Opinion
SHOHAM GEVA
EDITOR IN CHIEF
CLAIRE BRYAN
AND REGAN DETWILER
EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS
LAURA SCHINAGLE
MANAGING EDITOR
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Thursday, February 11, 2016
Over
the
past
year,
we
representatives in Central Student
Government
have
dedicated
ourselves to serving students.
The time we’ve spent in office
has been filled with everything
from the simple joys of talking
with students on the Diag about
their visions for a more inclusive
university to meeting with faculty
and administration about our
school’s mental-health climate.
In spite of all these positive
experiences on CSG, we must
not overlook the criticisms of
this body, namely that CSG is not
representative of all students. We
know this is a truth difficult to
admit for many, and it is even more
difficult to change. But we also
know that complacency with this
hard truth is unacceptable. It is
with this inspiration to transform
student the voice represented in
CSG that we decided to form a new
party — newMICH.
Our
presidential
and
vice
presidential
candidates,
David
Schafer and Micah Griggs, are
wholeheartedly passionate about
the work that lies ahead to bring
forth new representation. CSG
has long been a body that does not
represent or serve all identities and
students, and it’s time for a CSG
that is representative, inclusive
and productive. It is our hope that
students of different backgrounds,
experiences
and
organizational
involvement will rally under the
banner of newMICH and work
together to champion the causes
of diversity and inclusivity, and
they will collaborate to expand
opportunities for all Wolverines.
We hope to build a newMICH.
However, we believe in more
than buzzwords. We are running
on a series of tangible, actionable
goals and initiatives that we hope to
prioritize next year. Our focus is on
connection, opportunity, student
voice and well-being and safety.
It’s time for a new connection
between
students
and
their
representatives. We seek to create
a leadership scholarship or stipend
so lower income students can take
advantage of the many different and
rewarding extra- and co-curricular
opportunities that currently exist
at University of Michigan. We also
hope to expand CSG support for
student organizations by way of
the Wolverine Consulting Group,
started this year, which provides
consulting services for student
organizations. Our goal is also to
increase the number of available
study spaces during peak midterm
and final exam time and to further
game-day safety by hosting CSG-
sponsored alcohol-free tailgates
that will have food and hydration
stations on South State, Hill and
Packard streets.
It’s
time
to
create
new
opportunity
for
students.
To
make
CSG
a
more
inclusive,
representative and educated space,
newMICH will demand an increase
in minority enrollment, always an
issue of the utmost importance on
campus, and work to improve the
relationship between the University
and
Detroit
Public
Schools.
Additionally, we will work tirelessly
to make all students feel at home
by
establishing
non-traditional,
transfer,
first-generation
and
international student mentorship
programs.
It’s time for CSG to play a big role
in enhancing the voice of freshmen
on campus. First-year students
represent
25
percent
of
the
undergraduate student population
— more than 6,000 students — and
yet they have no guarantee that
their voices will be heard by their
student government. As such, we
hope to set a few seats aside that
first-year students can run for
in the November CSG elections
each year. Additionally, newMICH
will institute a CSG-sponsored
Academic Scholarship Fund so that
some of the burden of expensive
textbooks and coursepacks are
lifted off students.
Lastly,
newMICH
will
fight
to both further and hold the
administration
accountable
for
students’ mental health, because
it’s time for student well-being
and safety to be front and center.
Not only do we plan to call for an
increase in funding for both the
Counseling
and
Psychological
Services and the Sexual Assault
Prevention and Awareness Center,
but we also seek to expand those
invaluable
resources
to
North
Campus and the residence halls,
where their presence is currently
lacking. In addition, newMICH
will fight to increase the training
that faculty and staff undergo in
the areas of mental health and
diversity.
Students’
relationship
with
the
Division
of
Public
Safety and Security must also be
addressed and enhanced, and we
hope to achieve that by creating
an emergency texting and instant
message system between students
and DPSS.
Together,
by
addressing
connection, opportunity, student
voice and well-being and safety,
we hope to make your student
government and the University
as a whole more inclusive and
welcoming. It is our belief that,
at
the
University,
everyone’s
opportunities
should
be
as
limitless as their potential. If
you would like to get involved
with newMICH to either run as a
candidate or be part of the “field
team,”
please
visit
newmich.
com. Our mass meeting will be on
Monday, Feb. 15 at 7 p.m. in the
Weill Hall Room 1110, Gerald Ford
School of Public Policy. It’s time
for change, and we’re excited.
David Schafer and Micah
Griggs are LSA juniors.
DAVID SCHAFER AND MICAH GRIGGS | OP-ED
From your newMICH candidates
I
n 2013, the Being Black at the University
movement, which gained traction through
the #BBUM Twitter campaign, and the
University of Michigan’s
Understanding
Race
theme semester — a blend
of intellectual and cultural
immersion of coursework,
lectures, exhibits, musical
theatre
performances
and so on, enjoyed by
the University and Ann
Arbor
community
at
large — sparked a wave
of
discussions
about
diversity,
equity
and
inclusion
within
the
student population at the University. Notably,
the comments from these conversations
brought about a focused committee to
concentrate resources on creating inclusivity
within the classroom at the University.
In an e-mail exchange with The Michigan
Daily, Dr. Marjorie Horton, the assistant dean
for undergraduate education, who attended
several events, said she was “personally
very disturbed and moved by what students
of color were saying about how race
impacted their academic
experiences in and beyond
the classroom.” In reaction
to these discussions, 14
individuals from the LSA
Undergraduate Education
division,
primarily
directors and senior staff of
undergraduate programs,
formed the LSA Climate
Committee.
Since
its
inception, the committee
has grown to include five
subcommittees and has 50 active members,
including
nine
students.
The
general
committee aims to improve campus climate,
resources and outreach efforts to ensure that
all students, especially those who belong to
underrepresented groups, feel welcomed at
the University.
Horton, Kelly Maxwell, the co-director of
the Intergroup Relations program, and Dr.
Dwight Fontenot, associate director of the
Comprehensive Studies Program, are three
of 12 members of the Inclusive Pedagogies
Committee, which creates classroom content,
curricula and other resources to increase
students’ and faculty’s understanding of
social justice and intergroup dynamics. In the
summer of 2015, the committee filmed a group
of students simulating classroom modules
that would help faculty design inclusive
classrooms that will be published next fall.
These videos, along with a record of comments
from previous focus groups, surveys and other
resources will be compiled into a database for
faculty to access at any time.
All committee members I spoke with are
pleased that the committee has developed
the videos, and have high hopes for its
effectiveness and usability in transferring
pedagogical tactics. However, the committee
still faces several obstacles.
“The largest challenge is to move from
theory to practice,” Fontenot said. “We have
to convince faculty that developing inclusive
classrooms leads to better scholarship and
better classrooms. This is a very hard sell,
especially in the STEM fields.”
STEM fields are not immune to the effects
of a shortage of diversity. If anything, the
undisguised gaps in diversity should compel
STEM professors to ensure that there is
an environment where all students feel
comfortable asking questions, participating
in study groups, and have the tools to
communicate with diverse identities.
Interactions
with
professors
are
some of the most intimate that students
have with the University in general. A
student’s satisfaction with their academic
experiences is largely shaped by the classes
they take and the professors that have
impacted their course of study.
The University’s mission statement says
one of its goals is in “developing leaders and
citizens who will challenge the present and
enrich the future.” A professor has the crucial
responsibility of advancing this mission
statement, promoting critical thinking and
transmitting knowledge to students. Creating
inclusive spaces in the classroom is a perfect
opportunity to do this.
In the process of developing leaders and
citizens of the world, it is inevitable that
uncomfortable and difficult conversations
will transpire, especially if we hope to
make any meaningful change. In a learning
environment such as college, it is essential for
future leaders to know how to navigate these
conversations collaboratively, with respect
and dignity. Classroom environments that
install this framework build the foundations
for academic and personal enrichment.
“Academic excellence can only happen
when there are diverse
voices at every table in
the classroom space that
are actually able to be a
part of these classrooms,”
Maxwell said. Committees
like
the
Inclusive
Pedagogies are imperative
for
students
to
show
their best selves in the
classroom, enriching the
university
environment
they occupy.
Classroom
management
tactics
are
essential
to
creating
inclusive
spaces,
but equally as important in transforming
classroom spaces is the type of material from
which students learn. A diversity of authors
and scholarly works need to be integrated
more frequently and intentionally in course
syllabi. Academic scholarship from a diverse
array of authors is imperative in enriching
a
diversity
of
viewpoints,
experiences
and cultures in the classroom. It is also
encouraging and affirming for students to see
their identity represented and acknowledged
as notable work.
From my own classroom experiences, I
wish some professors knew how to handle
moments of tension and conflict in a classroom
— how to encourage thoughtful commentary
from students without jeopardizing their
safety or well-being. I have been fortunate to
have taken classes that have uplifted authors
and scholars of various races and ethnicities,
genders, socioeconomic backgrounds and
sexualities, though I do not know if the same
could be said for the majority of my peers.
I hope these videos will be widely
utilized by faculty across departments and
academic disciplines, and will not act as a
static repository, but an evolving forum for
sharing the best practices, which improves
campus climate from the inside out. The
Inclusive Pedagogies Committee’s active
work to address diversity, equity and
inclusion is an honest, collaborative effort
to improve campus climate for everyone.
Fontenot summed up how the University
community can support the DEI initiative
perfectly:
“Having
faculty,
staff
and
students working together on these issues is
the only way to build good solutions to the
problems.”
Alexis Farmer can be reached
at akfarmer@umich.edu.
Cultivating inclusive classrooms
Claire Bryan, Regan Detwiler, Caitlin Heenan, Ben Keller,
Minsoo Kim, Payton Luokkala, Aarica Marsh, Anna Polumbo-Levy,
Jason Rowland, Lauren Schandevel, Melissa Scholke,
Rebecca Tarnopol, Ashley Tjhung, Stephanie Trierweiler, Mary
Kate Winn, Derek Wolfe
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
—University President Mark Schlissel said during Tuesday’s Central Student Govern-
ment meeting.
“
NOTABLE QUOTABLE
A significant fraction of students make it
through their four or five years of undergrad
without really taking advantange of this
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to learn
from each other.”
ALEXIS
FARMER
I
n my last column, I wrote
about
the
odd,
pervasive
silence with which we regard
each
other
as
we
go
about
our days on this
campus. Burying
ourselves
in
our
gadgets,
we seek shelter
from
having
to
interact,
from having to
be
vulnerable
with our peers
and
colleagues,
because of how
tightly
this
environment makes us hold onto
those whom we do consider dear
friends.
In the time since that article’s
publication, I have been pondering
why this is the case, trying to locate
precisely which aspects and areas
of University of Michigan life help
to foster this atmosphere most
forcefully. It seems to me that the
way classes and classrooms are
structured plays an integral role in
this cold, silent process.
I am talking specifically about
lecture classes, which, as an LSA
sophomore, I have found to be the
most common format to educate
University students. On a basic
level, these classes foster little
interaction between professor and
student — one is rendered passive:
a statistic, a filled seat.
On
a
more
nuanced
level,
though, the physical structure
of classrooms can inform these
classes’ deleteriously ostracizing
and
desocializing
effects
on
individuals, influencing the greater
campus atmosphere. The seats are
most often set up so students do not
face each other; instead, looking
forward at the only person worth
seeing — the professor, who will
proceed to plant information in
your head — information that you
are, by virtue of the classroom’s size
and the bleary, dreary atmosphere,
discouraged to question or to
modify. It’s as if you have nothing
to learn from your peers or from
yourself, for you are just another
student, a kowtowing student.
Instead, look at and learn from this
polished, handsome professor, for
she is the only person worthy of
your attention in this classroom.
These classes, at the beginning of
the year, most often begin with the
professor reviewing the syllabus
with their students — a ritual I have
always found confusing and oddly
belittling, as if I am not able to read
and comprehend such a simple,
mundane document on my own.
In highlighting future deadlines
throughout the term, the professor
most often will discuss how one
can go about getting a good grade
— study for the exams, write a
relevant paper. Rarely anything
about participation. What kind of
a long-lasting, real education can
actually happen when the student
remains dormant, seated, silent?
And
in
this
classroom
environment,
introduced
by
an invitation to be a passive,
disengaged student, I often find
myself taking my computer out of
my backpack, not because I want
to, but because this is what my
peers are doing; this seems to be
the standard method. Inevitably,
logging in to a computer means
logging out of the conversation in
front of me, as distractions of all
sorts berate me as soon as I lift
the screen. I know this long before
I take out my gadget. I feel my
stomach turning as I do it.
But I am torn because it’s as
if the structure of these classes
encourage distracting oneself, only
prompting me to take notes when
the professor begins a point with,
“This will be on your exam … ”
A student who does this, paying
attention for just a few minutes
every class, might very well get an
A on their transcript. And in this
world, that grade translates to an
unmitigated success. Is this how to
measure the value and effectiveness
of education?
The attitude of conforming to
the behavior of my peers represents
the golden rule in these classrooms,
where students seldom do the
things that would make them, for
a moment, stick out: ask questions
of their professors, momentarily
halting
this
monotonous
and
ineffective process of professor
talking at student and student
feigning attention. But it is in these
moments
of
vulnerability
that
we learn: about ourselves, about
each other. It is in these moments
of asking for clarification that
professors are actually doing their
job, which is to teach, not just to
speak or to present slides to you,
slides that you could just as well
watch on your own time.
Is it a coincidence that students
act
with
an
Armageddon-like
urgency to get out of the classroom
at the ends of these classes? Who
could possibly be stimulated and
excited by this type of academic
work? But this reaction, too, is an
intentional element of the process.
For stimulation and excitement are
not, in this context, the goal of these
classes; the student, instead, ought
to be obedient and silent, sitting at
a computer tapping furiously, eyes
on the end-of-term letter marking
that will determine the success or
failure of their time here.
In a social context outside of the
lecture halls, our eyes similarly rest
not on the present, not on the scores
of students who roam around us as
we walk along the Diag, and all the
social possibility that lies there —
no, no, no. Instead, we direct our
focus only to those circles in which
we are comfortable, those people
who represent that end-of-term
letter-marking — as long as those
relationships are sturdy, I have not
failed any social contract.
In both an academic and a social
context, this is an exceedingly
irresponsible way to inhabit our
space. But it is the lifestyle that our
University breeds and promotes;
we are not taught to live presently
— instead of engaging fully with
our academic work, consider the
exam, the final grade. Instead of
striking up a conversation with any
of the dozen peers sitting around
you during Michigan time, sink
into your phone, catch up on your
friends’ GroupMe.
The silence with which we treat
each other begins in our lecture
classrooms, where conformity and
silence are the rule, and asking a
question the exception.
Isaiah Zeavin-Moss can be
reached at izeavinm@umich.edu.
Lectured into silence
ISAIAH
ZEAVIN-MOSS
Classroom
management tactics
are essential to
creating inclusive
spaces.