5 ms·

> I think what a lot of the commenters are missing is that this article, and statements like "If I must revise my teaching to conform to a popular view of inclu

> I think what a lot of the commenters are missing is that this article, and statements like "If I must revise my teaching to conform to a popular view of inclusivity that I do not share" have an impact on not just his research, but also sends a message to his students: that he doesn't whether they feel safe being there matters, and that they don't deserve to have representation in studied works. You're making a jump there: from whether Kunin's class covers works from authors with certain demographics, to whether his students feel safe. The character sequence "saf" doesn't appear in either of Kunin's articles. I think if it had been conveyed to him that his students' feeling of safety depends on his choice of curriculum, then he would have mentioned this argument (he'd probably call it absurd but I expect he'd mention it). His impression was: "That way, students from underrepresented minority communities will see themselves reflected in the readings. The students will feel included, and empowered to succeed, when they read works by writers who look like them." Do you think it's really true that a significant number of students were feeling unsafe as a result of curriculum choices, and if so, why hadn't Kunin heard of it?

ariabuckles 6y ago
I might be making a jump, because I've followed a lot of these discussions over time. To my understanding (and as a disclaimer, I advocate strongly for it), "inclusivity" in general means making an environment safe for people of marginalized backgrounds. So to me, his declaration that inclusivity as a value ought to be up for debate seems to indicate he doesn't think it's a top priority that students of marginalized backgrounds feel welcome in his classroom. Is that a jump? A bit, but it's based on seeing similar situations play out in other areas. But the choice of curriculum was to my second point: I think students deserve the chance to study a wide variety of history and literary viewpoints, including when feasible some from backgrounds similar to theirs. There has been tons of literature written by black authors, written by women, written by LGBTQ folx. Often times those works have been, in the past, deliberately destroyed (like the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft) or not considered for publication (George Elliot choosing a pseudonym to publish outside romance), which is a significant component to why there are so many more white men authors historically. If you teach a course where all the literature you choose is from white men, you really limit what history you are teaching, and you can subtly reinforce that others may not be welcome to succeed in literature. Inclusivity asks us to consider those implications and pick some variety of authors--there are many great writers of so many different backgrounds to choose from.
- bradleyjg 6y ago
  I think what the parent poster is getting at is that many of us are bewildered at the way you are using the word “safe”. I take it you aren’t saying that students believe that an assailant will be hiding in the classroom with a bat ready to assault them as the enter the classroom. Rather I take you and others to be using safe to mean something like comfortable. But unsafe and uncomfortable are two different words. There’s rarely or never good cause to make someone feel unsafe, but sometimes being uncomfortable can lead to growth. Or at least people used to believe so.
  - ariabuckles 6y ago
    I mean psychological safety, as in https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/after-years-of-research-google-discovered-secret-weapon-to-building-a-great-team-its-a-lesson-in-emotional-intelligence.html https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/after-years-of-research-go... , or as in "will i face verbal bullying in this space". That is a different type of safety than physical safety, but it's very real. How much people experience not feeling psychologically safe varies widely, though. I'm a visible minority, and my rights are frequently a part of political debate. In spaces where those debates are allowed to happen, it's often not safe for me to participate. It's a hard feeling to describe or put into words for someone who hasn't experienced others saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do participate in some aspects of society because of a characteristic they can't change.
    - rayiner 6y ago
      Okay, but are people being verbally bullied in university classrooms?
    - waterhouse 6y ago
      > In a team with high psychological safety, teammates feel safe to take risks around their team members. They feel confident that no one on the team will embarrass or punish anyone else for admitting a mistake, asking a question, or offering a new idea. Well. What happened when Kunin took a risk and published an essay asking some questions and offering what he thought was a new idea? He faced verbal bullying and was punished. Is the point to give psychological safety to minority students but not bother about other people? (In fact, I suspect many of the minority students who happen to agree with Kunin would not feel psychologically safe saying so.) At this point the classic rejoinder would be to say "look at these suffering minorities; your argument is invalid" or to talk about Kunin's privilege, but you seem to make better arguments than that.

ariabuckles 6y ago

I might be making a jump, because I've followed a lot of these discussions over time. To my understanding (and as a disclaimer, I advocate strongly for it), "inclusivity" in general means making an environment safe for people of marginalized backgrounds. So to me, his declaration that inclusivity as a value ought to be up for debate seems to indicate he doesn't think it's a top priority that students of marginalized backgrounds feel welcome in his classroom. Is that a jump? A bit, but it's based on seeing similar situations play out in other areas. But the choice of curriculum was to my second point: I think students deserve the chance to study a wide variety of history and literary viewpoints, including when feasible some from backgrounds similar to theirs. There has been tons of literature written by black authors, written by women, written by LGBTQ folx. Often times those works have been, in the past, deliberately destroyed (like the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft) or not considered for publication (George Elliot choosing a pseudonym to publish outside romance), which is a significant component to why there are so many more white men authors historically. If you teach a course where all the literature you choose is from white men, you really limit what history you are teaching, and you can subtly reinforce that others may not be welcome to succeed in literature. Inclusivity asks us to consider those implications and pick some variety of authors--there are many great writers of so many different backgrounds to choose from.

bradleyjg 6y ago
I think what the parent poster is getting at is that many of us are bewildered at the way you are using the word “safe”. I take it you aren’t saying that students believe that an assailant will be hiding in the classroom with a bat ready to assault them as the enter the classroom. Rather I take you and others to be using safe to mean something like comfortable. But unsafe and uncomfortable are two different words. There’s rarely or never good cause to make someone feel unsafe, but sometimes being uncomfortable can lead to growth. Or at least people used to believe so.
- ariabuckles 6y ago
  I mean psychological safety, as in https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/after-years-of-research-google-discovered-secret-weapon-to-building-a-great-team-its-a-lesson-in-emotional-intelligence.html https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/after-years-of-research-go... , or as in "will i face verbal bullying in this space". That is a different type of safety than physical safety, but it's very real. How much people experience not feeling psychologically safe varies widely, though. I'm a visible minority, and my rights are frequently a part of political debate. In spaces where those debates are allowed to happen, it's often not safe for me to participate. It's a hard feeling to describe or put into words for someone who hasn't experienced others saying that they shouldn't be allowed to do participate in some aspects of society because of a characteristic they can't change.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    Okay, but are people being verbally bullied in university classrooms?
  - waterhouse 6y ago
    > In a team with high psychological safety, teammates feel safe to take risks around their team members. They feel confident that no one on the team will embarrass or punish anyone else for admitting a mistake, asking a question, or offering a new idea. Well. What happened when Kunin took a risk and published an essay asking some questions and offering what he thought was a new idea? He faced verbal bullying and was punished. Is the point to give psychological safety to minority students but not bother about other people? (In fact, I suspect many of the minority students who happen to agree with Kunin would not feel psychologically safe saying so.) At this point the classic rejoinder would be to say "look at these suffering minorities; your argument is invalid" or to talk about Kunin's privilege, but you seem to make better arguments than that.