Supporting Faculty in Culturally Responsive Online Teaching: Transcending Challenges and Seizing Opportunities

Supporting Faculty in Culturally Responsive Online Teaching: Transcending Challenges and Seizing Opportunities

Isis Artze-Vega, Patricia Elizabeth Delgado
Copyright: © 2019 |Pages: 19
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-7802-4.ch002
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$33.75
List Price: $37.50
10% Discount:-$3.75
TOTAL SAVINGS: $3.75

Abstract

Only recently have we begun to ask what it means for online educators to work at proactively establishing culturally responsive pedagogy and learning experiences in their online classrooms. This chapter contributes to this dialogue by focusing on upon the work of those charged with supporting faculty: faculty developers, including instructional designers. After examining the current state of faculty development in the area of culturally responsive pedagogy online and the challenges therein, the authors offer an institutional case study illustrating several mechanisms through which one substantial Hispanic-serving institution has supported faculty in this critical, challenging work. Although faculty development regarding cultural responsiveness is fraught with challenges, this chapter illustrates manners in which the intersection of online professional development and cultural responsiveness brings powerful opportunities to engage and empower both faculty and students, and shares recommendations for doing so.
Chapter Preview
Top

Introduction

Growing interest in culturally responsive pedagogy and learning experiences in online classrooms stems from a variety of sources, perhaps most prominently from the convergence of two enrollment trends. Taking the United States as an example (yet recognizing these trends also hold true outside the U.S.), enrollments in distance education courses saw an 11% increase from 2012-2015, while the diversity of postsecondary students increased dramatically during the past several decades (NCES, 2017). As Ginsberg and Wlodkowski (2009) synthesize the impact of the latter trend, “Colleges and universities have more learners than ever before whose perceptions and ways of making meaning vary from one another and from the instructor. Influenced by global forces and unprecedented patterns of migration and immigration, skillful postsecondary teaching has become a highly nuanced endeavor” (p. 1). In essence, then, the need for culturally responsive online teaching mirrors the growing, broader interest in and recognition of the need for inclusion and cultural responsiveness in postsecondary teaching, and reflects the fact that increasing numbers of diverse students are taking courses online.

Certainly, securing an understanding of students and their distinctive backgrounds and strengths is a critical step in learning-centered teaching (Doyle, 2011), increases in online enrollments provide an important impetus for additional work in cultural responsiveness. However, it is important to couple this somewhat pragmatic rationale with an equity-minded motivation for attending to cultural responsiveness in online teaching: Although online education has been hailed as a beacon of democracy, and has, in fact, broadened access to education across the globe, burgeoning research suggests that biases surface in online courses (Baker, Dee, Evans, & John, 2018; Conway & Bethune, 2015). Some institutions have also witnessed lower performance in online courses for students from underserved groups (Wilson & Allen, 2011). As Smith and Ayers (2006) describe this dichotomy, “Distance learning reflects both promise and predicament” (p. 402). Recognizing that it offers unprecedented access to education and unprecedented opportunities to showcase cultural values, varieties, and strengths; they warn that “the pro-Western bias inherent in the technological foundations of distance learning presents an obstacle both to access and to understanding” (Smith & Ayers, 2006, p. 402). The expansion of online course enrollment therefore has the potential to exacerbate completion gaps in colleges and universities—gaps that, in turn, threaten the future of democracy. The nation depends on an educated, informed citizenry, and a college degree is increasingly seen as “the minimum ticket to get in the door to any job” (Selingo, 2017). In this regard, culturally responsive teaching emerges not as a trend or innovation but rather, to quote one of its leading scholars, as “one of our most powerful tools for helping students find their way out of the [achievement] gap” (Hammond, 2015, p. 15).

Key Terms in this Chapter

Backward Course Design: A course design practice in which one starts with the end course goals and then designs assessments and activities that align with the goals.

Hybrid: Otherwise known as “blended,” hybrid courses describe courses in which some traditional face-to-face time has been replaced by activities completed elsewhere, often online.

Deficit-Based Approaches: Deficit-based approaches focus on the perceived weaknesses of individuals or groups, such that the individuals or groups become viewed as “the problem.”

Educational Developer: Individuals who help colleges and universities function effectively as teaching and learning communities.

Instructional Designer: Although responsibilities vary, instructional design involves examining the target audience and creating, selecting or suggesting learning experiences aligned with this audience.

Asset-Based Approaches: Asset-based approaches shift the focus from individuals or groups’ perceived limitations or weaknesses to the resources and capacities inherent to them or associated with their lived experiences.

Faculty Developer: Individuals whose focus is on supporting individual instructor to enhance their teaching skills.

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset