Executive Summary of ARCC Meeting
2/19/16
We recapped the discussion from the last meeting, reviewing quickly the progress made of petition items. We then
discussed the other items on our agenda, listed below in items 2 and 3.
1) Progress on Petition:
Item #4:
A range of cases to be used in practice courses has been identified, 40% of which are written by clinicians of
color. More work must be done to ensure students are exposed to this material.
The Field Department has changed the face sheet of the major case study to require student and client
identity factors. Feedback is requested.
Item #8:
The School has not collected evaluation data on the AR commitment, but this would be a good project for
ARCC. Next steps: establishing objectives, evaluation criteria, and a process.
Item #10:
Students of color need more support from an advisor throughout all steps of the process (selecting a
project, working with the agency, managing racism as it emerges in their placement).
 There is a unique burden for a student of color to undertake the anti-racism project at an
organization which in some cases, has few professional staff of color.
 Students also request a place to discuss this process.
 Identify a project advisor who is a person of color who students can call to discuss road blocks? One
time group or discussion is less important.
Ideas for an optional differentiated orientation for the second year Anti-Racism Assignment:
 Organize students differently (e.g., rather than by setting, perhaps by issue).
 Developing a ‘clinicians of color’ orientation option.
 Adding new content to the online presentation where students of color discuss their projects,
attendant issues and how to deal with them, who to find support from.
Item #7:
The idea is to “take the temperature” of the class early on in both Term 1 & Term 2. The roll-out of this
needs to be systematic. This will be an instructor requirement and the feedback will be seen by the
instructor only.
Questions to answer:





How does the instructor allow issues of race and other identities to emerge and be addressed?
Are there ongoing micro aggressions occurring unaddressed?
Is there adequate communication about syllabus or course issues?
Is the class sufficiently organized so students understand the course plan and expectations?
Is there anything else the instructor could do to facilitate learning?
2) Roll out of the Critical Conversations facilitation model
This is a group facilitation model developed by Professor Peggy O’Neill and former faculty Hye-Kyung Kang.
It helps anyone to participate and manage discussions where tensions emerge because of issues of power,
privilege, or bias.
o Currently, the School has been using this model to train adjunct & resident faculty.
o We want to eventually also train all Smith SW students in order to be the most impactful
with classroom discussions, and for professional development.
 Time will be set aside in the future to discuss the training itself.
 This will likely be a multi-year project.
3) Making the ARCC more accessible and transparent to the Smith community.
We will create a one-page executive summary of ARCC minutes after each meeting. Within ARCC, we will
post minutes and agendas on a Google doc to allow feedback from committee members. We are still looking
to answer: how can the community (students, faculty, staff) learn about ARCC and provide feedback?