COMMITTEE ON MULTICULTURAL CURRICULUM TRANSFORMATION
Notes from Meeting of
16 October 2012
The second meeting of the Committee on Multicultural Curriculum Transformation was held on
Tuesday, October 16, 2012 at 10:15 a.m. in Altgeld 203.
Attendance
Gary Chen (Engineering & Engineering Technology), Carolinda Douglass (Vice Provost for
Academic Planning & Development), Teresa Fisher (Education), Michael Gonzales (CMCT
Chair; Director, Center for Latino and Latin American Studies), Janice Hamlet (Coordinator,
Academic Diversity Programs), Robin Moremen (Liberal Arts & Sciences), Kristen Myers
(Director, Women’s Studies), Donna Smith (Supportive Professional Staff), Beth Towell
(Curricular Dean), and Kayla Schnacky (CMCT Graduate Assistant).
Announcements
Gonzales announced that Teresa Fisher will be the new representative from Education, but that
we have not yet filled the vacant position from Law. Gonzales also announced that Laverne
Gyant, Director of Black Studies, would be available to serve on the committee during the spring
semester.
Minutes
The minutes from the meeting of September 18, 2012, were approved with one amendment.
Assessment & Evaluation Review
Post-Institute evaluations were discussed. Chen suggested the possibility of using Survey
Monkey to complete the evaluations. Moremen reminded the committee of the importance of
encouraging participants to complete the evaluations each day before they leave the room.
Several committee members expressed concern about the tedious and time-intensive task of
compiling the evaluation data. Schnacky shared her experience with data entry and compilation
and Gonzales mentioned the possibility of obtaining additional help if needed.
Gonzales asked the committee for their opinions regarding the pre-/post-Institute assessment
instrument used after the previous Institute. Towell stated that she didn’t feel that she learned
anything from the results. Moremen stated that the goal of the assessment was to capture the pre
and post impressions of the students with regard to their perceptions of diversity. She shared that
the instrument has been used in past studies to assess stereotypes and negative opinions, and has
demonstrated an improvement in views. Towell noted that the results do not show any
significant jumps in frequency. Chen stated that the current instrument could serve as a
component of the assessment, but should be supplementary to a component that is more
structured in format. Moremen reiterated the purpose of the assessment, which is to determine if
students in transformed courses come away with a more tolerant, accepting, and richer notion of
diversity. Towell noted that some of the terms provided by students in the assessment are
difficult to interpret as positive or negative. She also suggested adding to the results document
the instruction prompt text and the committee’s reactions to the results and instrument.
Schnacky will make the additions and redistribute the results document to the committee.
Gonzales asked the committee how we should approach the assessment instrument in the future.
Towell suggested a more direct route by asking the students if they are more culturally-open and
ask them to give an example. There was some discussion regarding how terms such as diversity
and culture would be defined. Moremen suggested asking students, “What specifically have you
learned about people who are different from you?” Chen suggested including “and who are
similar to you” in the wording as well. Gonzales posed the question of how we can
operationalize this into a new instrument. Myers questioned if perhaps the students are
confusing the diversity assessment with a course evaluation, given its timing near the end of the
semester. Douglass stated that the course evaluations can take place as early as the last half of
the class (i.e., last quarter). Myers volunteered to work with Douglass and Sherrill Morris in the
creation of a new assessment instrument. Moremen noted that the committee should find willing
professors to participate in the assessment. Douglass suggested using Hamlet’s survey of
transformed courses to identify past participants who may be willing to participate in a future
pre/post assessment. Towell stated that she would like to see the committee require participation
in the assessment of all the Institute attendees.
Fisher arrived at the meeting and committee members introduced themselves.
Gonzales turned the discussion to the compilation of the Institute evaluations (Word document).
Towell recalled discussing the compilation of results as a committee in a previous meeting. She
noted that there should be meeting minutes documenting what was discussed (i.e., what did or
did not work well). Schnacky will locate and distribute the document to the committee.
Institute
Plenary Speakers: Gonzales announced that he received confirmation of the plenary speakers’
appointments and their stipend.
Reservations: Gonzales confirmed the reservation of the University Suite.
Schedule & Themes: Gonzales mentioned that past Institute core panel sessions have included
the topics of race, ethnicity, and gender. He proposed that women in the sciences could be
included as a panel on gender. Gonzales stated that we could have more than one panel on a
large topic, such as race and ethnicity. He then opened the floor for discussion.
Myers stated that the gender and sexuality topics should go together, but perhaps as shorter
sessions. She suggested gender gap as a theme, with more than one presentation. Moremen
suggested that the topics of sexual identity and gender be kept separate in order to address the
transgender theme. She also noted that following 9/11, the institute had included a panel on
religion. Myers suggested coming up with a core theme for the Institute (i.e., contemporary
issues, such as the impact of the great recession on race, class, and gender). Gonzales mentioned
that affirmative action is currently before the Supreme Court, and suggested inviting a law
professor to speak on the topic. Moremen suggested a panel on economic inequality and its
impact on students, and the ability of university’s to provide financial aid. Chen proposed the
topic of social media and education. Myers noted that there is a class currently offered on this
topic.
Towell supported the idea of looking at current issues, but stressed the importance of selecting
topics where we can find competent speakers. Gonzales added that in selecting topics, we need
to identify issues that are salient to the faculty, to which the committee agreed. Douglass
identified Anna Stevens, who worked for Military Services, as a possible speaker on the topic of
military/veterans/PTSD. Douglass also stated that if she were a teacher, she would want to know
“who is going to be in my class, what do I need to know about them, and how do I make sure
other students are accepting of them?” Myers added, “and how do you engage them?”
Gonzales stated that panels should be focused and related to the needs of faculty and students.
Towell inquired as to whether the committee should first determine the topics or identify
speakers. Gonzales noted that the plenary speakers may need some direction. In reviewing the
2011 Institute schedule, the committee noted that there are nine sessions to fill, including the
opening session. Towell inquired about the number of applications received thus far. Schnacky
said she has not received any applications to date.
Smith suggested adding a note about the “flavor” of the Institute topics into future
announcements of the event. Moremen suggested using the theme of “contemporary issues in
the classroom,” or something similar if we plan to submit a release for NIU Today. Towell
proposed the addition of “issues related to diversity” in the wording. Gonzales said he will take
responsibility for the article and will share a draft with Douglass. He reiterated the importance
of everything coming back to the curriculum. Gonzales and Schnacky will compile and
distribute the topics and themes discussed during the meeting.
Reminder to Send Invitations: Moremen stated that in the past, committee members have
reminded colleagues and encouraged their participation in the Institute. Gonzales proposed that
the release in NIU Today include the themes offered as well as several quotes from committee
members.
Outside Participant Interest: Gonzales shared that he received an email from a gentleman in
Switzerland, expressing his interest in the Institute. Gonzales noted that while we have invited
participants outside NIU to attend past Institutes, they did not receive a stipend, and this will
likely come down to an issue of space.
Other Business
Moremen announced that a former institute participant had volunteered to join Will Ashford’s
panel for the MCT Academy at Rock Valley College earlier in October.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:35 a.m. The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday,
November 20, 2012 from 10:00-11:30 a.m. in Altgeld 203.