Search results

A Legacy Community is a living and learning community supported by broader institutional departments (e.g., student affairs, academic affairs, foundation, and alumni affairs) that dedicate resources, opportunities, and supports intended to: (a) undo legacies of educational disparities that Black/African American males have historically witnessed and (b) build capacity for students engaged in these communities (i.e., Black/African American males) to create and leave positive legacies on their terms. In this qualitative study of Black and African American undergraduate male living and learning community (LLC) participants at a primarily white institution (Legacy House), we investigate the LLC program elements that impact participants' educational and social experiences, and foster pathways for student legacy building. Legacy house participants describe brotherhood, sense of belonging, and leaving a legacy as elements that enable positive student academic and social outcomes, campus involvement, and career readiness.

This chapter takes a panoramic view to explore the lives of collegiate Black men. We begin with brief reflections from our own experiences to position ourselves to and alongside Black men's lives and college years. After setting the stage through our own reflections, we explore the literature on Black men's lives during their college years and pay particular attention to their social statuses, campus engagement, and health and well-being. Two critical components in many Black men's collegiate experiences are how they are projected in wider US society through deficit-based perspectives and repositioned away from educational success. We interrogate these realities and advance a discussion on ways to improve the conditions, environment, and understanding of their college journeys and possibilities. We conclude with recommendations for research, practice, and policy.

The VTBound program was implemented at Virginia Tech to ensure international student enrollment despite travel and visa restrictions during the pandemic. The program was a partnership across academic affairs, student affairs, and admissions. Eighty-two first-year undergraduate international students from 19 countries participated in a full-time remote curriculum directed to their intended major (mostly engineering). Instruction was primarily asynchronous with synchronous office hours and recitations attentive to global time differences. Support mechanisms to maximize student success included dedicated academic advising and a customized first-year experience (FYE) course with peer mentors. The academic performance of and adherence to academic integrity standards by these students exceeded that of domestic and international first-year students on campus. Many VTBound students became engaged in co- and extracurricular programming while studying remotely. The greatest challenge was limited access to visa appointments and global travel restrictions necessitating a second remote semester for most VTBound students. Overall, the VTBound program demonstrates the value of a customized first-year transition program for international students and the potential to engage students for a successful semester of remote learning from their home Countries.

The Whole Child Initiative (WCI) was developed over the past 15 years as a blueprint to promote long-term development and success of all children, as well as their families and communities. This chapter describes three aspects of the WCI model: (a) the need for a public health approach to sustainable, communitywide change targeting the whole child; (b) a clear, future-oriented vision for equipping educators, caregivers, and service providers with the skills and attitudes required to deliver high-quality instruction; and (c) the infusion of social and emotional learning practices to transform environments in which youth live and play. We provide examples of how schools, communities, and families can come together to create a common culture fostering stable and nurturing relationships essential for enhancing youth well-being. We close with recommended “super strategies” – low-cost, simple, and effective practices that can be broadly implemented to keep every child healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged in the community at large.

Initiating a practical model for embedding transformative learning in education that will promote sustainable development is a challenge for higher education. Siam University decided to assign a task force with the mission to work with communities in order to propose guidelines of learning for sustainability (LfS) based on real-life experiences. Selected communities which have agreed to be the community living labs for teaching and learning activities of the university were chosen based on the Bray and Thomas’ Cube Model. There are differences in sizes (number of members), locations (urban, suburban), and histories (old settlement with long history and rich culture and the newly settlement communities consisting of migrated members). Community-based participatory research (CBPR) was applied in the study. The initial model was developed from the synthesis of experiential work with communities in sustainability-related projects. After revision, the “Learning for Sustainability Action Model” was proposed. Success factors in implementing the model were also suggested.

No matter how dominant a worldview is, there are always other ways of interpreting the world. (Littlebear, 2000, p. 79)

No matter how dominant a worldview is, there are always other ways of interpreting the world. (Littlebear, 2000, p. 79)

These words resonated with me when I first started my career in higher education in Canada 15 years after being a school teacher for much of my young adult life in México. Back then, in Mexico, I took for granted the way in which I lived my values. While there were instances and contexts where those values were challenged, it was not until I moved to Canada that I started redefining and reshaping my worldview, negotiating what was negotiable within me, and fighting to maintain my position in what was not negotiable. I am still learning to navigate the world of postsecondary education where I have learned that, as Siksika Elder Leroy Littlebear (2000) observes, “No one has a pure worldview that is 100 percent Indigenous or Eurocentric; rather, everyone has an integrated mind, a fluxing and ambidextrous consciousness” (p. 85). How then, do I show all of who I am when my position toward Indigenous history, culture, language, and values is informed by my own upbringing and experience and consequently might be perceived as “biased”?

This auto-ethnographic chapter addresses this question by presenting a case study where I reflect on Littlebear's (2000) observations on the fluidity of worldviews and the development of an “ambidextrous consciousness,” and how those principles have allowed me the space to be my authentic self despite the different ontological and axiological orientations I have encountered my work in higher education.

First-generation college students in the United States are a unique demographic that is often characterized by the institutions that serve them with a risk-laden and deficit-based model. However, our analysis of the transcripts of open-ended, semi-structured interviews with 22 “first-gen” respondents suggests they are actively deft, agentic, self-determining parties to processes of identity construction that are both externally imposed and potentially stigmatizing, as well as exemplars of survivance and determination. We deploy a grounded theory approach to an open-coding process, modeled after the extended case method, while viewing our data through a novel synthesis of the dual theoretical lenses of structural and radical/structural symbolic interactionism and intersectional/standpoint feminist traditions, in order to reveal the complex, unfolding, active strategies students used to make sense of their obstacles, successes, co-created identities, and distinctive institutional encounters. We find that contrary to the dictates of prevailing paradigms, identity-building among first-gens is an incremental and bidirectional process through which students actively perceive and engage existing power structures to persist and even thrive amid incredibly trying, challenging, distressing, and even traumatic circumstances. Our findings suggest that successful institutional interventional strategies designed to serve this functionally unique student population (and particularly those tailored to the COVID-moment) would do well to listen deeply to their voices, consider the secondary consequences of “protectionary” policies as potentially more harmful than helpful, and fundamentally, to reexamine the presumption that such students present just institutional risk and vulnerability, but also present a valuable addition to university environments, due to the unique perspective and broader scale of vision their experiences afford them.

With the arrival of various assistive technologies (ATs) such as artificial intelligence, augmented reality, virtual reality and others, we can enhance support in a classroom with special educational needs students. The role of teachers in the new era will be switched to finding ways to develop the full potential of all students, rather than traditionally classified dull tasks, e.g. filling out forms, physical observation of children's behaviour etc. This chapter focuses on elaborating how AT can help to improve the efficiency of special education in the future, and how schools should restructure to accommodate this disruptive change to ease teaching in a classroom with a diverging group of students.