Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article shares the results of a research study designed to track faculty efficacy with integrating equity, inclusion and decolonization into their teaching. In response to student priorities, broad national policy priorities, and the lived experiences of researchers, this seven-person multi-department team followed a set of 16 faculty through a set of interventions and gathered a range of data to discern their shifts in awareness, intention and practice. Four major resources were made available to participants (a 4-hour training, an expansive self-assessment, syllabus revisions and development of an action plan). Five data collection activities were implemented (a pre/post efficacy survey, the self-assessment survey results, action plans for immediate and future practices, syllabus revisions, and focus groups). Promising results signal that targeted training, and relevant resources can manifest instructors’ skills and confidence to teach in ways infused with anti-racism, decolonization, cultural responsiveness and transformative learning.

Keywords

instructor efficacy racialized students higher education culturally responsive teaching transformative learning

This article shares the results of a research study designed to track faculty efficacy when integrating equity and decolonization into their teaching. Building on an early initiative from the Faculty of Social Work’s Equity Committee, [masked, professor and co-author] engaged a seven-person research team from across Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, Canada, and the team conducted a research study designed to support faculty and gather their experiences regarding learning and practice journeys in 2023. A total of 30 professors (full and part-time) began the study, and 16 completed all elements. The study occurred across numerous departments and a wide range of professors with various stature and social locations. Three major resources were made available to participants (a 4-h training, their Instructor Self-Assessment Tool (ISAT) results, and an action plan template) and five data collection activities were implemented (a pre/post efficacy survey, the self-assessment survey results, action plans for immediate and future practices, a syllabus improvement effort, and focus groups). This article encompasses an analysis of all data sources and highlights core insights from the study.

Our terminology draws from the social construction of identity and thus uses the term “racialized” to refer to persons of color. While being white is also a social construction, we solely use the term to indicate being a minoritized person. This is common usage in Canada. Second, Canadians use the term equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) instead of the US version of DEI. This places the emphasis on equity rather than diversity. Third, our research study focuses on how equity and decolonization are integrated into teaching. Thus, when describing our own research, we use the term equity, rather than the construct EDI. But the literature often refers to the inclusion of EDI in teaching, so we use that phrase when discussing the literature and the field in general, but equity for our own work.

We came together out of a shared interest in improving the experiences of racialized students in higher education. Our educational experiences catalyzed interest in sharing what we understood to be relevant approaches to equity-infused teaching. Lengthy trainings are available largely as courses in one’s professional training, and aim to shift faculty perspectives about racism. While these establish values aligned with social justice, equity and sometimes decolonization, faculty are largely left to themselves to figure out how to establish pedagogy that aligns with these principles. Our primary research question sought to assess if efficacy could be built among faculty from a relatively short intervention, and if results could be observed in syllabus improvements and action plans related to instruction. Our findings, as detailed in this paper, suggest that the answer is yes. Our second question was more exploratory: what can we learn from participants about the journey to integrate equity and decolonization into teaching? What can they tell us about their needs, challenges, assets, and strengths? In short, their responses are more nuanced, complex, and context dependent. Their responses cause us to recommit to further research in this area, and to consider ways to shift the culture and protocols within higher education to better foster faculty practices with equity and decolonization in teaching.

Our seven-person research team is diverse in many ways. We are all faculty within Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU) coming together from a range of racial identities (with five of seven racialized), fields of scholarship (including business, biology, leadership, mathematics, leadership, and social work), stature as professors (contract, pre-tenure, tenured and full professors), and length of experience in the equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) field (totaling 54 years, and ranging between three and 25 years). We have experience with integrating equity and decolonization into our own courses in contexts from undergraduate to PhD, from small seminar courses to 100+ student courses, from online to on-campus, and in areas where we have flexibility and relatively little flexibility with the curriculum. These diverse social and academic locations have helped broaden our perspectives, allow us to learn from each other about the conditions in alternate settings, and effectively resource the range of participants in the study. Our learning has been considerable, and this article shares the highlights. We emerge from this study more convinced of the potential for educators to understand how whiteness, colonization, and various forms of imperialism are replicated in the classroom and shape higher education, and collectively, we are motivated to act.

Literature Review

EDI-based scholarship is gaining ground in higher education. This section first addresses the harms facing racialized students and the benefits that can emerge from inclusive and relevant teaching, and then brief details of higher education’s responses, particularly in Canada. We then turn to studies that unpack what is known about “how to” integrate equity and decolonization into teaching.

Persistent negative occurrences are faced by racialized students and faculty (Zambrana et al., 2020). Social exclusion (Schachner, 2019) and low school engagement (Abacioglu et al., 2020) are distinct challenges. Racial bias is pronounced in teaching, as one study showed 96% held an unfavorable bias against students of color, yet only 19% were concerned or had impetus to address it (Clark & Zygmunt, 2014). A climate survey (Cheng et al., 2024) identified that 20% of Indigenous and racialized students experience microaggressions weekly or monthly, and 29% do not experience belonging. Half of students indicated their instructors never or seldom prepare them for equity or decolonization practices and 42% of BIPOC students reported that instructors rarely or never addressed marginalization in course work. Students’ experiences of racism can “traumatize, hurt, humiliate, enrage, confuse, and ultimately prevent optimal growth and functioning of individuals and communities” (Harrell, 2000, p. 42).

Unfavorable climates are strongly linked to diminished engagement, retention, and academic success. The consequences are significant, as Chin et al. (2020) link this to significant gaps in test scores and suspension rates. While most climate-related literature is focused on the corporate sector, the impacts of toxic workplace cultures are still relevant for this study, as “a toxic corporate culture is by far the strongest predictor of industry-adjusted attrition and ten times more important than compensation in predicting turnover” (p. 2, Sull et al., 2022). In higher education, “a lack of sense of belonging is the No.1 reason undergraduate students have seriously considered leaving their institution, even more than financial needs” (Weber et al., 2022, p. 9). Furthermore, greater hostilities yield reluctance to report such events (Mathieu et al., 2022).

Positive school climates increase perceptions of safety and therefore more able to retain focus and task (Jones & Fleming, 2021). Additional scholars (Jones et al., 2020; Schachner, 2019) then link inclusion to improved academic outcomes. Ash and Maguire (2024) advocate for instructors need to lead “inclusive, equitable, and multicultural classrooms” (p. 382).

Many post-secondary institutions identify the need to address inequities, create more accessible and inclusive classrooms, and decolonize curriculums. The USA has incorporated elements of culturally responsive teaching within all states’ professional teaching standards (New America, 2019), intending to garner student academic gains through engagement, relationships, reduced discipline, and greater achievement. That said, today’s political environment is disappearing attention, resources and research aimed to reduce racial inequities in education. In Canada, higher education is moving towards racial equity in aspirational statements and early initiatives towards diversification of instructors and leadership, with tentative and eclectic steps towards addressing racism and whiteness. Primarily rooted in the Dimensions Charter (Government of Canada, 2019), which has been endorsed by Canadian universities, most universities recognize that achieving cultural change necessitates a profound and intersectional comprehension of inequity, discrimination, and exclusion. Similarly, Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) placed education at the center of the country’s reconciliation process with Indigenous communities (Attas, 2019). Most recently, the Scarborough Charter centered the priorities of Black Canadians, highlighted the exclusion experienced by staff, professors, and students, and offered remedies. These national policy documents create a framework for Canadian universities, but progress has been slow and uneven. Despite promising indicators that 77% of universities refer to EDI principles in major documents and 70% are developing an EDI action plan (Universities Canada, 2019), we hold tentative hope for these initiatives. Slow progress towards the TRC’s Calls to Action has been made. A scoping review identifies policies that are shown to advance EDI (Wolbring & Nguyen, 2023). Their conclusion shows that insufficient research is addressing how EDI can take root in academia: “We found many gaps in the academic coverage suggesting many opportunities for academic inquiries and a broadening of the EDI research community” (p. 168). Noted was the need for “best practices for DEI instruction outside of diversity/multicultural courses” (p. 181). An additional challenge exists in Canada as very few institutions collect race-based data, and racial disparities in education are not known. Lim and Galabuzi (2022), among others, urge this be rectified.

Turning now to studies of how to teach in ways infused with equity and decolonization, there is a general recognition that educators are unaware of and tentative about addressing issues of racism and white privilege, and the task largely remains individualized, lacking university-wide improvements (Pellissier et al., 2022; Sue et al., 2009). One study identified that less than half of all instructors feel prepared to integrate equity or decolonization into their teaching (Cheng et al., 2024). Faculty are ill-prepared for difficult classroom conversations, resulting in avoidance of dialogues related to racial equity (Mena & Quina, 2019; Sue et al., 2009). The consequence of sidestepping these dialogues distracts students from their schoolwork, causes emotional distress, perpetuates poor interpersonal and intergroup relations, silences students of color, and undermines the learning process.

Seminal authors forward equity and power sharing (Freire, 1970; Hooks, 1994; Kumashiro, 2002; Pease, 2022), decolonization (Absolon, 2019; Cote-Meek, 2014), and culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2018; Ladson-Billings, 2009). Some intersections and implementation of these approaches are beginning to surface (Chrona, 2023; Pirbjao-Illich et al., 2017). Despite these missives, a current scoping review identifies the shortage of research on how to advance equity in teaching across many fields including sciences, engineering, environmental education, library sciences, clinical learning, pharmacy, and medical education (Wolbring & Nguyen, 2023).

Racial matching between students and instructors is one solution, as student engagement rises (Abacioglu et al., 2020; Aronson & Laughter, 2016; Bartanen & Grissom, 2021; Hill, 2012; Schachner, 2019), students feel cared for (Egalite & Kisida, 2018), student achievement rises (Bartanen & Grissom, 2021; Hart, 2020; Llamas et al., 2021), and students’ attitudes towards their own and others’ intrinsic worth improves (Hill-Jackson, 2020). Also, racial alignment leads to reduced rates of exclusionary discipline (Lindsay & Hart, 2017). Hiring racialized faculty is an important equity feature. So too is instructor efficacy in EDI.

Pedagogical research is best developed within culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1995). Core elements are validation, comprehensiveness, inclusion, empowerment, transformative, emancipatory, humanistic, normative, ethical and multidimensional (including curriculum, classroom climate, student engagement and management, student-teacher relationships, and assessment practices) (Gay, 2018). The National Equity Project (n.d.) synthesized it as affirmation (of who one is), validation (of students’ lived experience and the power hierarchies embedded throughout society), cognition (using students’ cultures to deepen understanding) and processing (to internalize critically oriented content through applications).

Studies of equity and decolonization in teaching are most frequently applied within anti-racist education. Racism and white privilege can be effectively added into any course, provided it incorporates “political, historical, and economical context to the development of the discipline, rather than looking at knowledge as apolitical, ahistorical and neutral” (Kishimoto, 2016, p. 545). Lopez and Jean-Marie (2021) stretch this to require equity be embedded across the practices of both teachers and administrators. Alongside Kishimoto (2016), equity-grounded instruction requires that educators demonstrate anti-racism comprehensively, not just in their teaching roles.

Pedagogical studies begin with Friere’s work on consciousness raising and emphasizing the need for power sharing in the classroom. Hartwell et al. (2017) identify how teaching can advance equity across disciplines via experiential learning, activation of students’ prior knowledge, rebalancing power so that the instructor moves from expert to collaborator, adding community-based learning including collective action, and deep reflection. Critical reflexivity is prioritized in current anti-racist scholarship: applying anti-racist values,

… requires the professor’s humility, critical reflection of our social position, and commitment as we begin and continue to confront our internalized racial oppression or internalized racial superiority and how those impact our teaching, research and work in the university and community. (Kishimoto, 2016, p.551)

Transformative learning (TL) explores how learners reconfigure their worldview, highlighting the magnitude of such a shift. While TL’s conventions focus on disorienting dilemmas and naming the shifts, its current focus is critical reflexivity. Scoping reviews highlight the need for improvements in how critical reflection is operationalized and measured (Taylor, 2017), and identifying pedagogical approaches that prepare educators to teach, characterized as “experiential learning, group learning, diverse learning strategies and reflection” (Rojo et al., 2023, p. 65). Benefits for educators were identified as emotional (such as expanded caring and altruism), awareness of the importance of cultural relevance in providing services, shifts in perspectives (from holding prejudice to letting these go), and the importance of relationships to influence learning. Van Schalkwyk et al. (2019) identified general patterns of health practitioners as they prepared to teach: reflection and relationality were highlighted, such as being sensitive and responsive to students in both cognitive and emotional ways, and supporting students’ exploration of how their values influence their practice.

Among studies of pedagogy that advance equity, Lopez and Jean-Marie (2021) requires that educators unlearn one’s complicity with racism, and advocate for accountability: “without accountability, initiatives become random acts and are not sustainable. When educators know that they are being held accountable, actions will be more sustainable and thoughtful” (p. 59).

Recent scoping reviews help discern emerging best practices. Ash and Maguire (2024) assessed 229 studies for how diversity training for educators influenced their classroom practices. Experiential learning was relied on to reduce bias in teaching, noting gains in how educators challenged stereotypes, perceived minoritized students, and understood how culture influences learning. Students were described in less blaming ways, and explicit approaches taken to address the learning needs of students. One quasi-experimental study identified that gains were sustained over 2 months. Most studies did not report educational improvements to pedagogy.

Two scoping reviews focused on educator preparation and professional development. Ash and Maguire (2024) assessed 229 studies on the results diversity training to build inclusion for educators to influence their equity-related classroom practices. The studies relied largely on experiential learning designed to reduce bias. A smaller set of studies focused on culturally responsive teaching, finding that it yielded a positive influence on how educators challenge stereotypes, perceive minoritized students, and understand how culture influences learning. Students were described in less blaming ways, and explicit approaches taken to address the learning needs of students. One quasi-experimental study identified that gains were sustained over 2 months when follow-up data collection was done. Not all studies identified benefits, and benefits in one study were only noted among White teachers, and in another, monocultural settings resulted in less learning than diverse school settings.

The second (Fallon et al., 2024) focused on the development of anti-racism capacity in teaching via 38 studies. Through professional development averaging 17.5 h, instructors identified gains, listed here in decreasing frequency: increased critical consciousness, improved racial literacy, self-awareness, and the development of intentions to use culturally responsive teaching, provide greater supports to racialized students, improving classroom climates, build relationships with students, and incorporate student voice. Despite these self-perceived gains and intentions, Fallon et al. (2024) concluded that “little change was observed in teachers’ lesson planning and instruction” (p. 411). This caution will resurface in our section on next steps.

Our synthesis is that instructors need to both learn and be prepared to operationalize the concepts of equity, decolonization, and culturally responsive teaching in their classrooms and teaching. A wholistic approach to teaching is needed, alongside deep critical self-reflection, and high empathy for, and relationality with, students. Ideally, instructional accountability and institutional alignment with EDI co-occur, but are beyond the scope of our study. Our study aims to gather information from faculty as they learn and implement equity, decolonization, and culturally responsive teaching practices within their own classrooms.

Study Method

Research Approach

This is a mixed-methods research study, designed to gather information from contract and full-time faculty as they learned and operationalized the concepts of equity, decolonization, and culturally responsive teaching in their classrooms. Diversity in data collection allowed for integrating multiple perspectives and standpoints to provide a deeper and more nuanced understanding of how participants work to improve their teaching (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2021). Additionally, data was collected over 8 months generating insights from pre-study, mid-way development of plans and intentions, and then post-study reflections on the experience.

The study provided participants with three major resources as they learned and implemented the concepts of equity, decolonization, and culturally responsive teaching in their classrooms, and five data collection activities (a pre/post efficacy survey, the self-assessment results, action plan details, a syllabus improvement effort, and focus groups). A qualitative approach was used to gather in-depth information from the focus groups, open-ended survey questions, and the syllabus review (Cohen et al., 2011). This dataset was analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022) and a grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2006). The quantitative methods include instructors’ self-efficacy surveys (administered at the start and close of the study to identify the changes in confidence and equity skills), as well as the analysis of the action plans, which allowed us to identify patterns covering the participants’ diverse perspectives and different fields of study.

Research Participants

While most research participants were full-time and contract faculty at Laurier, additional participants joined from US institutions. Thirty professors (full and part-time) began the study, and 16 completed all elements. The professors who participated in the study were affiliated with multiple departments, held different academic statures, and were from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Data Collection

We designed five research activities to help us study participants’ learning, implementation, intentions and overall experiences. This helped us discern patterns in benefits and challenges facing participants. Specifically, our five research activities included the following:

a. Pre/post efficacy survey in teaching with equity, belonging and decolonization: A short eight-item survey identifies measurable gains made by participants in the study (see Figure 3).

b. Results from the ISAT: Participants attended a four-hour training session with the research team and then completed the 161-item ISAT. The ISAT reflects the literature, the researchers’ practice experience, and the input of about 15 students. Its 161 statements ask faculty to identify the degree to which their practices reflect the statements. Eleven domains organize these statements: values; intention; anticipation; critical self-reflection; curriculum; pedagogy; classroom activities; relationships, inclusive classroom dynamics; continuous learning for the instructor; and cultural alignment and understanding. Its focus is equity, anti-racism, decolonization, and culturally responsive teaching. It also introduces participants to the importance of such approaches.

c. Action Plans: After completing the ISAT, a summary profile of each participant’s average score in each domain was generated and sent to them. Participants then reflected on their results and created a 10-point equity-infused action plan for how they intend to teach differently moving forward. An iterative process was suggested to identify activities where (a) they held strength and could continue building, (b) scores were weak and could improve, and (c) changes yielding high impacts for students. They finalized ten actions, sharing why they selected each item, timelines for implementation, and how they would assess its effectiveness.

d. Pre/post-syllabus reviews: Participants selected one course they intended to improve through the study, submitted the syllabi to the research team before the training, and re-submitted it after they implemented changes that reflected their learning through training and the ISAT. This allowed us to see the concrete results of the study.

e. Focus groups: All participants joined a 90-min focus group to reflect on their experience and how the training, ISAT, and action plan impacted or enhanced their teaching, and suggested improvements.

Data Analysis

Focus group data were analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), and a coding tree organized the main themes (Yin, 2003). We added grounded theory and the constant comparison method to expand our analysis (Charmaz, 2006; Guest et al., 2012).

For the syllabus review, we designed and implemented a template to assess the changes made to participants’ syllabi, rating the changes, and developing examples of innovations. To maintain credibility, multiple researchers used the template to analyze the same syllabi, then checked for the alignment between the different analyses and discussed any differences, reaching agreement on implementing the template. Quantitative data from the efficacy surveys and the ISAT were analyzed using Excel and SPSS to identify changes among participants, and measures of significance.

Credibility and Trustworthiness

The research team members engaged in a deep and ongoing reflection. We collectively evaluated the research methods, assumptions, biases, and interpretations throughout the research process. This allowed us to identify potential difficulties, biases, and oversights that could affect the quality of the research (Stahl & King, 2020). We met monthly, discussing and addressing inconsistencies or disagreements in interpretation. This promoted transparency, reflexivity, and critical thinking within the research process, sustaining credibility (Cope, 2014). Similarly, team members engaged in individual critical self-reflection, and team meetings were structured to encourage sharing. Given our grounding in different fields (social work, leadership, biology, and math) and diverse experiences of being full-time and contract faculty, and senior and early career faculty, we surfaced different challenges at different levels in various contexts. Our diverse racial identities ensured that wholistic approaches informed our work.

Ethical considerations, such as informed consent and confidentiality, were carefully addressed. Through the data analysis process, the research assistant was the only person who knew the identity of the study’s specific elements. She stripped all identifying information from data products before sharing them with the research team. Pseudonyms were used throughout the study.

Study Results

Each of the five data sources are reviewed here: syllabus reviews, self-assessment and action plans, efficacy surveys, and focus groups. We then synthesize the overall findings of the study.

Syllabus Reviews

The syllabus is the first communication with students, making it a crucial aspect of promoting an inclusive educational environment (Fuentes et al., 2021). The original syllabi often had a harsh tenor about topics such as lateness, assignments, and attendance. Strictness and policing behavior was notable. Co-occurring was an implicit deference to authority which prepares students for the colonial organization. Statements about equity were overly general with nothing specific to illustrate how equity was integrated into the curriculum or teaching approaches. This upholds the status quo by omitting elements that would hold faculty accountable to take equity seriously. Syllabi held no explicit information that supports racialized students, despite elements such as foot patrol, food bank, and accessible learning. Finally, the syllabi were primarily built upon mainstream (white, colonial) readings. In no situation did participants require course textbooks by BIPOC scholars. A few articles had some racialized authors.

Revised syllabi (post-training and ISAT) communicated welcome and offered students more choices, signaling flexibility by the faculty member. Their words indicated a clear interest in learning about students and participants markedly reduced the harshness in the tone of the syllabi. Often, “rules” about compliance were softened and moved later in the syllabus. For example, one faculty had previously stated, “The deadlines are fixed. There can be no extensions except for serious personal or family matters. Late assignments will lose points for every day of delay.” The revised syllabus now says, “The deadlines are fixed. However, there can be extensions for personal or family matters. If you need an extension, please notify me in advance.” This type of revision was common, deemphasizing the punitive consequences regarding course deadlines.

New elements were added to expand student choice. Four methods were observed: options for reducing attendance penalties, customized assignments to reflect their interests, selecting the format of their assignments (e.g., providing choices between presentations or written work), and creating “open” class topics that would be decided later in response to student interests. Readings were often diversified (except the core text), and a few participants made curriculum changes like refining class topics to better address the perspectives of racialized communities. Some faculty added guest speakers with lived experience on specific topics.

We had anticipated greater changes in syllabi and were disappointed to see relatively narrow improvements. While the trends were encouraging, not all faculty reflected these, with about 1/4 retaining a harsher tenor and lack of welcome. Faculty typically opted to soften and explain the stances they took. We observed signs of cultural responsiveness but not power sharing, which would better align with an anti-racism and anti-colonial approach. Also missing was a critique of one’s own profession and academic field. We also recognize that a syllabus is incomplete as a standalone document, as sometimes it is hard to interpret the faculty’s intention and its likely impact on students. We found we wanted to do a deeper exploration of course materials, such as assignment details and online teaching modules.

That said, some exemplary and creative improvements inspired our research team to add a new approach in future research: to share the exemplars and offer a wide range of supports to faculty in future research activities. Two examples illustrate these insights. The first illustrates a creative approach to drawing from just one Indigenous-authored article and using it creatively through the course. This approach fills in for the faculty’s difficulty and time limitations to identify relevant Indigenous literature for their topic in the course. Here are the words of the faculty:

For the first week, and throughout the term, please read: [article identified]. Throughout the 12-week course, [the author’s] leadership as demonstrated through his words in this article (as well as supplementary material) will be reviewed in our lessons. This may include pauses for reflection, examples of our course content in action, practice quiz questions and more. The goal of this approach is for us to systematically recognize the inherent complexity and connectedness of our course content, as well as see how it can be applied in actionable ways through others’, as well as our own, learning, advocacy, and leadership.

The second seeks to provide a brave space (Arao & Clemens, 2013) that expands students’ learning opportunities:

At the core of our teaching philosophy is student-centered learning in a “brave” space, co-created by teachers and learners alike. Our intention is to cultivate a rehearsal setting that is as non-hierarchical and inviting as possible, with non-violent communication and circle teaching practices (informed by Indigenous teachings) as our model. We believe that teaching and learning are two sides of the same coin, where teachers are lifelong learners, open to the lived experience and creative impulses that students bring in abundance, and where students can grow in confidence to share their own knowledge and ideas, while being open to whatever learning might come their way.

These examples demonstrate that faculty perceive the syllabus as an important method of communicating their course intentions and operationalizing equity and anti-racism commitments.

The syllabus revision requirement created a barrier to completion of the study. Thirty attended the training, completed the ISAT, and submitted a syllabus they intended to update. Only 16 did revisions and prepared an action plan identifying their intentions. Through follow-up with participants, we understood that teaching opportunities changed for a sizeable group (particularly contract faculty) and an additional group simply could not complete the syllabus revisions despite extending timelines. Syllabus revisions remain an appropriate outcome for the study, as they demonstrate the integration of equity and decolonization, but also catalyzed attrition.

Self-Assessment

Reviewing the participants’ ISAT results and action plans yielded individual and collective insights. Figure 1 identifies the average scores for the 30 participants who completed the ISAT. These are shaded to reflect categories according to their scores. The strongest categories are more values-based, and demonstrate high attention to relationships. Application-based domains, such as building inclusive classrooms and pedagogy, are rated lower, and we note classroom activities and curriculum at the second lowest level. Anticipation of learning and emotional needs of students are rated midrange, and self-improvement practices such as critical self-reflection and continuous learning are also midrange. The weakest rating is cultural alignment with students.

Figure 1.

Average Scores in Each of 11 Domains in the ISAT

Our interpretation is that faculty have high needs for specific teaching skills that reflect equity in the classroom and ongoing self-improvement practices. Their values, intentions, and relationships are well-defined and practiced. We further interpret that the lower-rated practices are partially due to lacking skills in this area, but also because systemic barriers that faculty choices. The associated critique is that colonial practices are embedded in the bureaucratic processes of the institution and make it harder to challenge the status quo. Examples include adding student choice and voice in teaching, introducing BIPOC scholarship into the curriculum, and implementing critiques of the field. Modifying department-specific expectations is both difficult and involves some risk-taking, especially for more vulnerably positioned faculty. The low score on cultural alignment may be due, in part, to not holding a racialized identity and lacking access to additional learning/training opportunities.

The variation within these data were high, suggesting that participants are at very different stages of their learning journeys, illustrating that the study appealed to folks with various strengths and priorities for improvement. We did not observe links between teaching seniority and efficacy scores. Another insight is that the low scores suggest that participants are being honest and demonstrating humility, a fruitful characteristic for future renditions of this study.

Action Plans

Sixteen action plans are tallied in Figure 2. Predominantly, faculty intended to increase the inclusion of BIPOC authors and student voice and choice in their classes. The least selected item surprised us: to “reach out to disengaged students.” This might be because faculty already do this, or they aimed to focus more on preventative steps. Without deeper exploration, we are unable to conclude the reason.

Figure 2.

Categorizing Action Plan Activities by Participants

In future studies, we aim to follow-up with participants to see if they manifest these goals. Participants affirmed the value of their action plans in focus groups. Some intend to post them in their offices, and one likened it to a “north star” that guides them.

Efficacy Surveys

The efficacy survey measured confidence and skills in relevant areas. Given attrition, only 16 completed the post-survey (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Efficacy Survey Results

Four topics revealed significant improvements associated with equity-based practices in teaching, their confidence in their teaching adaptations, and their beliefs that this work is important for students. Q4 had the largest increase, which reflects increasing efficacy in impacting student experiences. This is very encouraging. The increases in the other areas, and loss of confidence in noticing prejudice are not statistically significant. Even so, we interpret that these shifts are the result of a new-found understanding of how complex this topic is, and the ways that our approach necessitates a wholistic understanding of how equity (and inequity) permeates so many parts of our teaching. Seeing declines in some areas can be expected.

Focus Groups

Five major themes emerged in the focus groups: affirmation of the value of this study, explicit requests to be more involved with the research team, specific gains from the assessment and training, challenges faculty faced in implementation, and recommendations for further study.

All participants indicated that they valued the opportunity created by the research. They found it useful and encouraging to learn in this way. We were surprised when they asked for greater involvement with the research team. They wanted more support, individual advice on their syllabus and action plans, check-ins with us on a regular basis, and an opportunity to build a learning community and a collegial environment for undertaking this work. One participant stated:

Having had the cohort together in the trainings were great. And to be able to hear so many rich examples and struggles and challenges was fantastic… it's odd that teaching is such a solitary kind of profession when there would be so many benefits for gathering and reflecting together and preparing together and having ideas for each other.

We had anticipated a more utilitarian element to their learning, expecting they would prioritize the “how to” elements embedded in the ISAT. Instead, they wanted more accompaniment along their journey, rejecting a “one-and-done” approach. We think this request was catalyzed by the self-revealing approaches that the research team used in the training. We each took a set of elements from the ISAT and shared our experience with how we would assess ourselves, including some of our shortcomings. Sharing our foibles encouraged participants to be more self-revealing and authentic throughout the study. An example is in the domain of intention and the statement, “I want all students to pass the course.” Several researchers identified the ambiguity we hold in this area, as we frequently judge students and see this as appropriate. Here is a participant’s poignant example:

I was treating them like children by constantly bringing up the rules like I was talking down to them. And so that was really good for self-reflection of like, I need to figure out another way to talk about these group rules and to make like…it was a definite learning experience. … I felt like such a bad instructor apart from trying to implement some of the things that I was doing. Clearly, I was doing it wrong. So, I have some work to do, but it's okay.

Second, participants shared their learnings from the study. Patterns were evident in the quantitative dimensions of this research, while focus groups insights were more eclectic. Quotes give a sense of the learning that differed greatly in scope and focus:

• “You made me think very carefully about my own practices.”

• “You helped me help them.”

• “Many students who need accommodations are not registered with Accessibility Services. And I’d always relied on getting that letter to think about accommodations. And so I’m now thinking about it in the front end and making accommodations in the same way.”

• “We assume the students will come to us advocating for themselves, but there are many students who don’t do that.”

Third, focus groups surfaced challenges that faculty face in integrating equity into their teaching. We have categorized these as systemic and discursive racism, positional constraints, and administrative conventions. Systemic and discursive racism continues in higher education. Racialized faculty typically lack power and influence and have access to few relevant supports. When departments lack diversity, equity work is a lonely journey: “First I try to do things myself.” Asking for support is likely to be interpreted as “incompetence.” Another participant said, “I want to be flexible with students, but others [will] say, ‘she doesn’t know what she’s doing because she changes her mind.’” Positional constraints created limitations for contract faculty who were already disconnected from the regular faculty opportunities. They rarely knew others, were not included in meetings, lacked continuity with teaching roles, and were disinclined to invest in a course that they might not be hired to teach again. Other times the challenges were tied to their progress towards tenure. For those in early career stages (such as being pre-tenure or contract), participants lean towards risk avoidance, as pushing for change can be judged harshly. Finally, administrative conventions limit the influence of individual faculty to modify their teaching approaches. The range of constraints is far-reaching: from perceptions of rules, where “the university won’t let me do that” (in reference to surveying students prior to the start of courses, and integrating equity into course evaluations), to expectations that multiple sections of courses must align with each other with few deviations, where senior faculty tend to set the expectations. In one example, creating a more welcoming, flexible, and affirming environment would be rejected by their department: “We are told we need to fail 50% of students, who then populate other programs the university depends on.”

Fourth, participants in the focus groups provided us with advice for turning this study into a more robust initiative. They encouraged us to continue and expand our roles. We also know we need to engage with students to gain their perspective about this work. Participants said they could facilitate contact with their students, once they established trust in our approach.

Finally, not only did these focus groups provide us with a richer understanding of the benefits and challenges facing faculty who participated in the study, but they were relational in ways that inspired us, as a research team, to deepen our commitment to supporting these faculty as they journey towards teaching in ways that can improve outcomes for racialized students, and by extension, for all students.

Discussion

Insights are organized in four theoretically grounded categories: Indigenous-informed decolonial approaches to teaching, sharing power with students (the anti-oppressive approach), culturally responsive teaching, and the transformative learning potential for faculty.

Decolonized teaching is wholistic. Our ISAT includes 11 domains. The domains of values, intentions, relationships, critical self-awareness, ongoing learning, and cultural alignment reflect the decolonized teaching perspective. EDI-infused teaching is an embodied practice that draws from our beliefs, values, relationships, intellect, practice, and culture. We honor Indigenous beliefs about both knowledge and self and integrate all parts of the work in an ongoing, interactive approach. We cannot leave out any element if we are to consider the gains by faculty to be successful. The integrated whole, in tandem with a positive and helpful influence on marginalized student groups, is a necessary outcome of the initiative. That said, we needed to combat the sense of overwhelm and inadequacy as participants did not score well in most areas. We clarified that we do not expect each of them to support every element. Acting on some elements does not require adherence to all elements. Holding the tension between progress and the ideal needs to become part of capacity for decolonized teaching.

In addition, we implicate the institution of higher education as a feature of colonization, designed to stratify society and the labor market and normalize adherence to power holders’ expectations. Decolonization also requires that we challenge how society sustains oppression, such as capitalism, natural resource exploitation, and the private ownership of land on disputed territories. Study results bring attention to the differential capacity of faculty to sustain potential backlash when they “rock-the-boat.”

Decolonization-based results were relatively weak yet illustrated in the action plans. The ISAT was only conducted at the opening of the study, so it missed identifying gains. While the action plans contained some decolonization elements, no participants prioritized systems change, instead focusing more on local actions within their sphere of influence. The plans emphasized relationality, and in this way, advance decolonization. They aimed to build relationships with students, learning more about their backgrounds, and sharing more of themselves, alongside either an element of critical self-awareness or ongoing learning objectives. As noted previously, we were disappointed in the scope of syllabi improvements, despite having training and a resource that identified opportunities to improve anti-racism, anti-colonial, decolonized, and culturally responsive elements in the syllabi. As we reflect on this divergence between goals and results, we reach these potential conclusions: values, intentions, and relationships set a foundation for doing this work and while these are foundational in the wholistic approach integral to Indigenous-defined anti-colonial approaches to education, they provide a great starting point for this practice, but more guidance is needed to translate into action.

When we reviewed data related to anti-oppression and power sharing with students, participants demonstrated capacity in this area. These were observed in moderate ways in the syllabi, with a few examples noted earlier. We will amplify these in the cultural responsiveness section. Here, we highlight that by reducing the penalties and consequences for diverging from the instructor’s expectations, there is a reduction of the power that faculty have over the students. Simultaneously, increasing student input in course content prioritization and assignment customization is a form of power improvement for students. We also saw these detailed in the action plans as professors identified intentions for sharing power. Examples included sitting in a circle, doing midterm check-ins with students with a commitment to respond to student priorities, gaining student input on grading weights, sharing more of one’s own experience and missteps in practice, asking students for their own learning goals, and making greater use of small groups to enhance student participation and reduced lecturing.

Areas of cultural responsiveness in teaching were the most strongly observed gains, and this was clear in the focus groups, syllabus reviews, and action plans. Diverse elements reflect these gains, ranging from avoiding religious holidays, adding BIPOC scholarship, learning sources for BIPOC-authored research (including dialogues with racialized colleagues and seeking assistance from librarians), using case studies that reflect various cultures, and asking students to share more of their backgrounds with faculty. A “student survey tool” that asked students about themselves was embedded in the ISAT and several added this to the opening of their course. Those who used it found it very useful: “A student told me, ‘Nobody has ever asked me this before’ which I interpreted as gratitude for being open to learning about students.” Another said, “this tells me that students want to be heard.” Several commented on their satisfaction with the improvements made to both syllabi and pedagogy: “students saw themselves in the course.”

Finally, we look at the evidence of TL among participants. Related ISAT domains were continuous learning, critical self-reflection, values, and intention. Participants were appreciative of the opportunity to focus on making changes and improvements to their teaching, and many were eager to continue their learning. Notably, this was rare in the training they had done thus far on this issue, as the existing impetus is to build analysis, and miss implementation. We thus retain a firm emphasis on practice improvements, as opposed to more narrowly prioritizing faculty learning.

Numerous ISAT elements demonstrated faculty learning journeys, such as follows:

• I am invested in the academic success of all my students.

• I aim to inspire students to create a more equitable, decolonized world.

• I am invested in students becoming civically engaged contributors to local and global wellbeing.

• I am on a lifelong learning path in undoing the dominance and privileges that I hold.

• As a marginalized educator, I am developing practices to challenge injustices that devalue me, including within my field and higher education itself.

The opportunity to review broader transformative learning arose through focus groups. One participant stated, “I didn’t know I was so dominant.” We did not explicitly seek this type of intense self-assessment, or self-disclosure. For future renditions of the ISAT, we will seek to broaden available resources to support the difficult emotional dimensions of this learning.

When we consider whether or not participants shifted their worldviews, and reflect a deep form of TL, we first recognize that we did not design this research with TL foregrounded. To achieve this, we intend to broaden the efficacy survey to better include shifts in worldviews such as follows: “I need to challenge the colonial dimensions of higher education” We would also expand elements of TL in the ISAT, perhaps adding a twelfth domain to address the range of cognitive, behavioral, emotional, ideological, spiritual and psychological changes [Curry-Stevens, 2007] that accompany TL among educators.

Given the importance of disorienting dilemmas in TL, we note that the training included researchers’ own teaching dilemmas and their unsettling of colonization and resettling in equity and decolonization. For example, one researcher shared their ambivalence about “aiming to have all students pass their course.” They knew this is a colonizer role, but they had harshly judged some student behaviors and did not want them in the field. In another example, instructors recognized the importance of student collaboration (as culturally responsive teaching) but thought this was academic misconduct. In both cases, participants came to see how their dominant cultures of merit and individuality were embedded in the institution and thus opened their worldview to the university’s embeddedness in colonial values and practices.

TL research details movement along Bloom’s taxonomy (demonstrated among students), greater engagement in one’s learning, permanent shifts in worldviews (versus temporary), reductions in prejudice, and deepening one’s relational capacity. As a result, we recognize its compatibility with the pedagogical approaches we already prioritize. We intend to move firmly and explicitly towards integrating TL with other approaches, becoming an explicit goal rather than its current status as an outcome associated with existing strategies. This will require more attention to the disorienting dilemmas (and being more intentional in forwarding these within the training), and to support the range of possible responses to this unsettling.

Research Limitations and Challenges

This study has several limitations that can impact the relevance of the study. We are studying our own intervention, which risks potential confirmation bias. We are deeply involved with the intervention, which could result in overly positive findings. The influence of our personal positionalities and identities are likely to be negligible given the diversity within our research team as we engaged in deep ongoing reflection. This limited viewpoint may result in disregarding alternative explanations or variables that could influence the ultimate outcomes.

Anticipating these constraints, we used data triangulation and included quantitative data to improve reliability. We also used researcher triangulation, so multiple researchers with various expertise and diverse backgrounds were involved in data collection and analysis. These strengthened the rigor and trustworthiness of our study.

Geographically (and thus culturally and politically) the study reflects Canadian experiences as just two participants were from the USA. Factors such as institutional culture, student demographics, and academic conventions can vary widely, impacting the applicability of the findings beyond the specific context of the study. Researchers and participants may be embedded within the university culture and dynamics, which will influence our interpretations and conclusions.

Another limitation is the emphasis on participants’ self-assessment of their efficacy in this area. Notably absent is input from students, who are the primary end users of educational practices and policies. Therefore, the study lacks crucial insights from students into their experiences, needs, and perspectives regarding equity and decolonization within the classroom. Students' voices are essential for understanding how educational practices impact their learning, sense of belonging, and overall educational outcomes. Our next research study will include student perspectives on the effectiveness of participating faculty.

Next Steps in the Research

Six insights emerge from this study that guide our subsequent studies: (1) gather student perspectives on their experiences of faculty practices, (2) address the unique challenges facing racialized faculty such as bias and discrimination, isolation and exclusion, microaggressions, unequal workloads and opportunities, and emotional and mental health strain, (3) provide ongoing support for faculty who participate in the study, (4) integrate examples on “how to” in terms of implementation, (5) add a whole department to see if greater systems change can be generated, and finally (6) deepen attention to the alignment of participants’ journeys with decolonization, anti-racism and anti-oppression, culturally responsive teaching, and transformative learning. We recognize that the requirement to make syllabus improvements contributes to attrition, but we plan to retain this requirement as it is a tangible metric to assess results, as well as being a clear link to student experiences. To address attrition, we will create a second level of engagement with participants, and include those who do not do the syllabus revisions in the efficacy survey and also will assess their ISAT and their action plans.

Our intentions align with numerous messages in the literature: two scoping reviews (Ash & Maguire, 2024; Fallon et al., 2024) found that none of the studies included students’ experiences of belonging, classroom climate or relationships with teachers, or any student-specific outcomes. This is an essential affirmation for future steps in our own research. So too are our plans a response to scholars who identify the need for systems change to address racism (Devine & Ash, 2022; Hartwell et al., 2017; Kishimoto, 2016; Lopez & Jean-Marie, 2021; Wolbring & Nguyen, 2023).

Conclusion

Our study shows that moderate to significant improvements in faculty’s ability to implement equity and decolonization into their teaching can be nurtured with a relatively short intervention, alongside practical implementation suggestions, and expectations to improve a syllabus and an action plan for future enhancements. Signals exist in our data that participating faculty have entered into, or deepened their engagement in a transformative learning journey, being drawn to the values and intentions of critical and anti-colonial elements of the journey, as well as critical self-reflection, plans for deeper learning, and practice improvement to increase the academic success of racialized students. In summary, this approach holds potential to widen the range of professors’ efforts to integrate equity and decolonization into their teaching. The study emphasizes the importance of linking education, awareness, resource availability, support, and making use of learnings by implementing them in immediate and future activities. We found, ultimately, that gains were made in educator’s confidence and skills. Faculty begin these improvements during the study, although retention and ongoing application are not yet known. To date, we have some examples of greater student inclusion and belonging, and we intend to hear from students themselves as we continue this research.

We are optimistic about the prognosis of interventions that integrate training, resource availability, intention development, syllabus improvements, and ongoing support for faculty to expand their capacity for anti-racist, anti-colonial, power-shared, and culturally responsive teaching. Faculty were motivated to improve their teaching; closing with a participant’s words: “This told me to go do changes, instead of learn more!”

Footnotes

Author Note

Portions of these findings were presented at multiple conferences in Canada and the USA.

• EDI Webinar Series with the Statistical Society of Canada, March 14, 2025, online.

• EDII Speakers’ Series on Decolonization, Anti-Racism and Culturally Responsive Learning in Teaching, August 22, 2024, online.

• National Conference on Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education, June 2, 2023, New Orleans, LA.

• 7th International Conference for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment, October 5, 2023, Chicago, IL.

• Canadian Association of Social Work Education, June 1, 2023, Toronto, ON.

• University of Guelph Teaching and Learning Institute, May 18, 2023, Guelph, ON.

• Association of Leadership Conference, July 17, 2023, Nashville, TN.

ORCID iD

Ann Curry-Stevens

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by Wilfried Laurier University (WLU) internal grant, WLU Teaching and Learning and WLU-VPA office.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Abacioglu

Volman

Fischer

(2020). Teachers’ multicultural attitudes and perspective taking abilities as factors in culturally responsive teaching. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 736–752. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12328

Absolon

(2019). Decolonizing education and educators’ decolonizing. Intersectionalities: A Global Journal of Social Work Analysis, Research, Polity and Practice, 7(1), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.48336/IJUFBE8541

Arao

Clemens

(2013). From safe spaces to brave spaces: A new way to frame dialogue around diversity and social justice. In Landreman

(Ed.), The art of effective facilitation: Reflections from social justice educators (pp. 135–150). Stylus.

Aronson

Laughter

(2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066

Ash

Maguire

(2024). A scoping review of diversity training for teachers: The potential for school psychology. School Psychology Review, 53(4), 382–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2023.2175585

Attas

(2019). Strategies for settler decolonization: Decolonial pedagogies in a popular music analysis course. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49(1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v49i1.188281

Bartanen

Grissom

(2021). School principal race, teacher racial diversity, and student achievement. Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 218–286. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.58.4.0218-9328R2

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun

Clarke

(2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage Publications.

10.

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (Ser. Introducing qualitative methods). Sage Publications.

11.

Cheng

Curry-Stevens

Huang

Aquilina

Patel

(2024). Faculty of Social Work’s Climate Survey 2024. Wilfrid Laurier University.

12.

Chin

Quinn

Dhaliwal

Lovison

(2020). Bias in the air: A nationwide exploration of teachers’ implicit racial attitudes, aggregate bias, and student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 49(8), 566–578. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x20937240

13.

Chrona

(2023). Wayi Wah! Indigenous pedagogies: An act for reconciliation and anti-racist education. Portage & Main Press.

14.

Clark

Zygmunt

(2014). A close encounter with personal bias: Pedagogical implications for teacher education. The Journal of Negro Education, 83(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.83.2.0147

15.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge.

16.

Cope

D. G.

(2014). Methods and meanings: Credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(1), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.89-91

17.

Cote-Meek

(2014). Colonized classrooms: Racism, trauma and resistance in post-secondary education. Fernwood.

18.

Curry-Stevens

(2007). New forms of transformative education: Pedagogy for the privileged. Journal of Transformative Education, 5(1), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344607299394

19.

Devine

Ash

(2022). Diversity training goals, limitations, and promise: A review of the multidisciplinary literature. Annual Review of Psychology, 73(1), 403–429. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-060221-122215

20.

Egalite

A. J.

Kisida

(2018). The effects of teacher match on students’ academic perceptions and attitudes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(1), 59–81. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373717714056

21.

Fallon

Robinson-Link

Womack

Alba

Sunda

Ballard

Veiga

Johnson

(2024). Learning to decenter whiteness in schools through teacher professional development: A systematic review. School Psychology Review, 53(4), 400–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2023.2194236

22.

Freire

(1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Pantheon.

23.

Fuentes

M. A.

Zelaya

D. G.

Madsen

J. W.

(2021). Rethinking the course syllabus: Considerations for promoting equity, diversity, and inclusion. Teaching of Psychology, 48(1), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320959979

24.

Gay

(2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice. Teachers College Press.

25.

Gay

(2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.

26.

Government of Canada . (2019). Dimensions: Equity, diversity and inclusion Canada. https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/InterAgency-Interorganismes/EDI-EDI/Dimensions-Charter_Dimensions-Charte_eng.asp

27.

Guest

MacQueen

K. M.

Namey

E. E.

(2012). Applied thematic analysis. Sage Publications.

28.

Harrell

S. P.

(2000). A multidimensional conceptualization of racism-related stress: Implications for the well-being of people of color. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087722

29.

Hart

C. M. D.

(2020). An honors teacher like me: Effects of access to same-race teachers on Black students’ advanced-track enrollment and performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(2), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373719898470

30.

Hartwell

Cole

Donovan

Greene

Storms

Williams

(2017). Breaking down silos: Teaching for equity, diversity, and inclusion across disciplines. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 39(Special Issue), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.55671/0160-4341.1009

31.

Hill

A. L.

(2012). Culturally responsive teaching: An investigation of effective practices for African American learners. (Publication No. 3549438) [Doctoral dissertation, Loyola University Chicago]. Proquest dissertations and theses.

32.

Hill-Jackson

(2020). Special emphasis recruiting: Intentional recruitment of Black women to the teaching profession. Theory Into Practice, 59(4), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2020.1773187

33.

Hooks

(1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.

34.

Jones

T. M.

Fleming

(2021). A multilevel model of the association between school climate and racial differences in academic outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 58(5), 893–912. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22477

35.

Jones

T. M.

Fleming

Williford

(2020). Racial equity in academic success: The role of school climate and social emotional learning. Research and evaluation team of Seattle public schools. Children & Youth Services Review, 119(3–4), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105623

36.

Kishimoto

(2016). Anti-racist pedagogy: From faculty’s self-reflection to organizing within and beyond the classroom. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(4), 540–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1248824

37.

Kumashiro

(2002). Troubling education: Queer activism and antioppressive pedagogy. Routledge Falmer.

38.

Ladson-Billings

(1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465

39.

Ladson-Billings

(2009). The dream-keepers: Successful teachers of African American children. Jossey-Bass Publishers.

40.

Lim

Galabuzi

G.-E.

(2022). We need more race-based data to tell stories that matter. The Monitor, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. https://monitormag.ca/articles/we-need-more-race-based-data-to-tell-stories-that-matter/

41.

Lindsay

C. A.

Hart

C. M. D.

(2017). Exposure to same-race teachers and student disciplinary outcomes for Black students in North Carolina. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(3), 485–510. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373717693109

42.

Llamas

Nguyen

Tran

(2021). The case for greater faculty diversity: Examining the educational impacts of student-faculty racial/ethnic match. Race Ethnicity and Education, 24(3), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1679759

43.

Lopez

Jean-Marie

(2021). Challenging anti-black racism in everyday teaching, learning, and leading: From theory to practice. Journal of School Leadership, 31(1–2), 50–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684621993115

44.

Mathieu

Fotsing

Akinbobola

Shipeolu

Crosse

Thomas

Denis-LeBlanc

Gueye

(2022). The quest for greater equity: A national cross-sectional study of the experiences of Black Canadian medical students. CMAJ Open, 10(4), E937–E944.

45.

Mena

Quina

(Eds.). (2019). Integrating multiculturalism and intersectionality into the psychology curriculum: Strategies for instructors . American Psychological Association.

46.

National Equity Project . (n.d.). Culturally responsive teaching. https://www.nationalequityproject.org/culturally-responsive-teaching

47.

New America . (2019). Integration of CRT into state professional teaching standards. https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/reports/culturally-responsive-teaching/integration-of-crt-in-state-professional-teaching-standards/

48.

Pease

(2022). Undoing privilege: Unearned advantage and systemic injustice in an unequal world. Zed Books.

49.

Pellissier

Siluk

Flynn

Kanaan

(2022). Approaching equity, diversity, inclusion, and social justice education as imperative to engineering curricula. In Proceedings of the Canadian engineering education association (CEEA). https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.vi.15924

50.

Pirbjao-Illich

Pete

Martin

(2017). Culturally responsive pedagogy: Working towards decolonization, indigeneity and interculturalism. Palgrave Macmillan.

51.

Rojo

Ramjan

George

Hunt

Heaton

Kaur

Salamonson

(2023). Applying Mezirow's transformative learning theory into nursing and health professional education programs: A scoping review. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 18(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2022.09.013

52.

Schachner

M. K.

(2019). From equality and inclusion to cultural pluralism–evolution and effects of cultural diversity perspectives in schools. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1326378

53.

Stahl

N. A.

King

J. R.

(2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1), 26–28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45381095

54.

Sue

D. W.

Lin

Torino

Capodilupo

Rivera

(2009). Racial microaggressions and difficult dialogues in the classroom. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(2), 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014191

55.

Sull

Zweig

(2022). Toxic culture is driving the great resignation. MIT Sloan Management Review. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/toxic-culture-is-driving-the-great-resignation

56.

Tashakkori

Teddlie

(2021). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Sage publications.

57.

Taylor

(2017). Critical reflection and transformative learning: A critical review. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 26(2), 77–95.

58.

Universities Canada . (2019). Equity, diversity and inclusion at Canadian universities: Report on the 2019 national survey. www.univcan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Equity-diversity-and-inclusion-at-Canadian-universities-report-on-the-2019-national-survey-Nov-2019-1.pdf

59.

Van Schalkwyk

Hafler

Brewer

Maley

Margolis

McNamee

Meyer

Peluso

Schmutz

Spak

Davies

(2019). Transformative learning as pedagogy for the health professions: A scoping review. Medical Education, 53(6), 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13804

60.

Weber

Rankin

Malewski

(2022). ‘Do I belong here?’ Students’ service experiences through a lens of campus climate. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered./views/2022/09/20/how-campus-climate-and-student-services-interactions-connect-pinion

61.

Wolbring

Nguyen

(2023). Equity/equality, diversity and inclusion, and other EDI phrases and EDI policy frameworks: A scoping review. Trends in Higher Education, 2(1), 168–237.

62.

Yin

(2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage.

63.

Zambrana

R. E.

Allen

Higginbotham

Mitchell

Perez

D. J.

Villarruel

A. M.

(2020). Equity and inclusion: Effective practices and responsive strategies. A guidebook for college and university leaders. Consortium on Race, Gender and Ethnicity. Retrieved from: https://crge.umd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/SummitGuidebookFinal-June-8-2020.pdf

Building Faculty Efficacy in Teaching: Bringing Equity and Decolonization into Focus