. DEI leaders need to and must be empowered by those at the helm, and those leaders must be aware of their own unconscious biases.

It goes without saying that if the organization does not have such goals, implementing them is a necessary first step in ensuring that staff members—teachers, support staff, administrators (and extended to the selection of board members)—are viewed through a DEI lens. Perhaps if we had the opportunity to peel back the layers of the onion even further, the question that would lay the foundation would be: Does the leadership of the organization recognize that there is a need to have DEI goals and are those goals ultimately supported by a hiring process that aims to achieve them? Thus, depending on how many layers you are peeling back, therein lies your starting point. If our goal is to ascertain the root cause, one could also go beyond the K–12 realm and delve into the student teacher pipeline that is generated at the tertiary level, for that is where recruitment originates.

In the absence of DEI goals, the organization should consider a thorough, transparent, and reflective equity audit process. Dr. Roger Cleveland, who received the P.G. Peeples Equity and Excellence Achievement Award from the Fayette County Equity Council for his work in improving local schools, uses discovery conversations with the board and district’s leadership to begin the process of conducting an equity and culture audit. Can you work on a problem that has yet to be identified as such? As educators, we all know that what is monitored and measured matters, and without the support of the head of the organization, DEI work will not infiltrate schools and departments across a district and impact the intended beneficiaries—students. Discovery conversations followed by surveying stakeholders (including students, teaching and non-teaching staff, parents, and administrators), an extensive data review, as well as “boots on the ground” campus visits, all lead to the development of an equity policy. With the creation of an equity policy, all staff members, existing and new staff as they are onboarded, must receive professional development to have a thorough understanding of the district’s expectations and equity policies. This process is the genesis of the acquisition of an equity mindset which will in turn support the work needed to drive your equity plan forward and expand the vision of the organization with DEI work as its foundation.

Operating on the assumption that the school district has established equity goals, a critical self-reflection question is this: Are you seeking to hire candidates who will bring value to the diverse perspectives of the given community? More specifically, are the potential teachers, support staff members and administrators representative of those who have been intentionally or unintentionally underrepresented and/or marginalized in the educational organization? Clear articulation of this question as the overall mission of the campus or district must be conveyed by the person overseeing the hiring process.

The hiring committee itself should be reflective of the diversity of perspectives that the organization values, and they should be prepared to ask candidates about their understanding and experience with DEI work in the quest for equity warriors. This will highlight candidates’ commitments or lack thereof as you strive to have people on board who have an equity purpose; for these are the people who can and will inspire and prepare our students for the unchartered territory that lies ahead.

These change agents will be the ones in our organizations to determine the learning outcomes for our students and their opportunities moving forward. The committee should agree on their “look-fors” as it pertains to a candidate’s understanding of the role social justice plays in education, why the candidate truly wants to serve in the capacity being sought in that specific campus/district/department, and be able to articulate his/her philosophy on traditional education and the corrections that can be made to ensure equity in education. Don’t hesitate to share your educational values and the direction in which the organization is heading. These should not be kept in the vault.

How do we set up employees to be successful? In an effort to better meet the needs of our students, we, the leadership of the campus/district, must remain steadfast and consistent in ensuring that ongoing meaningful and relevant formal and informal professional development is provided to the staff. This does not have to be an intricate task, and can be a series of facilitated discussions. Open discourse may test the waters of the organization, but weighing the risk of silence versus the reward of understanding…you be the judge. As the educators and leaders embrace the conversations around DEI, they can steer the students entrusted to their care toward a safe learning environment rather than having their voices unheard, or worse, stifled. Support teachers as they engage and continue to build relationships with students in innovative ways.

Targeted mentoring, support navigating through the social side of the organization outside of the formal structure, while also getting the formal skills needed to advance within the organization all impact retention. In essence, what is required is a holistic integrated experience for all employees.

In conjunction with continued growth and development opportunities for teachers, it is imperative that leaders are supported to be able to coach teachers and network with others doing DEI work. In Principals Need Help Building Anti-Racist Schools, Superville noted:

It [building anti-racist schools] takes time and it has to be repeated—over and over. It’s uncomfortable—both for the principal who may be examining his/her own identity for the first time, and the teachers and staff who’re going to be asked to do so. And there will be pushback, especially from those who see the world through race-neutral lenses or are wedded to colorblindness. People may leave. They may think that the principal who is asking them to think critically about race (and equity) is the one being divisive.

Superville (2020)

The human brain is wired for survival. Employees with a homogenous lifestyle who are not accustomed to being uncomfortable will feel threatened with DEI work.

This newfound relationship would allow both teachers and students, administrators and teachers, to begin to tear down walls leading to the rebuilding of a new foundation built on norms and agreements that allow for active engagement despite the possible uncomfortable experiences. What this provides is opportunities for everyone to speak their truth and repressed emotions to be safely released. Consider creating a safe space using listening tours to give employees pockets of opportunities. You must, must, must get into the psychology of making people feel more secure. There is no escaping frank conversations; honesty is missing from failed equity-minded efforts.

Soliciting feedback from all stakeholders cannot be seen as optional. Align practices with performance data. It ...