Student Focus Group Feedback – Equitable Teaching

Student Focus Group Feedback

The Equitable Teaching at U-M team undertook an initiative to delve deeper into student experiences through a series of student focus groups. Students from varied backgrounds and experiences engaged in candid discussions, which were designed to capture a spectrum of insights from personal demographics and support systems to specific classroom interactions and broader university perceptions. Insights were gathered on the efficacy of equitable teaching resources, experiences with sensitive classroom discussions, and broader assessments of equity within the university context.

This data comes from 8 focus group containing 30 undergraduate students and 24 graduate students. In asking if student have encountered inclusive teaching resources in their classes, overall, 22% of student had, 9% of students had not, and 69% of students were unsure. For the personal identity wheel, 22% of student had,11% of students had not, and 67% of students were unsure. For the social identity wheel, 22% of student had, 9% of students had not, and 69% of students were unsure. For the Implicit Bias test, 31% of student had, 11% of students had not, and 58% of students were unsure. For the racial bias test, 47% of student had, 10% of students had not, and 43% of students were unsure.
When asked how students' professors have handled discussions around race, religion, gender, and politics, overall, 3% of students believed their professors did very poor, 12% of students believed their professors did below average, 49% of students believed their professors did average, and 36% of students believed their professors did above average. For race specifically, 2% of students believed their professors did very poor, 8% of students believed their professors did below average, 46% of students believed their professors did average, and 44% of students believed their professors did above average. For religion specifically, 5% of students believed their professors did very poor, 17% of students believed their professors did below average, 51% of students believed their professors did average, and 27% of students believed their professors did above average. For Gender specifically, 2% of students believed their professors did very poor, 10% of students believed their professors did below average, 46% of students believed their professors did average, and 42% of students believed their professors did above average. For politics specifically, 4% of students believed their professors did very poor, 14% of students believed their professors did below average, 52% of students believed their professors did average, and 30% of students believed their professors did above average.
Quotes. "That power dynamic can be really exclusive or it can be really inclusive depending on how you utilize it. And I heard throughout kind of this, the role of intention to be very purposeful in creating those spaces." Focus Group Six on respect and In-Class Climate. "I love a think-pair-share. I think that’s a good way to make space for people to have conversations with the partner. It’s where you take a minute to think and then your partner with one or two people and talk about it and then some folks can share out to the larger class. So it makes space for everyone to have a chance to process and then work it out with someone else." Focus Group Two on Fruitful Learning Techniques

Given this data, we split the information in four response categories: (1) Respect and In Class Climate, (2) Fruitful Learning Techniques, (3) Meeting Students Needs, and (4) Department/School Specific Feedback and Ideas. The most common category was Respect and In-Class Climate, which suggests that students consider how they and their peers are treated within classroom spaces when thinking about equity. Another popular category was the department/school-specific category where most codes discussed positive or negative standout aspects of the culture within classes within a specified department or school on the University of Michigan Ann Arbor campus.

We plan to update and create resources that align with student perspectives shared in the focus groups related to the following:

  • New and renovated teaching and class management methods
  • More syllabi techniques and inclusive practices or setting up an inclusive space through the syllabus
  • Accessibility and inclusion in the classroom and in the syllabi

By addressing these areas, we aim to align our educational practices with student feedback and create a more supportive and effective learning environment.

lsa logoum logoU-M Privacy StatementAccessibility at U-M