In our quest for anti-racist academic organizations from preschool to higher education, we have urged educators to
To address this issue, we share the Anti-Racism/Anti-Oppression Fidelity Assessment Scale by the Center for Research on Inner City Health. While not specifically intended for educational institutions, the instrument is nonetheless quite relevant, as we share herein. The Center recognizes this: ‘While the AR/AO Assessment Tool has been developed for organizations currently employing anti-racist and anti-oppression principles and practices, it may be of equal use in assisting organizations that are looking to implement such a framework … through laying out key criteria, guiding questions, and examples (p. 6).
Accordingly, we relate the 12 criteria to academic settings. In doing so, we remain true to the definition of fidelity – the quality or state of being faithful or loyal. Per the Center:
The tool has been developed based on an (i) extensive review of the literature I anti-racist and anti-oppressive practices; (ii) interviews with mental health experts and researchers; and (iii) through the use of confirmatory methods examining the degree of consensus on the domains of the fidelity scale among those familiar with AR/AO theory and practices. Lessons learned from community consultations have also been incorporated into this tool (p. 2).
A Dozen Criteria for Assessing AR/AO Applied to Educational Organizations
For the dozen criteria, benchmarks and indicators are applied. We share one example. To assess an agency’s (School/University) commitment to anti-racism and anti-oppression, a 5-point scale is used by the Center and adopted from Siegle et al. (2004):
- School/University has not yet made AR/AO part of its mission;
- School/University has made accountability for AR/AO part of at least one management level person’s activities;
- In addition to (2), school/university has only one of the following: a dedicated budget for AR/AO activities; a written AR/AO plan with objectives, strategies, and implementation timetable;
- School/University has both a dedicated budget for AR/AO activities and a written plan with objectives, strategies, and implementation timetable;
- In addition to (4), the school/university has been effectively monitoring and implementing its AR/AO plan/commitments. Figure 2 is our modification or application of the 12 criteria to educational settings – P-12 and higher education.
A Final Word
As the title of our paper and the instrument indicate, fidelity matters. Our Black and other minoritized students, families, and communities want and deserve to see written and to hear verbal commitments to anti-racism and anti-oppression implemented/translated into actual practice in all aspects of the educational enterprise. Lip service is a disservice! No excuses - the 12 criteria in the Anti-Racism/Anti-Oppression Fidelity Assessment Scale are specific and provide guidance on what is necessary to be an anti-racism/anti-oppression school and university. This will decrease inequities such as overrepresentation in discipline (suspension and expulsion), over-representation in special education (high-incidence categories), underrepresentation in advanced courses (gifted and talented, AP, STEM), and improve educational and career outcomes in higher education and students of color. Reversing these inequities requires formal and ongoing evaluation that addresses barriers, provides rationales, and offers recommendations and resources. We urge educators to prioritize this kind of evaluation and then to take action to be responsive and accountable to students and families on the margins.
Dr. Donna Y. Ford is Distinguished Professor of Education and Human Ecology in the College of Education and Human Ecology at The Ohio State University.
Dr. Erik M. Hines is Professor of Counseling in the College of Education and Human Development at George Mason University.
Dr. Tanya J. Middleton is Assistant Professor of Educational Studies in the College of Education and Human Ecology at The Ohio State University.
