Bringing Anti‐Oppression Pedagogy Training Into a Predominately White Institution in the United States: A Qualitative Analysis of the Challenges and Accelerators Faculty Face in Anti‐Oppression Work

What the paper says

We aim to better understand how to design impactful anti-oppression pedagogy training programs for faculty at predominantly White institutions (PWIs). To do this, we analyzed data from faculty participants in an anti-oppression training program to identify factors that faculty described as either challenges or accelerators to bringing anti-oppression pedagogy into the classroom. We contextualize these factors using an ecological perspective to examine potential challenges and accelerators at multiple levels of influence. This analysis of the challenges faculty face, along with impactful programmatic elements, informed our recommendations for future faculty training in anti-oppression classroom practice. We analyzed data from faculty participants (N = 15) in an intensive anti-oppression training program using thematic analysis to sort qualitative data from participant surveys and interviews into (1) the ecological level discussed and (2) factors participants described as either Challenges or Accelerators as they worked to bring an anti-oppression intervention into the classroom. We cross-examined the Challenge and Accelerator codes across ecological levels to capture the complex contexts of bringing anti-oppression pedagogy into the classroom. We identified several ecological settings as important to shaping the challenges or accelerators faculty encountered in their anti-oppression work: Academia, Field of Study, University setting, Department setting, and Classroom setting. The multilevel challenges and accelerators that faculty may face in doing anti-oppression work at a PWI are discussed. We then identified overarching patterns in our thematic analysis and used these to recommend potential key ingredients for designing training programs to accelerate faculty work in anti-oppression pedagogy. Based on our analysis, we propose two key ingredients for anti-oppression faculty training programs: (1) facilitating faculty ownership of ongoing critical analysis of how power operates in their positionality related to interlocking systems of oppression, their academic discipline, and their classroom practice and (2) the development of an interdisciplinary community of learners who support each other in ongoing reflection, learning, and critical praxis. If PWIs want faculty to address issues of equity and justice, then they must acknowledge the nested challenges of anti-oppression work and invest in the necessary institutional changes and training.