Post #9, Reflection on Teaching: Diversity and Inclusivity Issues

This is a post from a MOOC I am taking.  The prompt was "How can the concepts of identity, privilege, power and positionality manifest differently in the face-to-face versus online learning setting"?

Well, to be incredibly basic, in f2f we can see everyone, so we and the students can’t hide in F2f. I am reminded of the old New Yorker cartoon of two dogs on computers. One says, "On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog." Honestly, in online, a student can make up a whole persona if they like, as long as they do the work. That's somewhat harder f2f.

And that lets our latent prejudices come out.  And we can have latent prejudices about any number of things, many of which we are not fully conscious. That is somewhat slower to happen in online, but it still can. If you use video, if a person has an ethnic name, if they tell their story (I had an online student in jail last semester), if, if, if . . . prejudices and biases come out, and there’s always a possibility that a latent prejudice (or not so latent) can get in the way of treating the student fully like a learner and giving them the opportunities and access they need.

Beyond that, power and status is always in the background as the faculty member. The class makeup often makes a difference. For example, I teach an emajor course in business communication, with students in their 30s and older. They have pretty rich, and sometimes impressive, professional backgrounds and life experiences. I consider them equals and we are working through the material, I'm just further down the trail, so to speak. With them, I'm ready to be Barbara Tucker. With 18-year-olds in COMM 11110, not at all--I am Dr. or Mrs.  or Prof. Tucker. BUT, in both cases, I still have a certain level of power in regard (only) to their level of success (grade) in the course. In neither case do I want to parade it or exploit it, and I do what I can to facilitate by answering questions (as opposed to the "it's in the syllabus" answer, which can be snarky). I also, especially early in the course, assign a lot of "Revise and resubmit" feedback so they know there is a standard of written or oral communication to be met. That's a measure of power (withholding a grade) but it would have to be a bad grade because they have not followed directions or met the standards set forward in the course.

 

In both cases, identity, to me, is a complex, multifaceted reality. To pick just one seems to me to ignore many others, and to totalize a person. This is a potentially offensive opinion, so we can talk about it, maybe. Identity is a lot about choice, so I respect what students and colleagues choose.

Privilege is the one where old white people like me get uncomfortable because they want to point to how hard they worked to get where they are, and that people don't know them just because they are white and middle class and don't know their backgrounds, etc.  That is where folks can get defensive and distrustful, and I think it's the place to start, really.  There are levels of privilege. A fellow student at Georgia State 15 years ago told me I was oppressed because I was a woman. I rejected that.  I have a great deal of privilege and don't want to think of myself as oppressed.  He said I just didn't recognize it!  But it got me thinking about this subject. 

 So back to the original question, online classes are not "bias" or "judgment" free zones. We should not walk into them with that misperception because it might influence us without our awareness, and awareness I think is the foundation of this subject.