An Inside Look at an Award-Winning Maker Program

Edutopia

Making turned New Jersey middle school students into teachers for a weekend—and sent some of them to the White House.

School ended in June 2016 with a crescendo of activity we had worked all year to orchestrate, bringing bigger accomplishments than we’d dreamed of. Our year-end adventure began in Washington, D.C., where my students’ work with design earned us an invitation to the White House for the kickoff of the 2016 National Week of Making. As one of two representatives from New Jersey, I represented not only my students but effectively all K-12 educators in the state for whom making is a way of teaching and learning. Though making is not new—creative individuals in communities and schools everywhere have been doing this work for years—its increasingly high profile certainly is. Making matters. And design thinking matters to makers.

jarrett-inset1-designthinking-author
Students work in the author’s digital shop class.

At the beginning of the National Week of Making, I set up our exhibit at the National Maker Faire. Eleven students, including four who had just graduated eighth grade, would spend the weekend explaining how design thinking drove our program’s work and their learning. Kids used student-built prototypes to explain how they employed design thinking to solve problems and make the world a better place.

We set up stations where Faire attendees got to experience prototyping for themselves, tackling design challenges based on the Extraordinaires Design Studio and expertly explained by our kids. The kids’ efforts garnered not one but two awards: Best in Class and Editor’s Choice.

The next day, three teams of seventh-grade students traveled to Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia to present their ideas for making hospitals less scary for child patients.

A group of nearly 70 people, including relatives, friends, hospital professionals, fellow educators, and members of the press, watched the student teams present their ideas and recommendations. It was a very good day. And it was just the beginning, as these students would work with JeffDESIGN over the summer to learn valuable lessons about what it takes to get an idea from concept to production in the real world.

In the span of four days, our kids met and conversed with hundreds of people about their accomplishments as designers, experiencing a level of personal and professional validation that many adults rarely get to enjoy. It was a fantastic end to a fantastic year.

So how is our program growing, changing, and adapting this year?

Initiative One: The EPICS Curriculum and Processes

We have adopted the free and fabulous EPICS—Engineering Projects In Community Service—as the heart and soul of our program this year. I attended a summer training at Purdue University; it was exhaustive and a great investment. EPICS is all about documenting design thinking processes. To that end, they have assembled a massive library of resources, including fully editable and customizable documents teachers can use to plan projects.

I love that the EPICS framework is just that—a framework. It provides a flexible structure I can modify as necessary to suit our processes and needs. As of this writing, we are still deep in that customization process; I expect that it will take most of this year to finalize. When we are done, we’ll have a powerful, document-driven, human-centered methodology to guide our work in design.

Initiative Two: Bringing the Outside In

jarrett-inset2-designthinking-author

Students use the laser engraver.

Last year, students connected with professional designer Meghan Holliday, who spoke about her life and work as a designer. This year, we’ve got Andrew Coy, senior advisor for making in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, sharing why making is critical in schools today; Alixandra Klein, a Vermont-based entrepreneur who makes jewelry using a laser cutter and upcycled materials, talking about the importance of art and creativity; and Dr. Jorge Valdes of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office(and also a high school science teacher here in New Jersey) discussing intellectual property, patents, and the inventor’s mindset. And all of this is just for Design Experience One.

Initiative Three: Changes to the Instructional Environment

We were fortunate to acquire an Epilog laser engraver last summer. It has quickly proven to be a game-changer for our program, capturing imaginations and literally igniting creativity like no other tool previously. Our new “soft seating” area includes a SMART Board 6000 interactive display, an Ikea coffee table (donated), an Xbox 360 (also donated), and a leather couch I found for sale on Facebook for $75. The combination of these items has made a terrific small group instructional area, while providing kids who have lunch in my room a chance to enjoy some gaming.

Final Thoughts

The new school year has gotten off to a good start. We’re creating an entirely new understanding of design thinking in Digital Shop, an amalgam of our shared past experiences and the practices of some of the world’s best design thinking practitioners. It’s ridiculously hard work, alternatively frustrating and exhilarating, but totally worth it.

Teach Students to Break Down Criteria for Success

EdWeek

Screen shot 2016-12-20 at 11.10.55 AM.png

As a general rule, I front load my units/projects by previewing and discussing the end product first and then using the following weeks to provide instruction and practice to ensure success criteria.

Since we’re starting our new unit now, we’ve been spending time looking at the assessment, modifying it together and now discussing how students can find success with the skills being assessed.

Rather than just provide a rubric and a sample, students were split up into groups focusing on a particular standard.

Students needed to review the assignment (which they annotated yesterday) and the rubric and align past learning with the standard they were responsible for.

Each group made a chart and shared out around the room. Students then were asked to take pictures of each of the charts and return to their seats.Screen shot 2016-12-20 at 11.12.44 AM.png

As they worked together to determine what success will look like and why they were working on these skills, I walked around the room answering questions and listening to their conversations.

After we shared out and developed a list of skills from the standards, students were asked to answer an exit ticket (that was emailed to them) that asked the following:

Exit ticket:

Based on the success criteria established and the work we’ve done in class thus far, what skills and/or content do you feel you’re already proficient in or mastering? How do you know? Which areas do you feel you need the most help with? What lessons will you need to find success?

1. What skills and/or content do you feel you’re already proficient in or mastering?
2. How do you know?
3.  What areas do you feel you need the most help with?
4. What lessons would be helpful to find success?
Thanks! Make sure to check your email and “pupilpath” regularly for feedback.
Right after class, I read their emails and provide them feedback as well as gather data to align my mini-lessons to ensure success for all. Number four is of particular use to me, asking students to identify areas of need. This is essential to helping them reflect and be more metacognative. The better informed they are about their own learning, strengths and challenges, the better they can get their needs met and I can be helpful in how that happens.
Students need to know what is being assessed, so they can name and understand what they are learning and more importantly why. In this way they can start to connect their learning to real skills that will be of use to them in the future.

Teaching the Teachers

Teaching the teachers

Great teaching has long been seen as an innate skill. But reformers are showing that the best teachers are made, not born

TO THE 11- and 12-year-olds in his maths class, Jimmy Cavanagh seems like a born teacher. He is warm but firm. His voice is strong. Correct answers make him smile. And yet it is not his pep that explains why his pupils at North Star Academy in Newark, New Jersey, can expect to go to university, despite 80% of their families needing help to pay for school meals.

Mr Cavanagh is the product of a new way of training teachers. Rather than spending their time musing on the meaning of education, he and his peers have been drilled in the craft of the classroom. Their dozens of honed techniques cover everything from discipline to making sure all children are thinking hard. Not a second is wasted. North Star teachers may seem naturals. They are anything but.

Like many of his North Star colleagues are or have been, Mr Cavanagh is enrolled at the Relay Graduate School of Education. Along with similar institutions around the world, Relay is applying lessons from cognitive science, medical education and sports training to the business of supplying better teachers. Like doctors on the wards of teaching hospitals, its students often train at excellent institutions, learning from experienced high-calibre peers. Their technique is calibrated, practised, coached and relentlessly assessed like that of a top-flight athlete. Jamey Verrilli, who runs Relay’s Newark branch (there are seven others), says the approach shows teaching for what it is: not an innate gift, nor a refuge for those who, as the old saw has it, “can’t do”, but “an incredibly intricate, complex and beautiful craft”.

Hello, Mr Chips

There can be few crafts more necessary. Many factors shape a child’s success, but in schools nothing matters as much as the quality of teaching. In a study updated last year, John Hattie of the University of Melbourne crunched the results of more than 65,000 research papers on the effects of hundreds of interventions on the learning of 250m pupils. He found that aspects of schools that parents care about a lot, such as class sizes, uniforms and streaming by ability, make little or no difference to whether children learn (see chart). What matters is “teacher expertise”. All of the 20 most powerful ways to improve school-time learning identified by the study depended on what a teacher did in the classroom.

Eric Hanushek, an economist at Stanford University, has estimated that during an academic year pupils taught by teachers at the 90th percentile for effectiveness learn 1.5 years’ worth of material. Those taught by teachers at the 10th percentile learn half a year’s worth. Similar results have been found in countries from Britain to Ecuador. “No other attribute of schools comes close to having this much influence on student achievement,” he says.

Rich families find it easier to compensate for bad teachers, so good teaching helps poor kids the most. Having a high-quality teacher in primary school could “substantially offset” the influence of poverty on school test scores, according to a paper co-authored by Mr Hanushek. Thomas Kane of Harvard University estimates that if African-American children were all taught by the top 25% of teachers, the gap between blacks and whites would close within eight years. He adds that if the average American teacher were as good as those at the top quartile the gap in test scores between America and Asian countries would be closed within four years.

Such studies emphasise the power of good teaching. But a question has dogged policymakers: are great teachers born or made? Prejudices played out in popular culture suggest the former. Bad teachers are portrayed as lazy and kid-hating. Edna Krabappel of “The Simpsons” treats lessons as obstacles to cigarette breaks. Good and inspiring teachers, meanwhile, such as Michelle Pfeiffer’s marine-turned-educator in “Dangerous Minds” (pictured), or J.K. Rowling’s Minerva McGonagall, are portrayed as endowed with supernatural gifts (literally so, in the case of the head of Gryffindor). In 2011 a survey of attitudes to education found that such portrayals reflect what people believe: 70% of Americans thought the ability to teach was more the result of innate talent than training.

Elizabeth Green, the author of “Building A Better Teacher”, calls this the “myth of the natural-born teacher”. Such a belief makes finding a good teacher like panning for gold: get rid of all those that don’t cut it; keep the shiny ones. This is in part why, for the past two decades, increasing the “accountability” of teachers has been a priority for educational reformers.

There is a good deal of sense in this. In cities such as Washington, DC, performance-related pay and (more important) dismissing the worst teachers have boosted test scores. But relying on hiring and firing without addressing the ways that teachers actually teach is unlikely to work. Education-policy wonks have neglected what one of them once called the “black box of the production process” and others might call “the classroom”. Open that black box, and two important truths pop out. A fair chunk of what teachers (and others) believe about teaching is wrong. And ways of teaching better—often much better—can be learned. Grit can become gold.

Multipliciamus

In 2014 Rob Coe of Durham University, in England, noted in a report on what makes great teaching that many commonly used classroom techniques do not work. Unearned praise, grouping by ability and accepting or encouraging children’s different “learning styles” are widely espoused but bad ideas. So too is the notion that pupils can discover complex ideas all by themselves. Teachers must impart knowledge and critical thinking.

Those who do so embody six aspects of great teaching, as identified by Mr Coe. The first and second concern their motives and how they get on with their peers. The third and fourth involve using time well, fostering good behaviour and high expectations. Most important, though, are the fifth and sixth aspects, high-quality instruction and so-called “pedagogical content knowledge”—a blend of subject knowledge and teaching craft. Its essence is defined by Charles Chew, one of Singapore’s “principal master teachers”, an elite group that guides the island’s schools: “I don’t teach physics; I teach my pupils how to learn physics.”

Branches of the learning tree

Teachers like Mr Chew ask probing questions of all students. They assign short writing tasks that get children thinking and allow teachers to check for progress. Their classes are planned—with a clear sense of the goal and how to reach it—and teacher-led but interactive. They anticipate errors, such as the tendency to mix up remainders and decimals. They space out and vary ways in which children practise things, cognitive science having shown that this aids long-term retention.

These techniques work. In a report published in February the OECD found a link between the use of such “cognitive activation” strategies and high test scores among its club of mostly rich countries. The use of memorisation or pupil-led learning was common among laggards. A recent study by David Reynolds compared maths teaching in Nanjing and Southampton, where he works. It found that in China, “whole-class interaction” was used 72% of the time, compared with only 24% in England. Earlier studies by James Stigler, a psychologist at UCLA, found that American classrooms rang to the sound of “what” questions. In Japan teachers asked more “why” and “how” questions that check students understand what they are learning.

But a better awareness of how to teach will not on its own lead to great teaching. According to Marie Hamer, the head of initial teacher training at Ark, a group of English schools: “Too often teachers are told what to improve, but not given clear guidance on how to make that change.” The new types of training used at Relay and elsewhere are intended to address that.

David Steiner of the Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy, in Baltimore, characterises many of America’s teacher-training institutions as “sclerotic”. It can be easier to earn a teaching qualification than to make the grades American colleges require of their athletes. According to Mr Hattie none of Australia’s 450 education training programmes has ever had to prove its impact—nor has any ever had its accreditation removed. Some countries are much more selective. Winning acceptance to take an education degree in Finland is about as competitive as getting into MIT. But even in Finland, teachers are not typically to be found in the top third of graduates for numeracy or literacy skills.

In America and Britain training has been heavy on theory and light on classroom practice. Rod Lucero of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), a body representing more than half of the country’s teacher-training providers, says that most courses have a classroom placement. But he concedes that it falls short of “clinical practice”. After finishing an undergraduate degree in education “I didn’t feel I was anywhere near ready,” says Jazmine Wheeler, now a first-year student at the Sposato Graduate School of Education, a college which grew out of the Match charter schools in Boston.

This fits with a pattern Mr Kane’s research reveals to be “almost constant”: new teachers lack classroom management and instruction skills. As a result they struggle at first before improving over the subsequent three to five years. The new teaching schools believe that those skills which teachers now pick up haphazardly can be systematically imparted in advance. “Surgeons start on cadavers, not on live patients,” Mr Kane notes.

“We have thought a lot about how to teach 22-year-olds,” says Scott McCue, who runs Sposato. He and his colleagues have crunched good teaching into a “taxonomy” of things to do and say. “Of the 5,000 or so things that go into amazing teaching,” says Orin Gutlerner, Sposato’s founding director, “we want to make sure you can do the most important 250.”

The curriculum of the new schools is influenced by people like Doug Lemov. A former English teacher and the founder of a school in Boston, Mr Lemov used test-score data to identify some of the best teachers in America. After visiting them and analysing videos of their classes to find out precisely what they did, he created a list of 62 techniques. Many involve the basics of getting pupils’ attention. “Threshold” has teachers meeting pupils at the door; “strong voice” explains that the most effective teachers stand still when talking, use a formal register, deploy an economy of language and do not finish their sentences until they have their classes’ full attention.

But most of Mr Lemov’s techniques are meant to increase the number of pupils in a class who are thinking and the amount of time that they do so. Techniques such as his “cold call” and “turn and talk”, where pupils have to explain their thoughts quickly to a peer, give the kinds of cognitive workouts common in classrooms in Shanghai and Singapore, which regularly top international comparisons.

Trainees at Sposato undertake residencies at Match schools. They spend 20 hours per week studying and practising, and 40-50 tutoring or assisting teachers. Mr Gutlerner says that the most powerful predictor of residents’ success is how well they respond to the feedback they get after classes.

This new approach resembles in some ways the more collective ethos seen in the best Asian schools. Few other professionals are so isolated in their work, or get so little feedback, as Western teachers. Today 40% of teachers in the OECD have never taught alongside another teacher, observed another or given feedback. Simon Burgess of the University of Bristol says teaching is still “a closed-door profession”, adding that teaching unions have made it hard for observers to take notes in classes. Pupils suffer as a result, says Pasi Sahlberg, a former senior official at Finland’s education department. He attributes much of his country’s success to Finnish teachers’ culture of collaboration.

Mr Schneebly needs his feedback

As well as being isolated, teachers lack well defined ways of getting better. Mr Gutlerner points out that teaching, alone among the professions, asks the same of novices as of 20-year veterans. Much of what passes for “professional development” is woeful, as are the systems for assessing it. In 2011 a study in England found that only 1% of training courses enabled teachers to turn bad practice into good teaching. The story in America is similar. This is not for want of cash. The New Teacher Project, a group that helps cities recruit teachers, estimates that in some parts of America schools shell out about $18,000 per teacher per year on professional development, 4-15 times as much as is spent in other sectors.

The New Teacher Project suggests that after the burst of improvement at the start of their careers teachers rarely get a great deal better. This may, in part, be because they do not know they need to get better. Three out of five low-performing teachers in America think they are doing a great job. Overconfidence is common elsewhere: nine out of ten teachers in the OECD say they are well prepared. Teachers in England congratulate themselves on their use of cognitive-activation strategies, despite the fact that pupil surveys suggest they rely more on rote learning than teachers almost everywhere else.

It need not be this way. In a vast study published in March, Roland Fryer of Harvard University found that “managed professional development”, where teachers receive precise instruction together with specific, regular feedback under the mentorship of a lead teacher, had large positive effects. Matthew Kraft and John Papay, of Harvard and Brown universities, have found that teachers in the best quarter of schools ranked by their levels of support improved by 38% more over a decade than those in the lowest quarter.

Such environments are present in schools such as Match and North Star—and in areas such as Shanghai and Singapore. Getting the incentives right helps. In Shanghai teachers will not be promoted unless they can prove they are collaborative. Their mentors will not be promoted unless they can show that their student-teachers improve. It helps to have time. Teachers in Shanghai teach for only 10-12 hours a week, less than half the American average of 27 hours.

No dark sarcasm

In many countries the way to get ahead in a school is to move into management. Mr Fryer says that American school districts “pay people in inverse proportion to the value they add”. District superintendents make more money than teachers although their impact on pupils’ lives is less. Singapore has a separate career track for teachers, so that the best do not leave the classroom. Australia may soon follow suit.

The new models of teacher training that will start those careers have yet to be thoroughly evaluated. Early evidence is encouraging, however. Relay and Sposato both make their trainees’ graduation dependent on improved outcomes for students. A blind evaluation that Relay undertook of its teachers rated them as higher than average, especially in classroom management. At Ark, in England, recent graduates are seen by the schools that have hired them as among the best cohorts that they have received.

Mr Steiner notes, though, that it is not yet clear whether these new teachers are “school-proof”: effective in schools that lack the intense culture of feedback and practice of places like Match. This is a big caveat: across the OECD two-thirds of teachers believe their schools to be hostile to innovation.

If the new approaches can be made to work at scale, that should change. Relay will be in 12 cities by next academic year, training 2,000 teachers and 400 head teachers, including those from government-run schools. This year AACTE launched its own commission investigating ways in which its colleges could move to a similar model. In England Matthew Hood, an entrepreneurial assistant head teacher, has plans for a Relay-like “Institute for Advanced Teaching”.

This way, reformers hope, they can finally improve education on a large scale. Until now, the job of the teacher has been comparatively neglected, with all the focus on structural changes. But disruptions to school systems are irrelevant if they do not change how and what children learn. For that, what matters is what teachers do and think. The answer, after all, was in the classroom.

A Post-Election Letter to Educators from a High School Senior

Medium.com

My co-agitator, Renea-Harris Peterson, Class of 2018, and I on the day of the rally. Image by Ezra Robinson

On November 14, 2016, thousands of Seattle high school students took to the streets in protest of the presidential election results. The walk-out was an inspiring demonstration of the power that we as students collectively hold. And it was a painful reminder of our powerlessness as disenfranchised people inheriting the results of an election in which we had no voice.

Hours before students met in Capitol Hill and marched down to Westlake Park, a friend and I organized a rally for our own high school. As students of color at a predominantly white, independent school, we felt the need to carve out space and time to process recent incidents of racism in our own community and the ramifications of the election results. We needed to heal.

Students and faculty gathered together in the courtyard hours before the city-wide walkout. Image by Ezra Robinson

I witnessed my peers, teachers, and administrative staff come together in a way I had never seen before at my school. That day, students and adults in the Upper School circled together in the small courtyard as we extended the invitation to gather. Our invitation reached further than we expected, as middle school students filed in to join the crowd. Courageous truths were shared. Sage was burned. Arms were linked in unity. A moment of silence was held. Posters were made. And classes resumed two hours later.

For our small community, the two hour rally was not enough. For my city, one walk-out was not enough. But they both were necessary first-steps toward healing.

As a country we need to start taking second, third, and fourth steps. As people we need to use action as significantly as we do rhetoric. For the next four years, for time indefinitely, I need to know that the adults in my life support me. Below is a letter I shared with the faculty and staff at my school that afternoon, addressing the rally and city-wide walkout, and future plans for peacemaking in our community and the country. I hope that it serves to challenge all educators to act, assist, and grow.


Dear Educator,

I am incredibly grateful for today’s opportunity to organize and create the much needed space for our community to come together and speak their truths. It was humbling to hear the passion with which both students and faculty spoke about the need for action, change, and healing within our community and beyond. The gathering today, and the walk-out that thousands of Seattle high school students participated in, spoke volumes about what this moment in time means to us as young people. I would also like to take this opportunity to reiterate a few of the things stated and to add on to truths shared during our community meeting this morning.

In the past week, I have had multiple adults approach me and ask what they could do to support me and fellow students at this school. As faculty, fellow learners, and the mentors that students look toward for guidance, I would like to ask you to be especially mindful of a few things. Below are a few ways to move forward:

Understand that all students go through the healing process in different ways. As was stated by our Upper School Head this morning, some students take more time to “sit in their emotions.” This is crucial. This is a necessary part of the process. Let anger, sadness, fear, and frustration be. They are legitimate. You need only to look at the rhetoric and actions of emboldened Trump supporters to understand why.

Know that transgressions within our community and the breaches of trust caused by the actions of individual students reflect pain caused on a national scale. It is imperative that we recognize not just the emotional strain caused by recent incidents (i.e. use of racial epithets, micro-aggressions, stereotyping, erasure, etc.) within our community, but also the historical trauma that these incidents can bring up. For students in especially vulnerable positions, with marginalized identities, the election is about so much more than just Trump. It is about centuries of state-sanctioned violence against our bodies. It is about the systematic devaluing of our humanity, the othering of our cultures and differences. For some, it is a matter of life and death — and that is no exaggeration. Our lives outside the classroom are still real. Any attempt to make peace or heal also requires peacemaking and healing on a larger scale.

Acknowledge that this is not a surprise for many students. For white (and/or privileged) faculty members, in the words of Courtney Parker West:

“I get it. It’s awful. It’s terrifying. It’s devastating. But find yourself a white person and complain to them, then get past your feelings because if you really want to be an ally, we don’t need your posts or your shock or even your tearful apologies, but rather your organizing manpower. People of color have always resisted and you can follow us…And to my black and brown brothers and sisters reading this, I won’t tell you to not be discouraged, for I am discouraged. I will not tell you that we shall overcome, for I am tired of overcoming. I will not tell you to keep on keepin’ on like there’s any other option for us. I will only say that I will resist alongside you in love and justice because we come from a tradition of resistance.”

Be mindful of calls for “unity,” “mutual respect,” or “forgiveness.”Please understand that historically, calls for “unity” in the past were used as a subtle silencing tactic. While the current intent of most people calling for “optimism,” “unity,” or “forgiveness” is positive and ultimately necessary, its impact can be a painful reminder of historic, insidious attempts to censor dissent and return to the harmful status quo.

There is a time and place for optimism, for unity, and for forgiveness. Yes, they are necessary components of the healing process. But know that it is immensely difficult to embrace and empathize with someone who uses racial epithets, uses exclusive and hateful rhetoric, condones such rhetoric through their vote, or condones such rhetoric through their complacency. At the very least, unity will not directly follow the moment of abuse or the initial breach of trust. And that moment, or rather, the period of oppression extends far deeper than the night of November, 8th 2016.

Refer back to the first action on this list. Anger is part of the healing process and can take a painfully long time to work through. In the framework of peacemaking and restorative justice, people can only forgive when they are ready to do so. In a community, forgiveness and empathy are reciprocal, continual processes that occurs at different stages for everyone. They are not singular moments, they do not happen unanimously. Forgiveness occurs when the abuser(s) of trust indicate to the victim(s) that they have complied with mutually defined and acknowledged behavioral shifts, which ultimately moves both parties towards healing. That process takes time, is painful, thorough, and involves continuous action.

Acknowledge the necessity of self-care. In addition, someone notably articulated that, ‘“Don’t fight hate with hate’ is also a subtle example of gaslighting, in which our legitimate hurt and anger at the injustices we suffer is equated to the bigotry and abuse of our oppressors. For marginalized people, being angry does not mean you are being hateful, it means you love yourself enough to get upset at your own mistreatment.” In times like these, it is imperative that we prioritize the self-care of students in need, for self-care is inherently revolutionary in a society that fails to care for us.

Know how individual responsibility and identity is related to action. As I mentioned at the rally today, whether or not you chose to wear it, the safety pin symbolizes a promise that can be broken as easily as it is made. It is our collective responsibility to hold each other accountable to that promise. Let me be clear. A piece of metal, no matter how symbolic it is, will not save lives. It will not protect my peers and me from harm, from verbal and physical assault, nor from bullets. Wearing a safety pin is your personal commitment to action, which can actually protect us.

“I will trust actions, nothing more, nothing less.” — Ijeoma Oluo. Image by Ezra Robinson

It is also necessary to examine and confront our own privilege, power, and difference in making that promise. The burden of education, peacemaking, activism, and facilitation, should rest on the shoulders of every single person. These processes are inherently uncomfortable and necessary. However, it was said today as well, that the ‘work’ is being disproportionately distributed. For underprivileged individuals, creating safe spaces, embracing difference, and communicating with the “other side” to dismantle insular bubbles are actions that have been ingrained in our existence. These are necessary skills we use to survive this world, and to ultimately make it a better place. And we have been bearing a weight too heavy, while others in positions to contribute have been slacking for far too long.

Listen. Process. Act. Create a culture that is intolerant of intolerance, both in and outside of the classroom. Check in with your students, give hugs, and listen to us when we need you. Also, understand that hugs can only go so far to provide safety. Listen to our truths. Recognize us and our leadership and know that leadership in inherently a relational process.

Renew your commitment to action daily. Support institutional programs that uplift underrepresented narratives, seek out marginalized voices and promote them in your curriculum. Give your time to student organizations on campus, be a participant and facilitator in safe spaces.

Resist. Fight for your students and their rights. Give your time and money to organizations, support movements like Black Lives Matter and NoDAPL.

Ask yourself what you’re doing. Then, ask yourself what you aren’t. Show up, because your actions speak louder than words, especially as adults in our lives.

I hope this list serves to initiate necessary conversations, help you lean into discomfort, and assist us as students in this fight for our future.

Power to you.

— Brady Huang, Class of 2017