This is an out-of-class activity completed by HSTEM students in response to the reading materials provided. Here, an HSTEM student’s responses to this activity are shown as a sample of what an HSTEM instructor may expect.

Materials

1. Appiah, Kwame. “Go Ahead, Speak for Yourself.” The New York Times (Aug. 10, 2018).
2. Ross, Loretta, “I’m a Black Feminist. I Think Call-Out Culture Is Toxic.” The New York Times
   (Aug. 17, 2019)
3. Schulman, Sarah. “A Reparative Manifesto.” In Conflict is not abuse: overstating harm,
   community responsibility, and the duty of repair, 15-31. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2016.
   (17 pgs)
4. Wing Sue, Derald et. al. “Racial Microaggressions in Everyday Life”, American Psychologist
   (May-June 2007) (16 pgs)
5. Skills script from former Multicultural Resource Center director Bulaong Ramiz-Hall (2pgs)
6. Departmental Action Teams – Norms of Collaboration (2 pgs)
7. Seedtheway.com, Interrupting-Bias- Calling-Out-vs.-Calling-In (2 pgs)
8. Roberts, Hannah. “Use micro affirmations and call out microaggressions to help others (2021)”,
   Nature Magazine, (June 3, 2021) doi 10.1038/d41586-021-01498-7

Beginning of Module Work

Please complete these to help build your academic foundation and prepare for active participation during our discussion.

Part 1: Summary. (Articles 1-4)

Please capture, using bullet points, your top 2-3 key points for each article.

Appiah, Kwame. “Go Ahead, Speak for Yourself.” The New York Times (Aug. 10, 2018).

• Having a particular identity does not automatically authorize someone to speak on behalf of everyone in that identity group. It questions whether one individual can truly represent the experiences of an entire group using the “as a…” phrase.
• Experiences within a single identity group vary and the “as a…” formula implies
  sameness of identity. This formula ignores the fact that members of an identity group
  may have diverse experiences due to intersecting factors like where they live or the
  religion they are in etc.

Ross, Loretta, “I’m a Black Feminist. I Think Call-Out Culture Is Toxic.” The New York Times (Aug. 17, 2019)

• Call-out culture may be counterproductive for social justice work. While the intention may be to hold people accountable for their actions or statements, its public and confrontational nature creates defensiveness, hindering meaningful dialogue and contributing to a divisive atmosphere within social justice movements.
• People weaponize suffering in order to attack and silence others. This can hinder the potential for constructive healing and dialogue, as the focus shifts from addressing issues to attacking individuals.

Schulman, Sarah. “A Reparative Manifesto.” In Conflict is not abuse: overstating harm,
community responsibility, and the duty of repair, 15-31. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press, 2016.
(17 pgs)

• Overreaction to differences contributes to the pain and destruction in our society. Our community has the responsibility to resist overreaction to differences and provide alternative ways that emphasize understanding and complexity.
• Conflict resolution in our society now is very hard because we do not have the ability or willingness to change stories to integrate other people’s known and unknown reasons.
• Those within our social circles, the institutions we engage with, and the authorities we support have the potential to address the underlying issues and the main cause of conflict like exaggeration of harm, punishing resistance, projecting, exclusion and shunning, group bullying, negative group dynamics, and prioritizing cruelty over accountability.

Wing Sue, Derald et. al. “Racial Microaggressions in Everyday Life”, American Psychologist (May-June 2007) (16 pgs)

• Racial inequities are thought to be nearly invisible, and the unawareness of White Americans about their privileges and unintentional discrimination against people of color is highlighted by stressing the idea of cultural competence.
• There are 3 different forms of racism which are modern, symbolic, and aversive racism. These forms are characterized by being disguised, covert, and more challenging to identify. Aversive racists are the least consciously negative, followed by modern and symbolic racists and, finally, old-fashioned biological racists.
• Microaggressions are unconsciously delivered through subtle snubs, dismissive looks, gestures, and tones in daily conversations and interactions. They are often dismissed as innocent and innocuous despite its ability to create inequities.

Part 2: Reflection (Articles 1-4)

Choose one article and experiment with writing a one-paragraph response taking each of the following approaches.

1) “Believing approach”. Take a welcoming stance toward the arguments and evidence presented. Describe what meaning the material had for you. Find intersections between your own lived experience and the material. What really resonated with you?

• Appiah, Kwame. “Go Ahead, Speak for Yourself.”
  • This op-ed highlights crucial points that align with my perspective. I agree with the critique of the general use of the “As a…” notion, which tends to speak on behalf of the masses without their awareness. I resonate with the recognition of intersectionality because it reflects the idea that individuals have diverse facets, and a single identity label or individual cannot neatly summarize their experiences. I have often seen this happen over social media platforms like Instagram. I understand that people can land their points easier if they develop their ethos, but at the same time, people indirectly stereotype their people and put them all into one box. This can lead to various instances where people might assume or assign certain labels to others. An example I have now would be that amongst the Nigerian community abroad. For instance, within the Nigerian community abroad, there’s a prevalent stereotype that “All Nigerians are scammers,” and it’s disheartening to see some individuals reinforcing this stereotype by saying, “As a Nigerian, I agree.”

2) “Skeptical approach”. Try to challenge the arguments (but not the human lived experiences). What did you find puzzling or confusing? (Try to dig beyond finding the material dense and jargony.) Were any claims inconsistent with your own experience or understanding of STEM? Can you propose alternative interpretations?

• Appiah, Kwame. “Go Ahead, Speak for Yourself.”
  • While it is valid to emphasize the diversity within any identity group and the potential downside of assuming uniformity, there is a risk of dismissing the valuable perspectives individuals within a group can provide based on their shared experiences. I believe personal stories can contribute to a broader understanding of the challenges and triumphs faced by a particular identity group. By sharing these insights, individuals contribute to a richer dialogue and foster empathy among those outside the group.

Part 3: Reflections in preparation for authentically and respectfully engaging across differences in our HSTEM community (2-3 sentences each)

1) What would it look like to stand up for what you believe in, while being curious about understanding someone whose beliefs contradict yours or even call into question your humanity?

• If someone were to talk down or against something I believe in, I would start off by correcting their idea or view on that particular thing. If I have first-hand experience in that topic, I will share information that supports my beliefs without condemning the other person’s perspective and respectfully disagree with theirs, especially if they are going off hearsay. I would then hand the conversation over to them, asking why they have such a belief, hoping to find a common ground that can create a foundation for understanding and help with bridging the gap between our differing beliefs.

2) How do you want to show up as your authentic learning self in difficult conversations during this class?

• I will approach discussions with an open mind, practice active listening, contribute to discussions with thoughtful and constructive input, and reflect on my beliefs and perspectives while considering how they may evolve throughout the discussion.

3) Reflecting on the resources listed in 5-8, are there tools that you already have
experience with employing? Are there other tools that you have found effective in
helping you engage in difficult discussions? Identify at least three tools that you would
like to experiment with and why.

• Over the past year, I have participated in a lot of collaboration-based work within and outside the classroom. Those instances also call for active listening when peers share ideas or just talk. In that collaborative space once again, I have found micro affirmations to be very effective when targeted towards me or people around me. It helps ease off the stress and tension in the space when the conversation gets tense.
• Paying attention to self and others, appreciating community members when I practice active listening, and paraphrasing are tools that I would like to experiment with. After reading more about this, I noticed they re good ways to get away from conflict formation during hard discussions, one that I often find myself it.

4) Describe a time when you have witnessed, experienced, or perpetuated a
microaggression. How did you respond, and what might you have done differently?

• I have witnessed a lot of microaggression over Instagram due to the rapid increase in “keyboard” warriors. Sometime last year, there was an increase in the amount of people who ate this specific ethnic food, and everyone jumped on that trend. Major blogs started posting about this, but the comment section was very disgusting because a lot of derogatory terms were used, suggesting it looked unappetizing or using offensive language. While I have no problem with people not liking it, it would be another thing if they disregarded someone else’s culture by calling it names. My initial thought was to let them know it was disrespectful in a disrespectful manner, but someone else did it in a better way. They tactfully explained why such comments were inappropriate, delving into the food’s ingredients and health benefits. In the future, I would opt for a similar approach.

5) Describe a time when you have witnessed or experienced a calling-out. Suggest how it
could have been transformed to a calling-in.

• During the break, my sibling made a comment that inadvertently perpetuated a gender stereotype. In response, I quickly “cursed” him out. To transform this into a calling-in, I should have calmly expressed my concern about the comment’s impact and shared how it may reinforce harmful stereotypes.

6) Think about a conflict/disconnect at the individual or community level from your life.
See if you can describe its successful or unsuccessful bridging using the four phases of
the HSTEM process (Listening, Validating, Reflecting, and Partnering).

• Over the summer, I worked in a group where we had to develop a topic and do more research for a presentation. We were all very strong in our opinions, so we were focused on advocating for our specific ideas without considering alternative viewpoints. Our inability to listen led to tension and frustration, hindering our progress. To get past this, we each brainstormed different ideas and defended them. From there, we started recognizing the merit in each other’s ideas to find a common ground. When we got to the end, we collaboratively developed a presentation that incorporated the strengths of each team member’s ideas.