Welcome to the Reinvention Collaborative’s Town Hall with Claude Steele and Mary Murphy, featuring the Student Experience Project. My name is Steve Dandenau, I serve as the Executive Director of the Reinvention Collaborative, a Boyer-inspired national consortium of research universities dedicated to innovation and excellence in undergraduate education I also serve as Associate Provost at Colorado State University, the host of the Reinvention Collaborative. We are delighted that you have joined us for this 90 minute event What we have in store is roughly an hour of this conversation between Dr. Steele and Murphy followed by case studies featuring the Student Experience Project in action at the University of Toledo, Morgan State University and the University of North Carolina Charlotte. We’ll conclude with an overview of the Student Experience Project, or the SEP. While the chat function is enabled during this town hall, we will not unfortunately be taking questions and answers. For initial orientation let me share this slide that you see about the SEP. The aforementioned universities plus the University of New Mexico, Portland State University, the University of Colorado-Denver, Colorado State and peer learning network of 10 additional institutions including Morgan State have worked for over a year to explore how best to create equitable student-centered learning environments by means of social psychological approaches, tools, and resources. We couldn’t do this, however, without the help of experts in the field And speaking of experts, let me segue to our opening conversation by introducing Mary Murphy. Mary Murphy is the Herman B. Wells Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences and the Associate Vice Provost for Diversity and Inclusion at Indiana University She is co-founder of the College Transition Collaborative, a research practice partnership focused on using social psychological research to create more equitable learning environments in higher education. Finally, Mary is also one of our SEP lead scholars as much of her research has created the evidence base for how faculty and institutions create cultures of growth equity and belonging in higher education. I also want to mention that Mary has a personal connection to Claude Steele as she was a former graduate student of his at Stanford and they continue to collaborate today. So the conversation we will hear this afternoon is really one that will be happening between two good friends. First Mary will present a bit of research and evidence base for why the student experience matters and then we’ll transition to the conversation between Mary and Claude Steele. Mary, thanks so much for being here. I’ll turn it over to you. It’s my pleasure, thank you Steve. And welcome everybody, we’re so happy to have you today. Um I’d like to start uh, kicking us off this afternoon um with some words from um Dr. Claude Steele Um Claude I think in this, in this quote uh that he wrote back in 1997, prescient in many ways, um you know really describes the issues and the um challenges that we face today, that we’re dealing with in the Student Experience Project and that we’re dealing with really as a country. Um Claude said this, he said from an observer standpoint the situations of a boy and girl in a math classroom or of a black student and a white student in any classroom are essentially the same The teacher is the same, the textbooks are the same, and in better classrooms these students are treated the same. Is it possible then that they should still experience the classroom differently, so differently in fact as to significantly affect their performance and achievement there This is the central question, and of course what we know is that research shows that the answer to Steele’s question is yes, in many college settings we know that students of color and financially stressed students are far less likely to experience identity safety, a sense of belonging or instructors who effectively communicate their confidence in students potential. And what we know is that the student experience gap contributes to the broader opportunity gap because these affirming experiences of identity safety, of belonging and of growth mindset cultures are crucial for students abilities to engage and persist in college So I’m going to share a little before we get to the conversation about three to five minutes or so here, um about the research base that informs the Student Experience Project and that underlies this conversation that’s to come with Dr. Steele. So let’s get right to it. One of the key insights of

the Student Experience Project is the importance of taking students perspectives and understanding classrooms through their experiences. Now what we know about college students from decades of research is when they enter college and at transitional moments throughout their college career, students are likely to ask them, at least themselves, one of two questions, oftentimes more than that, but at least these questions: “do I belong here?” and “can I do it?” and students’ answers to these questions really affect the degree to which they reach out for support when they struggle or when they’re- whether they persist in college and ultimately graduate, and these answers are especially important from students from structurally disadvantaged backgrounds. How students answer these questions, we know, shapes their behavior and their outcome So this is the model we’ve been using in the SEP coming from many of our work, uh, much of our work uh here uh today. Um so what we know is that when students belong to an underrepresented group and they experience a challenge like critical feedback, a low exam score, or feeling like they don’t belong, their friends took off without them and they feel a little lonely, um if students believe this experience is not typical, maybe it’s something about me, maybe it’s something about my group, they start to have a particular psychological interpretation. Maybe we don’t belong here, maybe I can’t fit in, maybe I might not be able to be successful. This results in a withdrawal from the social and academic environment which of course results in worse achievement, persistence and completion, and sort of a negative recursive cycle. However, we also know that this is possible to reverse. If students believe that these kinds of worries and setbacks; critical feedback, low exam scores, it’s actually pretty typical and normal, and it’s normal to wonder whether you belong in a new context, that it’s common to go through things like this and to overcome them, then we see a different pattern of behavior; sustained engagement in the social and academic environment and higher achievement and greater persistence, and this can cause a positive recursive cycle. So what we know is that over three decades of research in social psychology, education and brain science really demonstrate that when the learning environments are designed to promote a sense of belonging and inclusion, support of student experience, students are more likely to take advantage of the other resources the campuses are likely to provide. So of course what can institutions do? This is a core question in our Student Experience Project and I’m just going to wet your appetite here. We’re going to talk a little bit more after the conversation about the Student Experience Project, but one of the things we know institutions can do is to attend to their institutional mindset culture. You might know the idea of mindset from Carol Dweck and her research on the growth and the fixed mindset The growth mindset means that it’s the belief that anyone can grow their abilities through hard work, strategies, and help from others, whereas the fixed mindset holds that you either have it or you don’t. It’s sort of relatively fixed and what we know from decades of research is that when students have a fixed or growth mindset it affects how they respond to challenges, how they respond to feedback. But the newest work here really focuses on institutions and faculty and examines how faculty create and communicate what we call the mindset culture of their classes So for example faculty say, you know, that standard: “look to your left, look to your right, only one of you is going to be here at the end of the term.” or “if you’re not a science person you should consider dropping this class.” This causes students to feel like they or people like them might not belong in that setting, whereas if they communicate more of a growth mindset culture: “this course builds on material from the past. If you need to review this concept, I can connect you to some resources to get there.” or “it’s normal to be challenged by material at some point, please reach out when that happens to you for help.” This communicates to students that all students can learn and grow and that their instructor is really an advocate or an ally in their growth and development. So what we see in this work is that perceiving a professor, an advisor, an administrator or indeed a whole institution as endorsing more of these fixed mindset beliefs creates a context of stereotype threat putting students from structurally disadvantaged backgrounds at risk of confirming negative stereotypes about their group. How would we know that this actually happens? We should see the effects of stereotype threats such that underrepresented racial and ethnic minority students should underperform relative to white and asian students but really more so in the context of these fixed mindsets and less in the context of the growth faculty mindset In one study that we just published last year, we did an institution-wide study to look exactly at this question and what we found is that students perform worse in classes taught by faculty who self-reported more fixed mindset beliefs. You can see that in the dark blue on the left compared to the light blue on the right. Moreover, and consistent with the stereotype threat hypothesis,

we found that the racialized outcome gap in this class here as course grade at the end of the term was twice as large in courses taught by faculty who self-reported more fixed mindset beliefs Another way to think about this is of course that the racialized achievement gap is halved in courses taught by faculty who endorse more growth mindset beliefs. So then of course the question for us in SEP is how do we do this? How do we create these growth and fixed mindset contexts and how can we actually support faculty and institutions to create more growth mindset cultures? So we want to know what’s it like to be a student there. Well we got all the course evaluations from those 600 classes and 15,000 students and we find that the instructors who communicate more growth mindset beliefs are more likely to motivate students to do their best work, emphasize learning and development over the course of the entire term, students are more likely to recommend them, and what we see is that actually it doesn’t take more time, it’s not perceived as more difficult or more rigorous um or less rigorous when faculty endorse a fixed or a growth mindset It just is more motivating. So what we see is that these growth mindset instructors seem to emphasize learning and development, motivate students to do their best, and yet these contexts are equally time intensive and rigorous. Now of course we want to focus on students’ experiences and that’s really where Claude’s work really speaks um I think the most to understanding student experience In this study across four universities we found that perceiving your stem instructor to endorse more fixed mindset beliefs led to a host of greater negative psychological experiences in that professor’s class. In the moments in their class. Through experience sampling they felt less belonging, more evaluative concerns, greater feelings of being an imposter in the setting and more negative affects. And this of course has consequences for things we really care about like lower course engagement, lower interest in the professor’s class and also in the professor’s discipline more broadly, and finally of course lower course performance. So what we see is that when learning environments communicate instructors and institutions have a growth mindset of intelligence, students feel more supported, they feel like they fit in, they trust people at their institution and they’re less worried about being reduced to negative stereotypes Another thing institutions can do is really to address directly these concerns about belonging What we know from many studies that I won’t go into now, but that you can find on the SEP website, is that stories that normalize students struggles and challenges that often undermine student sense of belonging and providing students with strategies to overcome them have powerful effects These social belonging interventions have narrowed racial achievement outcome disparities and these effects continue across students post-college careers. Similarly, in work by Christine Local, we find that these kinds of interventions can close gender academic outcomes um and these effects have continued through these men and women’s time in college as well. So what we see together is that when learning environments create and promote sense of belonging in students, the students feel more supported, respected and valued, they feel like they fit in, they trust people at their institution and they’re less worried about being reduced to negative stereotypes So taken together, the Student Experience Project is really a national effort that’s applying this body of work to implement change in real world context, in the classroom and beyond at institutions across the country. We’re using these continuous improvement methods to apply them to scale tools and resources in higher education. Of course none of this would exist without the pioneering work of Claude Steele on stereotype threat and it’s my pleasure now to introduce him So Claude Steele is a Social Psychologist and Professor of Psychology at Stanford University He’s originally from Chicago, Illinois and Claude’s best known for his work on stereotype threat and its application to racial and ethnic minority students experiences in school and their academic performance. Claude’s one of the most decorated, if not the most decorated psychologist in the country, elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Science Board, the National Academy of Education, and the American Philosophical Society Currently he serves as a trustee on the Russell Stage Foundation and as well to the MacArthur Foundation. He served in several major academic leadership posts as well, including the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost at Berkeley, Dean for the School of Ed at Stanford, and is the 21st provost of Columbia University. But more personally, I will say Claude, to me, an advisor, a mentor, and a friend. I’ll tell a little story here, as a first generation latina who somehow got

into Stanford, I remember walking across the campus, which is so beautiful, into the psych department and not being really sure if I belonged. You know, could I cut it, did I have what it takes One day in our first year seminar, when the faculty present their research to the first year cohort, I remember Claude’s visit and he discussed all this amazing work, programmatic research, over many years on stereotype threat and what he and his students were focused on then, which was understanding the situations and cues that could mitigate threat. And at the end of his talk, he listed all of his former students and his post docs, many of who were then, now famous uh professors and scholars, and were at that time, and there at the very end of that slide I saw my name. Talk about a cue to belonging. I thought if Claude thinks that I belong in this group, then maybe there’s some hope for me after all. I knew, I know I’m not the only one who Claude has helped feel as though they belong in the academy, and uh this is really the focus of his work. But not only the focus of his work, I think this is really the mission of his life. And I’m so grateful for Claude’s intellect and his generosity I don’t get to thank him enough for that, so thank you Claude, and welcome to this conversation, this town hall conversation. Great, great to be here Mary, what a wonderful uh introduction I want to say I’ve been listening to you ever since that day, so my great benefit there it is, a fine insight as I’m sure many of you know. So it’s a real pleasure to be here and have this conversation today it should be fun. We’re thrilled, we’re thrilled about it. Um so I guess let’s just jump right in. Um I was reading, actually last night, an interview between Eva Duvernay and Angela Davis, and they describe this time right now that we’re living through as a moment of racial reckoning. I thought that was a pretty good, um you know, term to to describe what we are experiencing and when it comes to inner group relations I think American society and college campuses in particular are, as you have put it in your recent chronicle article, really tense, very tense. So can you tell us a little bit, just um, set this stage. How did we get here, um what is important that we know about the historical and social context that sort of explains how we are in this moment together? Well I think a number, it’s interesting, I think a number of things do come together to give us a bit of a historical context here that um hasn’t hasn’t always been. So salient to me but in recent years and around, maybe from our research, and and also the moment uh I I’m beginning to see things more historically, maybe I’m just getting older, I don’t know, but it’s increasingly clear to me that we- our commitment as a society to have a genuinely integrated society and that means have integrated institutions and the like, is relatively new. 50, 60 years old at the most. I think it’s a primary, that commitment, that public commitment, uh is uh primarily a feat, a fruit of the civil rights movement and so uh we have been uh since that time trying to fulfill that and as everybody knows we haven’t done a perfect job, but we are definitely on that uh road, that effort. Uh and so that’s a little bit of context I think one fact uh that strikes me especially from my role as a administrator is that these institutions weren’t designed with such a a focus of improvement and integrity, they were designed uh uh with other functions, other missions in mind Uh they operated in a world for a part of our society that was a more homogeneous part of our society, higher education was largely for males, maybe of a certain class, a certain race, they weren’t geared to educate the full scope of American society which this commitment from the 60s has committed us to. So in in part, I think we are uh living through uh over these years uh the effort to adapt and evolve our institutions to meet the needs of a much broader part of the population than maybe they were initially attended to. And it’s in that context that these a lot of these issues uh come up. The same reasoning that would have made sense uh 80 years ago in a, a, a university and- and all of the culture and standards and the the vocabulary is a little strained when we’re bringing in and trying to incorporate a much broader, much more diverse part of our population. That’s great, that’s great. I know that one of the most popular approaches to diversity that we’ve seen, particularly at institutional levels, um is really this idea of color blindness. People saying “I don’t see color.” What do you think

about this color blindness as a diversity approach, um you know is there benefit to it? What are the challenges of the colorblind approach to diversity? Well again in difference to my age, I think I can remember when it came into play, which was at that time when we did make a public commitment to have an integrated society. The, the way we were going to do it is, is, is uh colorblind, we’re going to be colorblind and there’s there’s sort of an inherent offer in that idea, and the offer is that the enfranchised members of society would promise to be colorblind and not to discriminate against people on the basis of their identities, which had been legal until the mid 60s They were not going to do that, uh and the obligation of the other side, the disenfranchised, was to try to assimilate to the mainstream pretty much as fast as possible. That was the American uh way, that we were going to accomplish this integration, this incorporation of the disenfranchised into the mainstream of society was was with this, and I think there’s so many necessities that compel uh color blindness. We want our laws, we want our policing to be colorblind, we want our access to investment capital to be colorblind, there’s so many things that I I think there is a soundness to it, uh as a a part of our ethos of American society, but I do think it has crossed us. And part of some of the frustrations we have around integration come from the fact that that approach, uh may be being overused, and may blind us to the significance of identity that um uh our our identities are significant, we’ve been using in this society identity to organize society and to stratify it to to decide who’s in the social contract and who’s not, who would be enslaved and who’s not, who would be exterminated and who’s not, who was- would be moved from there, we’ve used identity, uh right? As the old world meet the new world to organize and stratify uh society And um there’s a great deal of legacy uh uh from that in modern contemporary uh society. Just looking at housing segregation, school segregation, um you know uh sentencing practices, access to good health care, access to good food, there’s so many things still tied around identity that what we have to understand is that if you have an identity, there are certain conditions of life that you have to deal with. Uh you just have to deal with them, that you wouldn’t be dealing with if you had a different identity. That’s right. That goal with that identity in our society come from it’s deep organization around those identities. Many of these things are material things, some I just mentioned, some of them are psychosocial psychological like stereotype threat, I can give a quick example of of of that without going into the research, maybe in this conversation so much, but uh let’s just take the example of uh a conversation of the the typical parent teacher conversation in school, okay uh, where the parents coming in, are coming in, they’re African-american and they’re coming in to talk to the teacher about their son in, let’s say the sixth grade And the teacher is white um, that con- that conversation I think illustrates uh some of the the contingencies of identity, the conditions of identity, that I’m talking about here, yeah from the standpoint of the uh African-american couple, they’re really about, they know the stereotypes about African-americans, and and they don’t want the, that school or that teacher to see or treat their son in terms of those stereotypes. To not see him as having really strong abilities, uh or to take a minor transgression and read it as an indication of some violent tendency on his part They, these are stereotypes in the air, they know them and they’re sort of hell-bent on getting at school so that’s their mission in the conversation, that’s their form of stereotype threat that they’re under, uh is the stereotypes about African-americans and they’re resisting them as best they can. The white teacher has another equally intense form of stereotypes, right, which she could worry that anything constructive that she might, any criticism of that and that she may intend as being really helpful and and constructive uh investing in him but it could be read given the stereotypes about white Americans as racist. Yeah so uh there we are with a American drama. Uh maybe best elucidated with this concept of stereotype threat that each party derived from the history of our society and the stereotypes that come down to us from that history

probably justifying inequalities, stereotypes born to justify inequalities, those stereotypes coming down make that conversation fraught and that is part of the reality that I think we’re dealing with as we integrate society. Those kind of pressures make it difficult for us to trust each other and to trust that we’re going to be seen in the best light and treated in the best light Invested in that our potential will be recognized it’s a, it’s just a question and uh a person has to remain kind of vigilant as to to cues in the situation, which you’ve done so much amazing research on. You have to be vigilant to those cues to read it well, what is going on here and I-I guess one one bottom line is I-I think this dynamic in our schools is underappreciated, uh and much of the time, I’m going to overstate this, I’m going to underline it, I’m going to overstate it, uh but I-I think it’s often more impressive, more important than something like prejudice or bias Yes that this, this inability to be comfortable, to trust, uh for fear that we could be judged in terms of or treated in terms of stereotypes about our uh identities, this can be it for, not for a minute do I want to diminish the importance of bias and prejudice, uh they’re profoundly important, uh but we also have this other uh challenge around uh trust that comes down to us from our history and the stereotypes that uh make themselves relevant in these important moments Yeah absolutely, I mean you can’t understate the role of trust and that really one of the you call it in your uh chronicle piece these identity predicaments, um that one of the predicaments we have is “can I trust you?” Right? Do I feel that you’re going to, as you say, see you, see me in the best light are you going to value me, are you going to respect me, am I going to get a fair shake, and not only that, are you not just going to tolerate being, but are you going to like me? That these are some of the questions that people enter into these intergroup contexts and our educational settings with and they’re really vigilant. They’re looking to the environment to see you know, what’s the uh non-verbal on this teacher, um you know, how are these African-american parents describing their students? Paying really uh big attention to the non-verbals to see whether or not that relationship is one that could be of trust uh in that moment. I think one of my favorite studies that you uh did, you did with Jeff Cohen, and it was really on this idea of trust and what you called the mentor’s dilemma, how to actually give critical feedback across the color line given these concerns about the way each individual is concerned about being seen through the lens of their identity. Do you want to say a little bit about that study for people who may not know it? I think that that’s a really cool study. I was thinking of that but yeah yeah I mean the basic question of that study is kind of what we’re focused on, how how can a white professor give critical feedback to uh a black student and have that feedback be trusted and thus be motivating to that student? So we uh very quickly, we had um white and black Stanford students come in and write uh essays about their favorite teacher and we told them if the essay was good maybe it would be published in a new magazine we were going to do on on teaching at Stanford and that they should write the essay and then we would grade it and they could come back two days later and they would get feedback on on the essay and at that point we measured how much did they trust the feedback. That’s sort of the setup of the experi- experiment. How much do you trust the feedback and we varied how we gave the feedback to see if we could affect in the way we gave the feedback the degree to which they trusted it, right? The immediate finding and this sort of illustrates the argument I was just making was that if you gave the feedback directly or if you gave the feedback with a kind of ad hominem broad compliment first, it wasn’t trusted by the black students and these are strong students, that’s Stanford, but they didn’t trust the feedback, the black students. White students did trust it but the black students did not trust it and when you you think about it in terms of the argument we were just making, I think you can see why it’s the feedback has for them a certain ambiguity to it uh is it coming from my work, this critical feedback, or is it coming from how this person sees my group uh and sees the abilities of my group Is he seeing me through the lens of a stereotype that’s an ambiguity and uh it makes the stereotype,

excuse me it makes the feedback less easy to just accept, suspect, yeah suspect, and with the feedback being suspect, it isn’t very motivating and they don’t, they aren’t very motivated by it but the good news is there was a condition that did work and i think it illustrates a core principle that I think can help our relations one-on-one and I think I-I hope to get a chance to give you an example of how it can be taken to scale in a in a whole program within a university but the feedback that worked was very simple The feedback giver said “look um we use high standards in evaluating these essays, we use high standards uh and I’ve looked at your essay and I think you can meet those standards.” Well when the black students heard that it was, they deeply trusted the feedback and were extraordinarily motivated to work on their essays and improve them, you know maybe three or four times of the amount of work on their subsequent essays as as in other conditions of the experiment So that form of feedback, we’re using high standards, I believe, I think you can meet those standards, I think you have potential to meet those standards and that’s what this feedback is about Uh that gives them the signal that they’re not being seen in terms of that stereotype, that principal worry they have that vigilance as to how they’re seen uh relaxes and uh they’re so delighted to just uh get a a a some input that they they can believe in So I-I think the study does do uh as you were anticipating, it it kind of illustrates the role the importance of trust in learning because you can imagine this business of of not being able to disambiguate feedback that is a chronic condition of a student being in school that doesn’t just happen once and it’s all over with. Absolutely You prove yourself to one teacher and then you have to do it all over again to another. It’s a it’s a condition of life tied to that identity and our schools I think, to be fully effective with with students in that kind of predicament of identity, need to recognize it and need to address it. We need to evolve as this whole project is beautifully doing, techniques that remedy this predicament and then free these students to more straightforwardly engage their work and learn. Yeah, I love how you know high standards, I have high standards and I-I know that you can meet them, just sort of takes the identity off the table. That this is not about my group membership, you see me as a whole person and that you actually believe in my intellectual abilities um and that means something coming from an authority figure in a context of a classroom. So I think that that that was brilliant. Um I don’t know how long you had to work to find those those words. Jeff Cohen was the major responsibility for that Yeah yeah yeah, and I see that the people in the chat are asking about the paper. It’s by Jeff Cohen and Claude Steele, um the Mentor’s Dilemma um and Lee Ross, that’s right, he’s another author on that paper um, so let’s talk maybe a little bit Claude, about um this current moment we’re in around the anti-racism movement. Um I know that you know that’s something that a lot of faculty are reading Dr. Kennedy’s uh book and thinking about what it really means to be an anti-racist and um I think it kind of comes back to what we talked about a little bit earlier this idea that um in the past we’ve been really thinking about prejudice as like a function of people that we have to root out who’s biased and in the battle days it was about explicit bias, about slurs and and overt prejudice and more recently it’s been about implicit bias, um but I think one of the challenges of both of these lenses is that it still locates prejudice within people instead of prejudice in places, prejudice in our policies, and our practices and the ways that we interact with each other and in our norms and our leadership messages at the institution level so can you tell me a little bit about what you think about this anti-racist movement and sort of the importance of it in the moment and how it sort of shifts our approach to diversity and inclusion institutionally? Yeah that’s a good question, I-I mean I-I think one thing that is really interesting about this moment, this moment of reckoning in American society really is broader than just American society, um is the shift in what and the criteria for being a good person is. One way to think about it yeah uh before the moment, this is going to be a bit of a overstatement, but I just want to be clear, uh before this moment you could be a good person if you were just colorblind, if you were,

if you did the gut check in the morning and you you didn’t think of yourself, no racism, then I’m kind of good to go and everything is, everything is a, as a, I’m a decent person Uh I think what this moment is and part of the reckoning is adding to to that criteria for being a good person is that we actually have to do something beyond that which is to undo the structures, uh that create inequalities. We can’t just tolerate that structure which continues to recapitulate inequality and and on the basis of our own self-improvement project of being colored, colorblind, not do anything about that, we have to do something about that. I just had this discussion uh an hour ago in our in our psychology department about why we, we’re not achieving much diversity and in the neuro science part of the field of psychology and it’s uh and people have have ratcheted up the prerequisites for getting onto that undergraduate major, that part of psychology as an undergraduate major so high, very few people unless you really come from an incredibly strong educational background are going to have the coursework to to do that. Well the the faculty who are doing research as best they can, as fast as they can, they they love those students who’ve had those backgrounds, it’s really hard for them to stop and say, well I need to somehow scaffold, make it easier for a broader diversity of students to get into this science, right, right maybe we need some more course coursework that scaffolds them in, maybe we need to to present the introductory courses so that they would be related to things that these a broader set of students are going to be interested in. Why, why aren’t aren’t we pitching them in a way that would make more women interested in these uh courses? So that’s a good example of uh what I think the shift is and there in my department I’ve been in for uh over 30 years, uh there’s finally a discussion about that kind of thing and I think it’s, I think we’re all over the nation having that discussion but I, I-I think the other the uh, another point that your research speaks to so much is that over focus on my individual, whether I as an individual, a prejudice is missing the reality that it, as you put it that the situation can be uh discriminating, that’s where the real source of discrimination may may come from, so I can ask you a question, why don’t you elucidate that a little bit, of what that looks like? Yeah I just think that you know, from my own personal experience without getting too much in the weeds of the research, you know, as a Latina I-I feel like I don’t really experience someone’s IAT score, their implicit attitudes test score, right? Whether they score high on implicit bias or medium on implicit bias, what I experience is whether you value me, whether you respect me, whether you include me, whether I feel like you’re going to treat me fairly, whether you think I’ve got what it takes to do be successful in an environment And that some of those things are communicated, yes by what a person’s saying but also by the greater context, what are the rules of engagement, what are the policies and practices, what is it that I have to take um, in order to be successful in this context. When we’re thinking about coursework or when we’re thinking about um policies and evaluation procedures um and so really, you know thinking about prejudice, not just as prejudiced people but as prejudice places and to really identify as institutions empirically that’s what the Student Experience Project is trying to do, starting with some historical data, taking a look at some of our practices that actually might be leading to some of these disparities, gender disparities, racial disparities, economic disparities uh between students and then to think about how we might shift those policies and practices, those interactions that we have with students, the norms in our classroom um, the norms when student goes on probation, what is the message that they get, is it that you know you’re out of here, you have just you know one semester to turn it around, um and we’ll be watching um, or do they get the message we believe in you, here are some resources, um come talk to us we want to do everything we can because we know you can cut it here and we want to help you get back on track, right? So these are institutional practices that even in the absence of a person because they’re institutional, um you know they still connote a sense of identity safety or an identity threat in students’ experiences. So I think the shift is is one that has been long coming and uh is welcome but it’s challenging I think, from the perspective of institutions. Um it takes a lot to dig into

their data and really get a sense of you know what are some of the policies, practices, norms that we need to shift um that might be contributing to these disparities. Yeah someone asked in the chat well but how how can you think, won’t people, won’t faculty see this as lowering standards? Isn’t that going to be a a challenge to getting them to think like this and be, right, yep this this mission? Uh well one one thing I want to do, one thing I quickly respond to him and I don’t know if we have time to go into to that in as much detail as I would love to, I think it’s such an important thing, uh it’s such an important question, uh but it was in that experiment I just described the use of high standards that was motivating, uh I think, I think high standards are compatible uh and part of uh the strategies we’re talking about that signals to the person that you’re not seeing them in terms of an ability demeaning stereotype, you’re you’re expecting a lot from them and you’re going to support them in that, uh, so I-I think it can be quite compatible and I think it’s essential to to reify that as soon as as soon as that student thinks you’re lowering the standards in order to be nice to them, they’re going to, that threat just comes up, right? Yeah that’s going to be negative absolutely. So thinking about institutional transformation what do you think the role of faculty is in an institutional transformation, I know um you know, what are faculty members predicaments and I know you’ve had a large role in many institutions and trying to enact institutional change. Do you have some examples of you know, successful um responses on an institutional basis that sort of really did something to change the experience of students on the ground and and help mitigate some of this threat? Yeah another excellent, uh question I uh I-I think faculty I’m glad your research is so focused on that now, because I think faculty may be the center most important challenge we’ve been thinking all along it’s the students, we, I think maybe it’s we, the faculty, who are important in really moving us forward uh in a in a big way where so that we see some real major changes um we did a survey or not, I shouldn’t say we because I wasn’t part of it, but a group of psychologists and administrators at Berkeley surveyed the science departments, physics, math, astronomy, computer sciences, electrical engineering, chemistry, they surveyed them with the following question: are the women and minorities doing as well as the men with regard to progress toward publication? And publication, that’s the coin of the realm in graduate school, this was a survey of the graduate departments there, and lo and behold they find- found what we feared that uh women and minorities were not making the same progress toward publication as men in all of those departments except the college of chemistry, and there the women and minorities were making the same progress toward publication So what were they doing? What’s the nature of that bright spot? Well I would like to say that it’s taking to scale the principle that I just tried to elucidate in Jeff Cohen’s experiment, the feedback, high standards and uh his I believe you can meet those standards if you took that principle, and you tried to just derive specific things that uh built a culture of that kind of support for students, I think you’d get a picture of what that chemistry department did. You know it decided, independent of diversity, to just be really good at producing chemists not in addition to their own brilliant research just let’s produce the best chemists in the world. Well what’s in the way of that? Well a lot of kids don’t have, come when they don’t really know what graduate school is about, let’s tell them three weeks in advance, graduate school is about publication, not much courses They often stumble in there early, getting a good research project, well let’s let’s have them in that three weeks, let’s meet with five professors and they’ll give them examples and of good research that they could do and they’ll have to pick one and write a proposal by November 11th, so they they’re demanding a lot, they’re using very high standards, um they’re supporting the students and they’re affirming their potential And they’re making all those things transparent, right, so that students don’t have to wonder what is required of me, what matters here, this or that or the other. Yeah uh it takes the ambiguity out of the situation. Yes. For those students and ambiguity invites in the pressures that we’re

uh talking about so in the other, what’s happening in the other uh departments, well it’s the same kind of thing, it’s mainly, they’re mainly men, they- men come in, it’s easier for them to relate, maybe the men have worked with somebody they knew it in other universities, undergraduates, they there’s just an easier compatibility and the women and minorities are: well we gave you a chance, we let you in, so there’s a sen- there’s not a sense of any obligation to them uh to to and and they they don’t, they were, they it was the chemistry college that encouraged people to publish independent of their identities, they encouraged women and minorities to publish as much as they did men, whereas that was not true in the other departments. There was really a difference in the level of encouragement and acceptance. They weren’t thinking about all this, they weren’t thinking about this and I like this finding because it shows that everybody can contribute to progress in this area. You don’t have to be of the same identity as the students, you don’t have to be necessarily a great expert in diversity and the like, I think that really helps, let me be clear about that because I think, I think we need to know the nature of our society and our society has not been good at helping us all understand the nature of our society and the challenges it has given to certain classes, certain groups of people. So that kind of training at least informs people, is I think essential, uh but on the other hand I can if I’m, you know, I’d look at my own advisor, somebody white, from a very different background but he helped me, he gave me, he encouraged me, gave me a concrete path forward and he held me accountable to it “I want those data analyzed by the morning.” Yep okay, yes sir. I rose to their, it was demanding, supportive at the same So it’s not a, it’s not rocket science. It’s it’s, maybe in sort of winding our way to this kind of, this kind of an explanation or understanding of it maybe that is similar to rocket science in some ways, but the actual remedy is pretty straightforward and I think we do it uh in in already in relation, certainly to our own children, and to, you know to people we care a great deal about, that that kind of attitude uh is especially uh uh essential in a diverse world, in a homogeneous world where everybody is guys, maybe that’s that whole just worry about it, maybe it isn’t so relevant, you can be just more straightforward because there’s not, that trust issue isn’t isn’t there but when you’re dealing with a genuinely diverse population this is the adaptation I think our institutions have to evolve uh to, in order to really meet the needs of our, of our diverse population as a society. These kinds of insights, this kind of of evolution of practice and pedagogy has to keep up with the demand of the population absolutely So you know, I know that we’re almost at our time, um I- this conversation went by very quickly Um so you know the last question I have for you is how do we know when we’re making a difference? How do we know when we’re actually moving towards institutional transformation, what are some of the signs or signals along the way that we would start to see as faculty shift practices, as administrators think about the larger messages and context that they’re creating? How do we actually know where we’re shifting the needle here? Well I’ve got a very specific answer and maybe some more general answers. I suppose more generally I-I feel uh like progress is made when I see diversity starting to happen in places it hasn’t happened before, and I’m old enough to have seen that, uh so I know what can happen Law school, med schools, not- psychology. When I was uh started psychology, I won’t say the number but it was a long time before, it was primarily a male operation. It’s not, it’s maybe a majority female field science at this, at this point, um so when I see that, I take great heart that, that we humans are somehow figuring this out and and uh uh and making progress. I also, I have a very specific uh criteria that I look for which is reduction in underperformance. Uh underperformance is a particular phenomenon that is this, that is among students with the same uh credentials, test scores, prior grades and the like. One group tends to get lower subsequent grades than another, that’s mysterious, why should that happen? They have the same preparation. Uh why should women in STEM fields be getting lower grades than men when they come in with exactly the same, maybe sometimes higher preparation? What’s going on there well that’s that’s evidence to

me of the play of these processes that we’re talking about so I take, I when I look out at colleges and universities and I want to get a good read on their climate and so on, I don’t look at self-reports so much as I look at at the level of underperformance in those kinds of fields And some schools are wonderful at that, I mean I’ve got a little set of pet schools that I love, they have a climate that is like that, uh condition in the experiment as we’re using, high standards and I believe you can meet them, and you- you see that melt away this this uh yeah and the performance that’s, so this removes the threat yeah so so I-I do have that, that kind of measurable criteria for how how much progress we’re making Yeah and another thing I think, I often uh look for is the extent to which administrators and faculty are willing to have these conversations. Um I think that that really is a signal that uh institutions are ready for change and most institutions want to be evidence-based about their change to figure out sort of the direction, what does the scholarship say about what might be most successful rather than just investing willy-nilly in various uh approaches um to actually uh use the research to sort of illuminate uh potential opportunities Um and so when I see schools asking about that I’m like that is, that is a good sign I would, I would say just so uh we stick this in at the at the end, but uh faculty, there is a mindset, growth mindset which really makes it easier for them, as you have demonstrated in your opening study to to engage this conversation and we we have experiments demonstrating that, but, and you you have real data showing its impact in real uh academic institutions and so we don’t want to end without without pointing to the fact that there is available a real clear approach when you’re in interracial context in general, interpersonally, in a classroom, ask questions. Take it as a opportunity to learn and expand one’s understanding of people’s experience in a situation. That posture, as opposed to the alternatives like performing that you’ve never been prejudiced, and performing yeah exactly, at some point uh there are a whole variety of other things we we get pushed into doing in these fraud conversations but the thing that seems to reliably work uh is something like taking a gross mind- mindset toward the whole experience of- of interracial interaction and and instruction. Well thank you, um we are at the end of our time this has been uh my pleasure and uh- mine to- so value you for all of your contributions both personal and professional and to our um enterprise of working through and creating more equitable learning environments, so thank you, very much. Um at this point I’m gonna transition um back to um sharing a little bit more um on the SEP, the Student Experience Project, and what we’ve learned so far. We’re going to hear from some campus leaders um in this last portion of our time together. Um I think that some of the themes here that Claude and I just spoke about really resonate with what we’re learning at the SEP, um we know lots of institutions have interest in this work and are maybe already applying some of these, maybe you’re using the College Transition Collaborative’s social belonging intervention already in your university but what the SEP is really doing is that we’re a network of campuses that are systematically redesigning the learning environment to support equitable experiences using these continuous improvement methods and common rigorous measurement approaches and so we take this knowledge base I talked about before, a broad base, um and we sort of share it with student experience school cohorts as well as our peer learning network, they try it, they measure their success and they feed us back the knowledge that we need to iterate on this process to develop what are some of the tangible practices that faculty, administrators and staff, advisors in particular, and other staff members can take to actually create more of these equitable learning environments. The Student Experience Project focuses on six core components, if you sort of do a literature review and say what are the really most important student experiences that lead to engagement, persistence and performance in higher ed you come up with something like this: institutional growth mindset, students sense of social belonging, their feelings of identity safety, the extent to which they trust, um something Dr Steele has written quite a bit on recently, um social connectedness, and their self-efficacy. And so what the Student Experience Project has done

is really identify four key drivers of change to students experience focusing on um advising and mentoring these social supports that are offered, instructors and our course interactions as faculty, thinking about our departments more broadly on our campus climate, as well as looking carefully at our institutional structures and policies and procedures that students have to go through in order to be successful, including our financial structures for example, and so what we do in this project is we create these examples of change, for example providing materials to help revise academic probation or early alerts to really use research to promote engagement with learning Or to give feedback in class, or to create our syllabus in a way that’s going to communicate value and respect and inclusion, um a growth mindset culture really, um to students early on and to evaluate how that’s influencing students. Um we do cues audits in our, in our university partner environments where we look at our environments and say um what is this actually signaling about who’s expected to succeed and we take a close look at our campus policies. Things like um really bureaucratic course maps like this that really are difficult particularly for students from first generation backgrounds to navigate successfully The Student Experience Project provides a library of evidence-based practices that institutions, administrators and faculty can use um to sort of change some of their practices and what we do is engage in this iterative continuous improvement design where we plan, do, study and act. Faculty use a platform called the Copilot Ascend, which provides faculty a report broken out by students identity groups to really see how students are experiencing their sense of belonging or their institutional mindset in the moment, their sense of trust, and faculty can then see across the course of the semester whether the changes that they’re engaged in actually are moving the needle on students experiences in their classroom so at the, at the core, the Student Experience Project is really about elevating student experience, reviewing feedback, learning the relevant practices that sort of come from these uh body of research, and tracking our improvement. So at this point I’m going to turn it over to some of our campus leaders who’ve been engaging in some of this work to tell us what they’ve learned Denise, from University of Toledo, I’m going to turn it over to you now Thank you, Mary. Can you all hear me? I think that you can, all right and you can see me I’m really excited to be here, my name is Denise Bartel, I’m the Associate Vice Provost at the University of Toledo and the lead on the Student Experience Project. The University of Toledo is an undergraduate and graduate comprehensive university, about 16,000 undergraduate students Um it is one of about 27 institutions across the country with such a diverse array of academic programs, I believe we have over 260 different programs in almost every area of study. Our population of undergraduates is about 22 percent underrepresented, minoritized students, about 28 Pell awarded students, and about 50 female. And so when I was thinking about um participating in this today, I was thinking about you know, why it is that we chose to participate or to apply for the Student Experience Project in the first place. When I came to the University of Toledo, I knew that we really had a strategic priority to start shrinking equity gaps and you can see on the slide here that one of the gaps that we were looking at was our first year retention and really tried to move the needle by having those gaps by 2022. I understood from some of my previous work that the Student Experience Project and what they were offering could really help us to move the needle and to be able to move to the next stage in this work because it would allow us an opportunity to learn the research at a broad scale, to be able to start using some of the tools that they had at their disposal, but I think it also provided us with an opportunity to start changing the culture. To be the sort of student focused place that we wanted it to be And so we have done a lot of things at the University of Toledo associated with the Student Experience Project. I’m going to talk about a couple of those today very quickly One of the most interesting things I think that our team has done on our campus is that we applied some of the psychosocial areas that the research coming out of the College Transition Collaborative identified to understanding the kinds of student attuned messaging that was being sent to students by our academic program websites. And so we looked at these five psychosocial areas; sense of belonging, students’ belief in STEM ability, the cultural relevance of STEM programs,

students comfort seeking support, and their confidence navigating curricular requirements And we went to our STEM academic program websites and we looked for indications of each of these five psychosocial areas and then our team designed a rubric for assessment of these websites in these five areas, with three levels for each area. So for each element addressed there basically was an opportunity to assess the extent to which the messaging in that area was student attuned, so we’ve coded all of the STEM programs that are associated with the Student Experience Project and we’ve also created this as a self-assessment tool for programs so they can actually click on this rubric, self-identify where they think they are in each of these indicators, get a score for themselves and then get recommendations for what they can do to become a more student attuned website to support students’ feelings of inclusion and their interest in pursuing careers in STEM The second program that I wanted to talk briefly about were the Equity Champions program and this is a project where we have 12 instructors who are working in a diverse array of gateway STEM courses and we have worked together with them from the summer to really create a community of practice And what I mean by that is that we’ve worked together to learn the research, to understand the importance of this kind of work, to understand the structural and systemic basis for a lot of the differences that we see in outcomes in our class, and to empower instructors to be able to take the tools that Mary talked about, the SEP provides, and do interventions in their class that they are testing, using the copilot tool that she mentioned, to be able to see in real time whether these things are working in their class and to make adjustments accordingly. And one of the most interesting things I think that I found about this work in particular, you know Dr. Steele and Dr. Murphy were talking a little bit earlier about the importance of building relationships and trust and as important as that is for the student-instructor relationship and supporting student success, I think because of some of what Dr. Steele was talking about earlier in terms of instructor, particularly white instructor, discomfort sometimes in terms of dealing with these issues, that creating a trusting community of these champions where they felt comfortable with each other disclosing their discomfort has actually helped us to empower cadre of stakeholders in this work who we hope are really going to be the grassroots’ champions to enable the kind of systemic change that we want to enable with participation in the Student Experience Project. So I am about out of time, um I am going to turn it over now to Tiffany Mfume from Morgan State University Thank you so much, it’s a pleasure to be with you all today. I’m Tiffany Mfume, I’m the Assistant Vice President for Student Success and Retention at Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland We are the largest of four public historically black colleges and universities in the state of Maryland, uh we just celebrated our 152nd birthday We’ve been designated as a national treasure by the National Historic Trust Preservation. We have just under 8,000 students, about 81 percent of our students are black students, about sixty percent of our students are low income, Pell eligible students, and we’re really excited that we’ve been able to maintain a retention rate first to second year, um for ten years now, of more than seventy percent and we’ve also been able to increase our graduation rate by 18 points, from 28 to 46 percent, our most recent graduation rate, from 2020, which is our highest graduation rate on record. We’ve been able to get that 10- 18 point increase in 10 years, and that’s because of our work with organizations like APLU, and projects like the Student Experience Project. Morgan is here today representing 10 institutions who make up the PLN, which stands for Peer Learning Network. We’re a network that falls under the SEP, the Student Experience Project, and we’ve been working together for just under two years and looking at the messages, signals, and communications that students receive from their engagement with faculty and the impact that these messages have on students and their sense of belonging, growth mindset, and purpose Our 10 institutions decided that we would focus specifically on day one or first day, even first

week of class experiences that students have with faculty and we thought that the most important thing that students receive or get from faculty, especially in writing, is their, their contract. Which we know is the course syllabus. We’ve been using the course syllabus as our number one item that we’ve been focused on, in addition to other artifacts that faculty use during the first week and first day of class. These other artifacts may be things like a particular assignment, an activity, something that they have students bring to the class, or to participate with other students. At Morgan State University we identified 30 faculty volunteers. These 30 faculty participated in two, two-hour growth mindset workshops led by one of our faculty on campus, Dr Mary Foster, who’s done a lot of work with growth mindset, sense of belonging and purpose, um and we asked all of those 30 faculties to submit their course syllabi for all of us to share and review And we used the Student Experience Project syllabus review guide, the SEP syllabus review guide, which was created by the College Transition Collaborative especially for the SEP partner colleges and the PLN institutions, and that guide helps us to ensure that the messages, policies and practices that are included in the course syllabi and that are reflected there actually communicate growth mindset and focus on students potential and promote a sense of belonging. Two things that the SEP syllabus guide consists of is questions to guide us and how we review our syllabus and then the best part is it includes examples of wording that is promoting a growth mindset versus those examples of wording and language that does not promote a growth mindset, or in fact actually is is more of a fixed mindset, and I wanted to share one example with you. One of the questions in the course syllabus guide is: does the syllabus communicate that the instructor and the instructional team care about students? This is one of the important questions and we all know that we get very busy and students might see that our lack of attention to their communications and their emails may feed into some of those insecurities, so here’s one example; students often fall through the cracks when instructors are managing heavy course loads and this particular note can be included in the office hours section of a syllabus. So the students can know that this is uh promoting that growth mindset and the the exact example is contacting me by email. This would be something that the instructor writes at points in the term, my inbox gets quite full but I do want to hear from you. If you email me and don’t hear back from me within two business days please send a follow-up email, I would appreciate the gentle reminder. That’s just one example of the uh how practical this guide is, and we hope that as we continue our work as the PLN institutions that there’ll be an entire toolkit um that will be a result, an outcome of our work, that would help all of us to inform the first day and first week of class At this point I’m going to turn it over to John at UNC Charlotte, thank you Right, uh I, am I talking now? Can you hear me? I can’t tell if I’m, um you’re hearing me, alright thanks Mary. Um so hi, my name is John Smail I’m the um Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte, um and uh we’ve been again working on the Student Experience Project and with the social psychological insights that you just heard about. Um my feeling is that this work is probably the some of the most important things that we’ve done at this university for quite some time and it’s just really exciting and inspiring to be part of it. So UNC Charlotte’s a large urban research university, we have a significant diversity in our population of students which you can see on the screen there I do want to draw attention to our high transfer proportion and as many of you will know yourselves from your own students, transfer students, bring their own particular set of challenges and for us in in um uh particularly the uh our transfer students tend to, uh population tends to skew more towards first-gen, low-income and underrepresented and so uh that’s something we’re

very aware of. We’ve had some great success uh in terms of student success, uh you can see our graduation rate for four years, we got to 48 this year and that’s up from 24 less than a decade ago and our six-year graduation rate’s at 65 percent uh which is up from the low 50s, again less than a decade ago. However we are also acutely aware of some significant equity gaps uh in uh that we need to address um our six-year graduate or graduation rate for first time in college students, the- there’s not much of an equity gap but we see a pretty significant equity gap for um underrepresented and low-income students, and referring to something I saw into, in a chat, the intersectionality here also is is uh very noticeable. Um and then our transfer students, we have in general a transfer time degree problem, our transfer students are not getting out as fast as they should given the credits they bring, but that is particularly noticeable, again, for underrepresented and low-income students and then finally we’re aware of some very troubling uh differences in economic success and gateway courses and so I think, to what Dr. Steele was saying earlier, we would not be on his list of pet schools. Um what you see in that uh again, it’s very difficult to read, I understand, but that scatter plot on the right represents the uh differential performance of, in this case, underrepresented students versus their more structurally advantaged counterparts in a range of gateway classes, including gateway STEM classes and essentially uh, any dot below the red line indicates that the proportion of students getting these Fs and Ws in those courses exceeds the proportion of students and of that demographic group enrolled in that course, and so those those gaps that you see there, the orange falling below the line, are underrepresented students not performing as well as their uh counterparts, and um those gaps are persistent over time and all of these are statistically significant, so this is something we’re very concerned about. So what are we doing about that? Um we should get a transition here, so this Student Experience Project at UNC Charlotte, so one thing we’re doing is focusing the conversation on what’s happening in the classroom um and I think this is really important. It obviously plays to the social psychological uh research that you’ve just heard about today uh but also speaking as an administrator, um I think this is critical because it’s the one piece of the equity puzzle that we actually have control over at our institutions. There are lots of factors affecting equity gaps, some of them we can’t control, some of them require lots more money than we’re ever going to get from our state legislature, but the, what happens in the classroom, uh and to the discussions in the chat here about faculty are absolutely things we can work on, and so uh this confronting these differential DFW rates that I showed you earlier is something we’re having a conversation about on campus. We are trying to fix what’s happening in the classroom, but I put that as a question mark because we don’t know how well it’s working. So this semester we have 60 faculty implementing mindset and belonging interventions like the ones you’ve heard about at Toledo and at Morgan State, so we’re looking at the syllabi language and that the growth and mindset and belonging in the syllabi, uh welcoming messages, building community in the classrooms, the way in which uh feedback is given to students, some of those classes are using the um PERTS Belonging Intervention, a variety of things we’re trying to do and we will be using that copilot tool to see whether this is making any difference, but the critical challenge is going to be uh bringing this to scale and making this something that happens with lots of faculty and lots of classrooms. And then the final thing I’ll talk about very quickly is we have a comprehensive program of early alert academic interventions, but we have a challenge reaching students and so we’ve used that same mindset and belonging lens um like the example from Toledo to try and look at the messaging that comes out with early alerts and midterm grades and make sure we’re reaching our students. So with that I’ll wrap up and I’m going to pass it over to Dina from the Raikes Foundation who’s going to tell you more about the SEP project in general, thank you Thanks John. I’m Dina Blum, I’m the Program Officer for Education at the Raikes Foundation, supporting the Student Experience Project and our, um our north star at the Raikes Foundation for the education work is really striving for an education system that reliably creates learning environments where whole healthy empowered educators and students thrive, where race, class, gender, language or any other social or cultural factor of identity holds zero predictive power on students experience and on student outcomes. And so um for that reason we’re really proud to be supporting

the Student Experience Project. I want to take a moment to thank John and Tiffany and Denise for their leadership and their commitment to to uh equity and student success and to um the vulnerability it takes to share what we’re learning about where are students being served least well and how to understand those experiences, so that we can figure out how to address them. I also want to thank Dr. Steele and Dr. Murphy, and all of those who have pioneered research that has enabled the work of the Student Experience Project research on belonging, on growth mindset, identity safety, stereotype threat and all of these factors that we know are critical aspects of student experience, and really important to both student success and equitable outcomes. Next slide, please Thanks, um also uh actually before I move on to this slide, I just want to thank um Steve Dandaneau and the Reinvention Collaborative for inviting us to share about our work today, and uh, really encouraged by so many of the comments and questions that you all are asking um, and appreciate you joining us today as a reflection of your commitment to equity and student success I just want to highlight that there are really three components um to the strategy behind the Student Experience Project and priorities of the project. You’ve heard um from three of our campus leaders about the work that they’re doing to move the needle for student success on their own campuses, so that’s one big priority, is to identify and address equity gaps to improve student experience and create equitable learning environments on the campuses of each of our members and that’s one level, and then you’ve also heard about building this knowledge base. There’s a rich history of research about how each of these factors of student experience influence outcomes and are also a lever for equity and um many of the questions in the chat that I’m not sure all of you have been able to keep up with have been about like, what are some of the suggestions, what are these tools, can we share the guides and the rubrics, and we are now in the context of the SEP piloting a lot of these tools and developing a lot of these tools with support from um scholars like Dr. Murphy and others and um are codifying them with the mindset that we, it’s not just about moving the needle at each of the campuses that are participating but also being able to offer our learnings and resources and tools for the broader field, and then finally we’re, we and this is a great example, we want to be able to elevate student voices, elevate these learnings, um let people know about what kinds of tools and practices and resources are coming out of the Student Experience Project so that we can influence policy makers and other thought leaders and decision makers in thinking about how to incentivize equitable outcomes. And one of the things that I just want to highlight that the Student Experience Project team has been really clear about is that, that it’s not just about centering student experience as a lever for equitable outcomes, centering student experience and working on issues of belonging and identity safety and purpose is in a really important and in and of itself it’s the right thing to do, and what we know from research and what we’re seeing play out on each of these campuses, and I’m in other places that are embracing this type of work, is that it is a lever. It is also a lever for equitable outcomes and so um we hope to- to be able to share more learning with you over time and in a moment um I’m going to hand it off to Jen Danek from USU and APLU, who will share with you how you can learn more, uh how you can access some of these tools that we’ve been talking about and join forces with us. Really on these second two uh levels here uh, join forces with us at the Student Experience Project and with our many partners in this broader movement to center student experience as an important goal in and of itself, and as a lever for equitable student outcomes, thanks Okay thank you Dina so much and thank you to everybody that presented today. I’m Jennifer Danek,

I’m the Senior Director at the Coalition of Urban Serving Universities, which is a permanent partner with the Association of Land Grant Universities. So I want to say first, thank you to the Reinvention Collaborative and to all the member institutions for partnering with us on this event today, and also just thanking the APLU and USU member institutions who joined the call We are so privileged to be partnering with leading national organizations on the Student Experience Project, so I wanted to acknowledge the College Transition Collaborative and the other two lead scholars, in addition to Dr. Mary Murphy, Dr. Christine Logal and Dr. Katie Boucher, the Education Council, the Project for Educational Research That Scales, and then Shift Results. Next slide For those of you um who are interested in learning more about the Student Experience Project, and I saw a lot in the chat about resources, about research studies, please visit our website It’s www.studentexperienceproject.org. If you sign up on our mailing list, which is in the, under the contact us button, we will send you the latest news and resources as they come out in a quarterly newsletter. There are also a couple of uh resources which are available now The first is a suite of materials on how to communicate with students in times of difficulty, which was specifically designed for the Covid pandemic and was designed by the College Transition Collaborative with two of our lead scholars. There’s one resource for faculty communicating with students, and another resource for administrators There’s also a high level resource on designing syllabi, which is the first in a number of resources that will deal with the first day of class. As Dr. Mfume mentioned, we’re developing a toolkit and the Peer Learning Network is in the process of piloting that and will be available in 2021. And finally there are resources already available through PERTS, which is available at www.pertz.com/resources. That includes the growth mindset for college students program and the social belonging for college students program. Both are being used by over 100 universities already and are direct to student programs that can be used. If you have any direct questions you can also contact Samantha Levine, and the email address is right there as well Next slide. I think it might be, is it perts.net? www.perts.net okay, apologies, that was incorrect on that last slide. So we are also going to be presenting um at a number of upcoming conferences in the next few months, so if you are attending all of, any of these conferences please keep a lookout That includes the AAC&U conference on transforming STEM education, the AAC&U annual conference, and the APLU annual conference. Those sessions will include more detailed data from our campuses, a little bit more of the bright spots and what they’re learning, and we’ll also have an opportunity for campuses to utilize some of the tools, uh the innovative tools that you’ve heard mentioned on this call Next slide, and finally, because this is about the student experience, I wanted to call out a new partnership with Get Schooled on a We Belong in College Campaign So this just launched last week, uh it is uh 12 students across our SEP campuses, are leading a social media campaign um that encourages students to share a story about a time when they questioned whether they belonged in college, how they overcame it or are working on it, and any advice that they have for other students. The-these stories are a way for us to lift up student voice and to learn about student experience, both to increase students’ sense of belonging in college by normalizing struggle, but also to inform decision makers and about students experience and to shift the public narrative about who is it that belongs in college. Students who submit their stories will have an opportunity to win a one thousand dollar scholarship and we’ll be awarding um 20 scholarships across our SEP campuses. So if you’re on Twitter or Instagram keep a lookout in the coming months for some of these stories from students and

this student-led campaign to share what their experience is now, particularly in the midst of the Covid pandemic which is really affecting how students experience the college environment So um with this I will turn it over back to the Reinvention Collaborative, and thank you all so much for being able to be with you today Thanks, thanks so much Jen, and thanks Dina This was a great, great town hall. On behalf of the Reinvention Collaborative, I just want to thank Claude Steele, Mary Murphy, Denise Bartel, Tiffany Mfume, and John Smail for contributing to this presentation, and of course also to APLU, USU, Raikes, and all the many people who work behind the scenes to make this event possible And finally thanks to all of you joined us today for this event, as Dina stressed, we appreciate your interest in equitable student experiences. Goodbye for now and best wishes to you all

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.