# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
29th Occasional Paper in 2017 that explores the question "how consequential can assessment be to learning when assessment approaches may not be inclusive of diverse learners?" We continue the conversation in our 42nd Occasional Paper, "A New Decade for Assessment: Embedding Equity into Assessment Praxis" which builds upon conversations since the release of the 2017 paper, highlighting questions, insights, and future directions for the decade ahead.

# data[].attributes.headline
Assessment During A Crisis: Responding to a Global Pandemic

# data[].attributes.subject
Assessment During A Crisis: Responding to a Global Pandemic

# data[].attributes.body
Dr. Natasha A. Jankowski

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Link to the Video: https://video.ucdavis.edu/id/0_36s9yrtq?width=393&height=700&playerId=24976591
About this talk:
Faculty and librarians created engaging, active remote learning experiences to develop the information research skills of students enrolled in Animal Science (ANS2), Computer-Mediated Communication (CMN 172), and Video Games Theory and Research (CMN 176). This presentation will highlight the library modules we developed and mapped to course and departmental learning outcomes, the impact the activities had on student learning and lessons learned. Drs. Maga and Peña share their perspectives in an interview with Dr. Andy.
About the presenters:
Dr. Elizabeth Maga specializes in applied genetic engineering and gene editing, and the development and use of animal models of disease.

Dr. Jorge Peña specializes in computer-mediated communication, new media, communication in video games and virtual environments, and content analysis of online communication.

Melissa Browne is a librarian at Shields Library. Her interests include demystifying the library for students and integrating information research skills into undergraduate and graduate courses.

Erik Fausak is a librarian at Carlson Health Sciences Library. His interests include utilizing technology in the classroom and Evidence-based Veterinary Medicine.

Melinda Livas is a librarian at Shields Library. Her interests include connecting library research with artificial intelligence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Link to the Video: https://video.ucdavis.edu/id/0_36s9yrtq?width=393&height=700&playerId=24976591 About this talk: Faculty and librarians created engaging, active remote learning experiences to develop the information research skills of students enrolled in Animal Science (ANS2), Computer-Mediated Communication (CMN 172), and Video Games Theory and Research (CMN 176).

# data[].attributes.headline
Five Principles for Enacting Equity by Design

# data[].attributes.subject
Five Principles for Enacting Equity by Design

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Association of American Colleges & Universities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In America's Unmet Promise: The Imperative for Equity in Higher Education (Witham et al. 2015b), we affirmed that effective higher education reform efforts must be infused with an awareness of the ways in which many groups within US society have been historically excluded from educational opportunities, or marginalized within the structures and institutions that house those opportunities. We have characterized this awareness as equity-mindedness-a way of approaching educational reform that foregrounds the policies and practices contributing to disparities in educational achievement and abstains from blaming students for those accumulated disparities (Bensimon 2007; Dowd and Bensimon 2015). In this article, we elaborate on the five principles for achieving equity by design that we first introduced in America's Unmet Promise, with examples drawn from campuses that have used the Center for Urban Education's Equity Scorecard.

The Equity Scorecard catalyzes a process of sustained change by engaging practitioners in equity-focused inquiry, using tools designed to yield more just, equitable, and effective learning environments for African Americans, Latinos/as, American Indians, and subordinated Asian and Pacific Islander populations. These tools prompt practitioners to integrate equity as a criterion for assessment across all core institutional practices. The scorecard is grounded in a theory of change that relies on the power of practitioner engagement in inquiry. Through a process of discovery that makes inequities visible, practitioners gain motivation to make changes in their own practices and in their institutions.

We believe that every campus has many practitioners with the potential to become "first-generation equity workers," as James Gray of the Community College of Aurora (Colorado) calls himself (Felix et al., forthcoming). These change agents cultivate the ability to see, communicate about, and address inequities through their daily work. As an administrator at the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) stated, "[Using the Equity Scorecard] has changed my world view.... it has made me really reflective about the perceptions of the world by others. It's been my experience that it's at the individual level where you suddenly realize that your world view has changed, that you really see the change happen.... I don't think it happens as a group; I think it happens as people."

The five principles discussed below provide the architecture that leaders and practitioners need to build equity by design.
Principle 1: Clarity in language, goals, and measures is vital to effective equitable practices.
Clarity in language. Inequality in higher education is a structural problem that is hidden or revealed through the use of language imbued with political and social meaning. Language conveys how individuals, alone and in the company of others, give meaning to numeric patterns; how they talk about race without talking about it (Pollock 2004); how they shape the reality of racial inequity. Language reflects culturally acquired knowledge that forms the schemas of practitioners, leaders, policymakers, and others whose actions can make-or unmake-the antiracism project in higher education (Bensimon, forthcoming).

Clarity of language is especially important because equity is so often confounded with equality. As one practitioner at the University of Wisconsin commented, "I used to think that equity means you treat everyone equally, but now I see it more in terms of outcomes. Are people able to achieve similar results at the end of their education regardless of where they started?" As described by this practitioner, equality is defined as treating everyone the same or giving everyone the same opportunities regardless of their individual attributes. Equity, in contrast, means accounting for differences in individual attributes and experiences for the purposes of achieving equal outcomes.

Clarity is also important when identifying racial and ethnic groups. Shorthand terms such as "URM" and "at risk" are problematic on many levels (Bensimon, forthcoming). Aggregating all groups into single color-blind categories erases the monumental differences in circumstances experienced by black, Hispanic, Asian American, and American Indian populations. Additionally, such aggregation contravenes equity-mindedness as described in Principle 2.

Clarity in goals and measures. Quantitative data are typically not available in user-friendly formats, and individuals who do not routinely work with data may struggle to use them. This can pose an obstacle to the goal of developing clear goals and measures. Practitioners who are unaccustomed to using data-the majority of faculty, staff, and administrators-often feel overwhelmed by long data reports. Worse, they may be too embarrassed to admit that they can't see a "story" in the percentages and numbers.

To make data more comprehensible, the Center for Urban Education designed the Benchmarking Equity and Student Success Tool (BESST). This interactive tool makes the story behind the data visible, understandable, and actionable for practitioners. Using the BESST, practitioners can understand equity gaps longitudinally and by race and ethnicity, and can manipulate the data to determine how many more students of a particular group need to reach particular milestones in order for an institution to achieve its overall goal. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate BESST data for a four-year college examining credit accumulation for a cohort of students who entered college in 2009. Figure 1 shows that 37.8 percent of Hispanic students accumulated thirty credits in the first year of college, 8.1 percentage points lower than the credit accumulation rate for all students. Figure 2 shows that in order for Hispanic students' credit accumulation to equal the current rate for all students, the college needs thirty-nine more Hispanic students to earn thirty credits within the first year.

Data that are disaggregated in this manner can be very effective in increasing practitioners' awareness and their desire to know why equity gaps exist. Seeing data displayed in the format presented in Figures 1 and 2 prompted James Gray, chair of the mathematics department at the Community College of Aurora, to launch several equity-focused reforms, including changing the hiring process to ensure a diverse candidate pool; using data more purposefully to assess success patterns by race, ethnicity, and course section; and offering more intentional coaching for faculty with large equity gaps in outcomes. (For more on data disaggregation, see Witham et al. 2015a; for a detailed description of the changes at the Community College of Aurora, see Felix et al., forthcoming.)
Principle 2: "Equity-mindedness" should be the guiding paradigm for language and action.
The term equity "has been more or less universally embraced by policy centers/institutes, major Foundations interested in reform and the higher education field itself" (Anderson 2012, 134). But the term is not always used in a manner that engages critically with race. An equity-minded approach raises consciousness of the need to consider equity in connection with historical and political understandings of stratification.

Equity-minded individuals are aware of the sociohistorical context of exclusionary practices and racism in higher education and the impact of power asymmetries on opportunities and outcomes, particularly for African Americans and Latinas/os. Equity-minded individuals are

Color-conscious (as opposed to color-blind) in a critical sense. Being color-conscious means noticing and questioning patterns of educational outcomes that reveal unexplainable differences in outcomes for minoritized students (Gillborn 2005); it means viewing inequalities in the context of a history of exclusion, discrimination, and educational apartheid.

Aware that beliefs, expectations, and practices assumed to be neutral can have outcomes that are racially disadvantageous. Racial disadvantage is created when unequal outcomes are attributed to students' cultural predispositions or when practices are based on stereotypical assumptions about the capacity, aspirations, or motives of minoritized populations (Bensimon 2012).

Willing to assume responsibility for the elimination of inequality. Rather than viewing inequalities as a natural catastrophe (Coates 2015), equity-minded individuals allow for the possibility that inequalities might be created or exacerbated by taken-for-granted practices and policies, inadequate knowledge, a lack of cultural know-how, or the absence of institutional support-all of which can be changed.

Aware that while racism is not always overt, racialized patterns nevertheless permeate policies and practices in higher education institutions. When policies have a disproportionate impact on students of color, they have the effect of maintaining racial hierarchies.

As an Equity Scorecard participant at the University of Wisconsin stated, "Equity-mindedness asks us to turn the mirror on ourselves and accept the fact ... that we actually may play a pretty significant role in creating [inequitable outcomes]. So there are barriers that are extant but for many people very difficult to identify, [and] because they seem so normalized, people continue to work with these practices never once considering that these seemingly innocuous practices contribute to inequitable outcomes."
Principle 3: Equitable practice and policies are designed to accommodate differences in the contexts of students' learning-not to treat all students the same.
As we stated in America's Unmet Promise,

Simply put, achieving equality in outcomes does not mean-in fact cannot mean-treating all students as though they are the same. Rather, [equity-focused] policies and practices in higher education recognize and accommodate differences in students' aspirations, life circumstances, ways of engaging in learning and participating in college, and identities as learners and students. (Witham et al. 2015b, 31)

For example, when the director of the honors program at a University of Wisconsin campus was confronted with data showing that the program had no students of color, rather than assuming these students just did not meet eligibility criteria, he asked a few simple questions: What are the criteria for acceptance to the honors program? In what ways might the criteria have disadvantaged students of color? When were the criteria established, and are they still relevant? He found that the criteria had been in existence for more than thirty years and depended on a single factor: ACT scores. In response to this new information, he said, "It was clear that there was a problem and it was also a very concrete thing."

With the appropriate tools, the director was able to see that the program's entry requirements systematically excluded students of color. The concreteness of the problem, along with the authority of his position, empowered him to develop a holistic admissions process. In one year, the all-white honors program became more inclusive with the addition of African American, Latino/a, and Hmong students. The program also began including courses on critical race theory and ethnic studies (Bishop 2014).
Principle 4: Enacting equity requires a continual process of learning, disaggregating data, and questioning assumptions about relevance and effectiveness.
While disaggregated data are necessary to identify and prioritize problems, disaggregated data alone are insufficient to attain equity-focused change. What matters is how practitioners interpret the data. Do they interpret racialized inequities as a symptom of student deficiencies or as an indication of failed practices? The interpretive lenses through which practitioners make sense of data are far more consequential than the collection of the data itself.

Both James Gray at the Community College of Aurora and the director of the honors program at the Wisconsin campus could have looked at their data and concluded that racial differences were attributable to characteristics over which they had no control. But institutional change requires the opportunity and capacity to learn from failure; it means digging into data deeply, purposefully, and systematically. Even though colleges and universities are organizations dedicated to creating and communicating knowledge, most lack the tools needed to support a continual process of learning among practitioners.

To address these limitations, the Center for Urban Education has drawn on the methodology of participatory critical action research, where professionals conduct inquiry into their own practices to learn how those practices work and why they may not be working as intended. According to Kemmis and McTaggart, "change cannot be secured if participants do not change themselves, their understandings, their practices, or their constitution of the setting" (2000, 590). For this reason, "participatory action research is the preferred approach to social and educational change" (590). Through inquiry, practitioners are able to question routines and develop the habits of equity-minded practice.

As an administrator at PASSHE observed, "It's like strategic planning of all types. Strategic planning doesn't have a beginning or an end; it's a continuous improvement process....You circle back. You're continuously looking at data."
Principle 5: Equity must be enacted as a pervasive institution- and system-wide principle.
Instead of thinking about equity as a "targeted strategy" that can be achieved through one particular office or program, institutions should approach equity as a normative standard for all aspects of the institution, from resource allocation to assessment to strategic planning.

Solutions are shaped by the way problems are defined. Embedding equity into the core of institutional work means reframing inequity as a problem created by color-blind practices and procedures and the lack of spaces to talk about race. Enacting equity as a pervasive institution- and system-wide principle requires practitioners to engage in the following:

Let go of traditional schemata that paint student success as a matter of effort, motivation, self-regulation, goal commitment, or other student characteristics. These qualities are important, but focusing on them draws attention away from practices-influential factors that are within practitioners' control. Put simply, practitioners taking the traditional approach to student success may ask: What does this student lack and how can he/she be remediated? From an equity-minded standpoint, the primary question is: Why are our practices failing to produce success for students of color?

Understand the difference between horizontal and vertical equity. The standard of horizontal equity asserts that those with equal needs deserve equal educational resources. Vertical equity, which is more often contested, states that those with greater needs should receive greater resources (Dowd and Bensimon 2015, 10-11).

Learn to make the pursuit of equity a normal practice that is evident in how problems and solutions are defined, implemented, and evaluated. Leaders, administrators, staff, and trustees must demonstrate equity-mindedness through language, reasoning, and action.

Making equity pervasive will require sustained buy-in and ownership across an institution or system. To institutionalize equity as a priority, equity-minded leaders should call practitioners to inquiry and action repeatedly. An administrator at PASSHE summed up the need for sustained commitment: "I think that buy-in around the idea of equity is gained by staying the course and sticking with it for the long term. If you can successfully do that, I think that you will get buy-in."
Conclusion
More than fifty years have passed since the adoption of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. But its promise of a more equal, just, and great society is belied by the evidence, according to every metric of social justice. Inequality, segregation, and racism-both overt and implicit-are intense and continue to grow. In 1903, W. E. B. Du Bois declared the color line the problem of the twentieth century. It is alarming that Du Bois's observation is an apt description of our society and educational system more than one hundred years later. As a society, we are a long way from accepting equity as a goal worthy of investment. As a system of higher education, we are a long way from moving equity from rhetoric to action. The five principles outlined here provide a place to start.
References
Anderson, Gregory M. 2012. "Equity and Critical Policy Analysis in Higher Education: A Bridge Still Too Far." Review of Higher Education 36 (1): 133-42.

Bensimon, Estela Mara. 2007. "The Underestimated Significance of Practitioner Knowledge in the Scholarship of Student Success." Review of Higher Education 30 (4): 441-69.

---. 2012. "The Equity Scorecard: Theory of Change." In Confronting Equity Issues on Campus: Implementing the Equity Scorecard in Theory and Practice, edited by Estela Mara Bensimon and Lindsey Malcom, 17-44. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

---. Forthcoming. The Misbegotten URM as a Data Point. Philadelphia, PA: Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education.

Bishop, Robin. 2014. "Language and Identity in Critical Sensegiving: Journeys of Higher Education Equity Agents." Doctoral diss., University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Coates, Ta-Nehisi. 2015. Between the World and Me. New York: Random House.

Dowd, Alicia C., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 2015. Engaging the "Race Question": Accountability and Equity in U.S. Higher Education. New York: Teachers College Press.

DuBois, W. E. B. 1903. The Souls of Black Folk. New York: The Blue Heron Press.

Felix, Eric R., Estela Mara Bensimon, Debbie Hanson, James Gray, and Libby Klingsmith. Forthcoming. "Developing Agency for Equity Minded Change." In Understanding Equity in Community College Practice (New Directions for Community Colleges 172), edited by Erin L. Castro. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gillborn, David. 2005. "Education Policy as an Act of White Supremacy: Whiteness, Critical Race Theory and Education Reform." Journal of Education Policy 20 (4): 485-505.

Kemmis, Stephen, and Robin McTaggart. 2000. "Participatory Action Research." In Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.), edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, 567-605. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Pollock, Mica. 2004. Colormute: Race Talk Dilemmas in an American School. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Witham, Keith, Megan Chase, Estela Mara Bensimon, Debbie Hanson, and David Longanecker. 2015a. "Moving the Attainment Agenda from Policy to Action." Change Magazine July/August, 6-15.

Witham, Keith, Lindsey E. Malcom-Piqueux, Alicia C. Dowd, and Estela Mara Bensimon. 2015b. America's Unmet Promise: The Imperative for Equity in Higher Education. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Estela Mara Bensimon is professor in and codirector of the Center for Urban Education at the Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California; Alicia C. Dowd is professor of education at Pennsylvania State University and former codirector of the Center for Urban Education at the Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California; Keith Witham is assistant professor in the College of Education, Temple University and policy advisor in the Center for Urban Education at the Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Five Principles for Enacting Equity by Design

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In America's Unmet Promise: The Imperative for Equity in Higher Education (Witham et al. 2015b), we affirmed that effective higher education reform efforts must be infused with an awareness of the ways in which many groups within US society have been historically excluded from educational opportunities, or marginalized within the structures and institutions that house those opportunities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Giving Students Equitable Opportunities to Demonstrate Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Giving Students Equitable Opportunities to Demonstrate Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-1                Presentation Resources    [Kory Ching | Maureen Kinuya]

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-1                Presentation Resources    [Kory Ching | Maureen Kinuya]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thank you for registering with TILT Higher Ed. Your registration request has been forwarded to TILT's program administrator for verification and access authorization. Once your account has been approved, you will be granted access to TILT Higher Ed using your email address as your username and the password you selected.

# data[].attributes.headline
KEYNOTE                Presentation Resources                      [Natasha Jankowski- Ph.D.]   

# data[].attributes.subject
KEYNOTE                Presentation Resources                      [Natasha Jankowski- Ph.D.]   

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-1               Presentation Resources                [Academic Assessment Team]  

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-1               Presentation Resources                [Academic Assessment Team]  

# data[].attributes.body
Curious Aggies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Centering Undergraduate Voices Curious Aggies is a research initiative that encourages students to share their experiences as learners in order to include students’ voices in conversations about how their learning is assessed. We believe that student-led research is important because it ensures that…

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                 [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke]  

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                 [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke]  

# data[].attributes.body
Promoting equity and engagement: Actively involving students in assessment

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2                              [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke]  Additional Resources   

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2                              [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke]  Additional Resources   

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The materials in the Assignment Library underwent a three part review process. NILOA team members review the initial submission, then the assignment is peer-reviewed by faculty in an assignment charrette. Assignment authors revise their assignment informed by the feedback and implement it in a course, gathering feedback from students along the way. Finally, authors resubmit their materials to NILOA, where they pass through a final review prior to posting. Authors are encouraged to submit updated versions of their materials and to continue reporting how the assignment is being used in their classrooms.

Users are invited to search the assignment library for ideas using the identified tags below of disciplines and assignment characteristics, degree level, or Degree Qualification Profile Proficiencies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The materials in the Assignment Library underwent a three part review process. NILOA team members review the initial submission, then the assignment is peer-reviewed by faculty in an assignment charrette. Assignment authors revise their assignment informed by the feedback and implement it in a course, gathering feedback from students along the way.

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2                              [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke] Additional Resources    

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2                              [Natasha Jankowski | Korana Burke] Additional Resources    

# data[].attributes.body
Promoting equity and engagement: Actively involving students in assessment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2020 Symposium Schedule At a Glance-padlet

# data[].attributes.body
Center for Urban Education (CUE) at the University of Southern California.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CUE's Racial Equity Tools aim to change the minds, hearts, and practices of faculty, staff, and leaders-all of whose collaboration is essential to achieve racial equity in higher education.

Each tool prompts reflection on the racialized characteristics of everyday practices, setting the foundation for change.

The tools are organized into four flexible phases:

Using the Racial Equity Tools

We borrow a principle of community organizing: to bring about transformation, you have to meet people where they are-and give them tools to build their own knowledge and self-change.

These tools reflect this idea and are inherently flexible approaches with practical activities embedded within them. Though the tools are organized into four phases, they naturally support a race-focused continuous improvement process: inquiring and observing, experimenting with changes, evaluating progress, and learning.

SO WHO ARE THESE TOOLS FOR?
Practitioners who have not dedicated much time or thought to reflecting on race and racism in higher education before. These practitioners may recognize diversity in a student body, but may not make a point to measure whether diverse racial / ethnic groups are equitably succeeding-or may see disparities in student outcomes, but attribute those disparities to students' effort or abilities rather than inadequate institutional policies and practices. The tools will help them build a new actionable, equity-minded view.

Practitioners who are aware of the role race and racism play in higher education, but aren't sure what to do about it. The tools will help them apply inquiry to deepen their understanding and identify problematic policies or practices to reform.

Practitioners who are well-versed in issues of race and possess a critical race perspective, but are struggling to get colleagues or leaders on board. The tools can help these practitioners speak to those that fall in either of the first groups mentioned, and build a shared vocabulary and plan for inquiry-driven, anti-racist action.

In the past, CUE facilitators have helped groups use these tools, but you may use them on your own-the content in phase one will help orient you and your team.

READY TO USE CUE'S RACIAL EQUITY TOOLS? START HERE

What is CUE?

Founded in 1999 by Estela Bensimon, the Center for Urban Education (CUE), now part of the Race and Equity Center at the University of Southern California's Rossier School of Education, helps individuals learn to use data, inquiry, and self-reflection to see institutional racism and dismantle it, one practice at a time.

CUE has developed tools to empower faculty and staff to become equity-minded practitioners who have the critical consciousness, will, and ability to combat institutionalized racism.

Why racial equity?

CUE's equity efforts are focused specifically on race and ethnicity in light of historical and current oppression in American education. Our goal is to achieve equity in outcomes for racially minoritized students-both in attainment and retention as well as in access to scarce opportunities like honors programs and high-value degrees such as in STEM fields.

For this to happen, there must be a shared understanding that colleges and universities have and continue to perform poorly for minoritized students, and that racial inequities are an outcome of structures, policies, and practices that are presumed to be race-neutral.

This is the root of equity-mindedness, a term that CUE coined to refer to the mode of thinking exhibited by practitioners who are willing to acknowledge that their policies and practices have not been designed to produce racial equity and that they need to be rethought and remediated in order to do so.

"I wanted to transform racial equity from an ideal that was embraced in the abstract to something that was actionable and measurable."

Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon,
University Professor & Dean's Professor in Educational Equity,
Founding Director, Center for Urban Education

How do we foster equity-mindedness?

The tools use action inquiry to help practitioners develop critical race consciousness: an understanding of how the way they operate produces racial inequity. The tools enable practitioners to see how racism is reflected in what they notice and fail to notice, what they consider good and not good, and what they say and fail to say-even in the absence of underlying intent.

Rooted in the tradition of critical action research, the tools provide practitioners with a structured process of studying their own actions and artifacts of practice. By learning to use disaggregated data and inquiry to "see" who, by race and ethnicity, is and isn't served by those actions and artifacts, practitioners can begin to make contextualized changes.

"An equity-minded practitioner commits to lifelong learning, actively participates in dismantling systems of oppression, and believes in the limitless potential of Black, Latinx, Native American, and other minoritized student groups."

Jennifer Ortiz
English Department Chair, LA Trade Tech College

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each tool prompts reflection on the racialized characteristics of everyday practices, setting the foundation for change. The tools are organized into four flexible phases: We borrow a principle of community organizing: to bring about transformation, you have to meet people where they are-and give them tools to build their own knowledge and self-change.

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                 [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]         

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                 [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]         

# data[].attributes.body
"Can a multiple-choice test ever be equitable?". Designing tests to maximize equitable outcomes
Anne Todgham & Barbara Mills

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zimmaro 2016 - Writing Good Multiple Choice Exams

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                  [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]          

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                  [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]          

# data[].attributes.body
"Can a multiple-choice test ever be equitable?". Designing tests to maximize equitable outcomes
Anne Todgham & Barbara Mills

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brame Vanderbilt - Multiple choice item construction - avoiding constructions that reduce validity and reliability

# data[].attributes.headline
KEYNOTE                         Presentation Resources |                [Divya Bheda, Ph.D.]       

# data[].attributes.subject
KEYNOTE                         Presentation Resources |                [Divya Bheda, Ph.D.]       

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                  [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]        

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2               Presentation Resources                                                  [Anne Todgham |            Barbara Mills]        

# data[].attributes.body
"Can a multiple-choice test ever be equitable?". Designing tests to maximize equitable outcomes
Anne Todgham & Barbara Mills

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Suskie -2018- Writing MC & Objective Tests

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-1                Presentation Resources |                                                   [Dan Melzer | Mark Verbitsky]            

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-1                Presentation Resources |                                                   [Dan Melzer | Mark Verbitsky]            

# data[].attributes.body
Improved Assignment Writing Prompt

# data[].attributes.headline
Session-2                Presentation Resources |                                                 [Jennifer Choi |               Heather J. Hether]                   

# data[].attributes.subject
Session-2                Presentation Resources |                                                 [Jennifer Choi |               Heather J. Hether]                   

# data[].attributes.body
Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) SMARTER Teamwork

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to CATME CATME SMARTER Teamwork prepares students to function effectively in teams and supports faculty as they manage their students' team experiences. Instructor Student CATME Provides Instructor Tools For Assigning students to better functioning teams: using CATME Team-Maker Training students to work in teams: through CATME Teamwork Behavior Training Identifying teams having teamwork difficulties Training students to rate...