A Guiding Framework for Teaching - Resource Page

Critical reflection is an ongoing practice that happens before, during, and after teaching with the intention of developing an equity-minded practice. This reflective process can include grounding your syllabus in skill-based learning goals, conducting mid-semester surveys, and making incremental teaching adjustments based on your students’ outcomes. Ongoing critical self reflection requires instructors and students to hone their awareness of their multiple, intersectional social identities and their relation to larger contexts of power, oppression, and liberation (Kishimoto, 2018). In addition, this reflective process should encompass the content of the other principles as you work towards determining a) the impact of your teaching on student learning, and b) the changes necessary to further enhance your teaching practices. While self reflection is not a substitute for changes to larger university culture, consistent self-reflection can enable instructors to identify the personal and institutional factors that support and/or hinder the sustainability of one’s teaching practice.
 

We view students and instructors as both learners and co-creators of knowledge (Ryan & Tilbury, 2013). Additionally, students and instructors enter higher education with knowledge and skills they have developed through their lived experiences (Castillo-Montoya, 2018). These lived experiences contribute to their understanding of academic disciplines, professional fields as well as their ability to successfully navigate higher education (Ives & Castillo-Montoya, 2020; Jehangir, 2010). Both this principle and “Leading with Humility” center on students’ experiences. This principle, however, emphasizes  ‘what we teach’ (e.g., curricular design), whereas “Leading with Humility” focuses on ‘how we teach’ (e.g., flexible course structure). By designing coursework that authentically builds on learners’ lived experiences, instructors support students’ content knowledge, sense of belonging, personal growth, and motivation to engage in the discipline.
 

To collectively meet our shared goal of supporting students and student success, instructors must go beyond the confines of the classroom and advocate for practices and policies meant to enhance teaching and learning across multiple institutional contexts (Bensimon, 2012). Educators can serve as institutional agents of change through their work on committees, as advisors and mentors, and within their academic communities. This process empowers instructors to understand and address how university policies, academic disciplines, and professional fields reinforce discriminatory outcomes for both instructor and students (e.g., overwork of Black & Indigenous female instructors; isolation of students with disabilities). To sustain an institutional culture of equity, instructors across different contexts need to collaborate with one another and build networks of support. This collective approach better supports collegial relationships and ensures that equity-minded teaching and learning remains central to the university’s mission.
 

Leading with humility means a commitment to sharing the production of knowledge and ideas with students and colleagues, while sustaining a culture of accountability, flexibility, and reciprocity. It also entails an understanding of students’ circumstances and responsibilities outside of the classroom, their impact on student learning, and instructors’ willingness to adjust to students’ needs (Karp, 2011). This principle focuses on how we can embrace student’s lived experiences through our instructional practices or ‘how we teach.’ For this reason, this work requires developing a flexible course structure that is able to serve the needs of a wide range of students. This flexibility can also lessen the amount of last-minute logistical challenges that instructors often encounter in their courses and provide instructors a transparent baseline from which to make further accommodations. Such a culture fosters a healthy learning environment where both students and instructors collaboratively develop and strive for their personal and professional goals.

Transparency is clear communication with students about learning outcomes & objectives, expectations, supports, and criteria for learning activities (Winkelmes et al., 2023; Univ. of Michigan, 2015). This communication is especially important to demystify the hidden curriculum of academia, which is defined as a) the unwritten rules and expectations that lead to student success, and b) the ways higher education is designed to shape students for particular roles in society (Orón Semper & Blasco, 2018). Being transparent about the rationale and purpose of course structure and content can also lead to increases in student motivation and engagement (Anderson et al., 2013; Copeland et al., 2018). Effective communication in equity-minded teaching also involves clarity of language and terms about the varying experiences of different social groups in the classroom and society, more broadly (e.g. specifying individual racial groups when applicable instead of relying on broad terms like “underrepresented minority”). This practice helps reveal nuances in  people’s experiences, power dynamics existing within academic disciplines and professional fields, and educational contexts, including institutional, classroom, advising, and mentorship (Bensimon et al., 2016). This heightened awareness of people’s experiences can position faculty and administrators to support specific students or groups of students with the particular resources they need.
 

In this activity, you will create your own constellation using the framework’s principles (Critical self-reflection, Learners’ lived experiences, Institutional structures,  Humility, & Transparency).  Each principle is an individual star, and you will design the constellation in a way that represents how the principles inform your teaching philosophy and practices. The design can be determined by the shape of the constellation and/or the brightness/size of the stars.  You can also connect the stars in ways that illustrate the relationships between the principles. In essence, you are creating a visual map highlighting the pedagogical “North Stars” that guide your teaching practice.  

Please use the following questions for this activity:

• What are the principles that most and least align with your teaching philosophy and practice?
• What are instructional strategies and disciplinary content that are central to your teaching?
  • How do they align with the framework’s principles?
• How do the principles influence one another? 
• What experiences (positive or challenging) have shaped your teaching philosophy?
• Where do you see opportunities for growth or new connections in your teaching constellation?
• What principles are foundational to you, but is missing in our framework?
  • How do they impact our framework’s principles? 

Engaging with this constellation-making activity provides instructors with a creative, reflective way to visualize the principles that guide their teaching. By mapping out values, practices, and relationships, educators can clarify their pedagogical priorities and see how these elements work together to support equitable, inclusive learning environments. This process helps surface implicit assumptions, highlights strengths, and reveals areas for growth. Sharing constellations with colleagues fosters dialogue, mutual support, and inspiration. Ultimately, the activity encourages intentionality—helping instructors align their daily teaching choices with their core commitments, so they can better navigate challenges and advance equity in their classrooms.

Feel free to contact us (TDI Team) for more information or if you’ll like us to facilitate this activity.

Anderson, A. D., Hunt, A. N., Powell, R. E., & Dollar, C. B. (2013). Student perceptions of teaching transparency. Journal of Effective Teaching, 13(2), 38-47.

Bensimon, E. M. (2012). The equity scorecard: Theory of change. Confronting equity issues on campus: Implementing the equity scorecard in theory and practice, 17-44.

Bensimon, E. M., Dowd, A. C., & Witham, K. (2016). Five principles for enacting equity by design. Diversity and Democracy, 19(1), 1-8.

Brookfield, S. (2015). So what exactly is critical about critical reflection?. In Researching critical reflection (pp. 11-22). Routledge.

Castillo‐Montoya, M. (2018). Rigor revisited: Scaffolding college student learning by incorporating their lived experiences. New Directions for Higher Education, 2018(181), 37-46.

Copeland, D. E., Winkelmes, M. A., & Gunawan, K. R. I. S. (2018). Helping students by using transparent writing assignments. Integrating writing into the psychology course: Strategies for promoting student success, 26-37.

Deslauriers, L., McCarty, L. S., Miller, K., Callaghan, K., & Kestin, G. (2019). Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(39), 19251-19257.

Ives, J., & Castillo-Montoya, M. (2020). First-generation college students as academic learners: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 90(2), 139-178.

Jehangir, R. (2010). Stories as knowledge: Bringing the lived experience of first-generation college students into the academy. Urban Education, 45(4), 533-553.

Karp, M. M. (2011). Toward a New Understanding of Non-Academic Student Support: Four Mechanisms Encouraging Positive Student Outcomes in the Community College. CCRC Working Paper No. 28. Assessment of Evidence Series. Community College Research Center, Columbia University.

Kishimoto, K. (2018). Anti-racist pedagogy: From faculty’s self-reflection to organizing within and beyond the classroom. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(4), 540-554.

Kozanitis, A., & Nenciovici, L. (2023). Effect of active learning versus traditional lecturing on the learning achievement of college students in humanities and social sciences: A meta-analysis. Higher Education, 86(6), 1377-1394.

Lee, E., & Hannafin, M. J. (2016). A design framework for enhancing engagement in student-centered learning: Own it, learn it, and share it. Educational technology research and development, 64(4), 707-734.

McCallen, L. S., & Johnson, H. L. (2020). The role of institutional agents in promoting higher education success among first-generation college students at a public urban university. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 13(4), 320.

Museus, S. D., & Chang, T. H. (2021). The impact of campus environments on sense of belonging for first-generation college students. Journal of College Student Development, 62(3), 367-372.

Orón Semper, J. V., & Blasco, M. (2018). Revealing the hidden curriculum in higher education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 37, 481-498.

St-Amand, J., Girard, S., & Smith, J. (2017). Sense of belonging at school: Defining attributes, determinants, and sustaining strategies.

Waks, L. J. (2018). Humility in teaching. Educational Theory, 68(4-5), 427-442.

Winkelmes, M. A., Boye, A., & Tapp, S. (Eds.). (2023). Transparent design in higher education teaching and leadership: A guide to implementing the transparency framework institution-wide to improve learning and retention. Taylor & Francis.

Yosso, T. J. (2002). Toward a critical race curriculum. Equity & Excellence in Education, 35(2), 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/713845283 

Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.