�鶹Ӱ��

From the collected reflections, a working definition of inclusive teaching at Pomona emerges that is quite like the one from 2021:

• Inclusive teaching builds community, is student-centered, cares for the whole student, teaches critical content, and is accessible to all students.

Eight primary themes were identified to encompass the practices that instructors consider as they work to create inclusive teaching environments:

1. Grading & student assessment – low stakes, formative assignments; multiple opportunities for feedback, reflection, revision, and reassessment; alternative assessment schemes (mastery, collaborative, ungrading, etc.)
2. Course content – including works with a diversity of authors and perspectives; introducing students to field-based critical discourse and critique; new courses focused on DEI issues or underrepresented voices.
3. Outside the classroom learning – multiple office hours; one-on-one meetings; field trips; research.
4. Course materials – affordable and available to all; multi-modal delivery; inclusive syllabus language.
5. Peer support – collaborative learning; group work; students teaching some class material; peer mentors.
6. Classroom practices – small group discussion; randomness; quick response to microaggressions; instructor bringing whole self to class; sharing relevant background and experiences; being honest and vulnerable.
7. Student input – gather information about students; solicit regular feedback; timely response to feedback; student agency in some class decisions and guidelines.
8. Language and tone –inclusive language in syllabus; discuss inclusivity with students; expect students to know one another; more flexibility; careful word choice.

Instructors were asked to reflect on any challenges or costs that they associated with inclusive teaching. There were many individualized responses, but a few themes did emerge:

1. Time – time-consuming; hard to balance with other responsibilities; struggle to attend workshops, etc.
2. Grading – time-intensive methods; not scalable; concerns about grade inflation/compression.
3. Disparities on campus – challenges for and with contingent faculty; difficult reconciling exclusivity of admissions, campus environment, and underpaid employees with fostering an inclusive space.
4. Professional value – questioning whether DEI work is valued; comes at a cost to scholarly work.
5. Individual student needs – balancing support and recognition of students as individuals with fairness; challenge meeting all student needs.
6. Assessment – difficulty assessing inclusivity; not sure this can be measured.

In comparing the reflections collected this year and in 2021, two key differences emerged. The first involved a new theme related to labor conditions at the College that was not present in prior reflections. Second, while the theme of student-centered work was present in the 2021 reflections, it was noted that there is a change in how instructors talk about student involvement in their course, with students having more knowledge, agency, and responsibility than was presented previously.

This report is for Pomona instructors, and we imagine it can help instructors in the following ways:

• Spotlight the time devoted and productive efforts already taking place on campus.
• Promote conversations: What resonates? What is missing? What do instructors need?
• Provide a resource that departments can use to help mentor colleagues as they prepare for tenure and promotion, and a framework for departments to discuss their promotion and tenure guidelines.
• Provide a resource for faculty considering changes to individual courses and departments considering revisions to their overall curriculum.

These individual reflections should initiate broader community conversations about the College’s commitments to DEI, for example identifying resources, tools, professional development opportunities, and policies that may address labor conditions and other challenges that instructors face. We charge the College to think about how we grow from here.

• There is value in instructors reflecting on their teaching and DEI practices. The Dean of the College, the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, the Executive Committee, the Teaching and Learning Committee, and others should determine how the reflections fit in with professional development and assessment of faculty teaching (formative and summative). Could a reflective exercise be required of all continuing faculty? Could this reflective exercise have a place in the promotion and tenure process?
• The Dean of the College, the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, the Executive Committee, the Research Committee, and others should consider how to integrate DEI commitments throughout the entire identity of Pomona faculty inclusive of their scholarship, service, and teaching. Practicing inclusion should not be “another thing” that instructors are asked to do – but a foundational aspect of all their work.
• Practicing inclusive teaching, as defined by Pomona instructors, is labor intensive. The Dean of the College, the Executive Committee, the Work-Family Committee, and others should consider labor conditions on campus and how to achieve equitable flourishing for all instructors.
• The Dean of the College, the Executive Committee, the Inclusive Excellence Committee, the Teaching and Learning Committee, and others should identify and create needed resources for continuing instructor professional development. These committees should also identify and address the needs of the instructors and of departments for assessment of inclusive teaching.

This summary is based on a detailed report of the inclusive teaching reflections from 28 Pomona faculty members representing all three college divisions, and can be found on the Dean’s Office Sakai site. This report was prepared by Sara Hollar, Director for the Claremont Colleges Center for Teaching and Learning. The Institute for Inclusive Excellence, the Inclusive Excellence Committee, and the HHMI Inclusive Excellence Team would like to thank Sara for her thorough analysis and for preparing this thoughtful review of her findings.