International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 2022, Volume 34, Number 1, 60-80

http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ ISSN 1812-9129

Success for All? The Education Equity Mindset of University Faculty Members
Louis Nadelson, Stacey Loyless, Michael Mills, Odunola Oyeniyi, Shelly
Albritton, Valerie Couture, Thomas Bruick, and Charlotte Rainey Parham
University of Central Arkansas

The desire to broaden participation and increase campus diversity requires more than simply recruiting
students of color. Faculty members’ education equity mindset may be useful for determining their
motivation to provide students with opportunities to achieve at their highest capacity. The extent to
which faculty members think about inclusion and equity and act on those thoughts reflects the strength
of their education equity mindset. To begin filling a gap in the literature, we engaged in a cross-section
methodology, collecting quantitative and qualitative survey data from 180 faculty members working
at four-year institutions to document their education equity mindset and associated teaching practices.
We found the faculty members held a moderate education equity mindset, with differences by gender,
discipline, years in higher education, number of students taught, age, and level of instruction. Our
findings have implications for preparing faculty members and the focus of professional development
provided to faculty members.

Our society's long-term success in the age of mindset to be the perceptions and thoughts of an
synthesis requires a diversity of perspectives (Cai, 2011; individual about a phenomenon, idea, or condition that
Hall, 1996; Hong & Page, 2004; Nadelson & Seifert, guides their corresponding actions (Nadelson et al.,
2019) requiring educators to broaden participation in 2019b). We also maintain that mindsets are influenced
postsecondary institutions to influence the future and determined by both the state (i.e., working and living
(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014; Starobin et al., 2010). conditions) and traits (i.e., perceptions and actions) of
Increasing diversity and broadening participation individuals.
involves creating equitable environments in which issues Taking into consideration the work of scholars
of inclusion and diversity are systematically addressed. focused on equity mindedness such as Bensimon (2007,
We argue that to broaden participation and increase 2012); Harper et al. (2009); Milner (2010); Museus
diversity, there is a need to facilitate educational (2014); and Malcom-Piqueux and Bensimon (2017), we
opportunities with an equity mindset, yet the extant have worked to consider education equity broadly and
literature does not seem to contain any empirical studies holistically. Thus, we define an education equity mindset
documenting the education equity mindset of as a set of perceptions and motivations that lead to
postsecondary faculty members. actions aligned with how individuals perceive equity
Given the importance of broadening participation situations in education. We argue an education equity
and addressing the gap in the literature, we conducted a mindset aligns with the extent to which faculty members
study of postsecondary faculty members’ education think they are responsible for broadening the diversity of
equity mindset, intending to determine their perspective students in higher education and increasing opportunities
of education equity issues. These issues include valuing for those historically denied or marginalized from access
diversity, facilitating student-centered learning, or full participation in learning.
advocating for diversity and inclusion, taking Consistent with the perspective of French (2016),
responsibility for student success, and lowering we maintain that mindsets should be considered on a
institutional barriers to educational success. Our research spectrum and recognize that individuals may change
is critical to providing the structure needed to support their mindsets due to shifts in contexts, knowledge, and
postsecondary faculty members' creation of feelings. Thus, similar to the education equity mindset
environments that support the success of students from model for K-12 teachers (Nadelson et al., 2019b) and K-
different levels of prior preparation, cultures, social- 12 school principals (Nadelson et al., 2019a), we
economic status, and identities. consider the thoughts or perceptions of individuals
holding a weak equity mindset and those holding a
Review of Literature strong equity mindset to be at two ends of the education
equity mindset spectrum. Using the same approach, we
Education Equity Mindset have developed an education equity mindset model for
postsecondary education faculty members.
Building upon prior work on developing a In defining an education equity mindset for
framework for education equity (Nadelson et al., 2019a, postsecondary faculty members, we considered the
2019b), we continue to refine the definition of education potential conditions, interactions, and institutional
equity and the associated mindset. We consider a structures that may influence perceptions of supporting
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 61

Figure 1
The Education Equity Mindset Spectrum

or ignoring opportunities to increase student equity, education equity mindset much more rapidly than faculty
access, and inclusion in postsecondary education. The members who have never embraced a strong education
elements included student-centered teaching, advocacy, equity mindset.
the embracing of diversity, open-minded thinking, the
lowering of institutional barriers, awareness of privilege, Student-Centered Teaching
empathetic curiosity, cultural responsiveness, and self-
awareness. Thus, faculty members with a strong A pervasive gap in academic achievement continues
education equity mindset embrace and act on ideas of to plague our nation (Hung et al., 2020), reflecting a lack
equity. In contrast, those with a weak education equity of equity-driven instruction. Applying an equity-minded
mindset seem to be unaware, ignore, or even disavow instructional approach, educators resist the lure of
elements of an education equity mindset (see Figure 1). focusing solely on reading textbooks, relying on
Again, we maintain faculty members may shift their lecture/notes, and assigning objective testing activities,
position on the mindset spectrum based on the context, which commonly result in low levels of engagement
relationships, and responsibilities. For example, a faculty (Conley, 2011). We contend that educators are more
member with a strong education equity mindset may effective when they reposition the constructs of
change institutions, and the shift in the professional role knowledge, curriculum, teacher, and student from
or location may temporarily result in faculty members teacher-focused to student-focused. Student-focused or
considering more immediate and personal needs such as student-centered teaching involves orienting students in
developing new relationships, learning a new system, meaningful learning experiences that appeal to each
and establishing a presence on campus. Increases in student’s values, interests, and needs (Barth, 2001),
personal, immediate needs may diminish a faculty which is key to an equity-minded approach to teaching.
member’s focus on issues of equity, which may result in Institutions should provide development opportunities
actions and perceptions that align with a weak education that build faculty efficacy for delivering student-
equity mindset. Thus, we recognize that an education centered teaching and designing experiences that
equity mindset is subject to alignment to conditions, consider the layering of the learning experience,
relationships, and resources related to the individual's individual student differentiation, and the personal
personal state. However, we maintain that faculty relevance of learning application (Ehren, 2009). Faculty
members possessing a strong equity mindset and who members who possess a strong educational equity
experience such shifts are likely to (re)gain a strong mindset promote student-centered instructional
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 62

practices, providing experiences in which students can Accepting the role of advocacy and taking
grow, learn, and succeed regardless of their race, responsibility for student success is an element of the
ethnicity, gender, socio-economic status, language educational equity mindset. Faculty members who
acquisition, sexual orientation, religion, or disabilities advocate for all students and design their instruction to
(Dweck, 2007; Farrington et al., 2012). be inclusive are taking responsibility for creating more
We maintain that faculty should take into account equitable and inclusive learning environments.
students’ proactive involvement with the learning and
content. University-age students possess the ability to Value and Embrace Diversity
add to the experience, transforming the learning process
by collaborating with a team or partner, personalizing While more universities voice interest in recruiting
with options and communication preferences, or by diverse student bodies onto their campuses, the
requesting an individualized learning opportunity rather institutions may not foster supportive environments for
than just reacting and complying to the assigned task these diverse student bodies. Recently, students have
(Bandura, 2006; Reeve & Tseng, 2011). Student- protested against discrimination and structural
centered instruction positions learners to seek personal inequality across a variety of higher educational
possession of the content, creating opportunities for institutions (Cook-Sather et al., 2018; Spade, 2017).
making connections, thinking analytically, solving Discrimination and structural inequality impact
problems, and perhaps, making contributions due to new students’ sense of belonging on campuses, and students
understandings. Student-centered teaching establishes a have expressed, quite strongly in some cases, that
learning environment that increases opportunities for campus climates have felt unwelcoming, and maintain
student personal expression resulting in more equitable the opinion faculty members do not value student
and inclusive education. Thus, we consider student- voices (Jaschik, 2015). The concerns shared by
centered teaching to be a critical element of a strong students include feeling undervalued due to their
education equity mindset. identities, beliefs, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual
orientation, immigration status, and religion (Cook-
Advocating and Taking Responsibility for Student Sather et al., 2018). Part of making campuses
Learning welcoming to all students is to create a culture that
values and embraces diversity at the institutions.
According to Theoharis (2005), advocacy for Faculty members must value and embrace diversity, as
educational equity is an aspect of social justice they have direct contact with students. Due to the
leadership. Education leaders who implement social importance of creating inclusive learning
justice leadership address inequity issues due to race, environments, we have included embracing and valuing
class, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and other diversity as an element of the faculty education equity
historically and currently marginalizing conditions mindset.
through their leadership practices and vision (Theoharis, There is an expectation at educational institutions
2005). School leaders who understand the importance of for faculty and staff to value and embrace students from
advocacy and social justice intentionally analyze student multicultural backgrounds and to adjust their
data with the lens of addressing inequities. These leaders instruction and services to meet the needs of students.
promote and cultivate collaborative partnerships with the The first step for faculty embracing diversity is self-
larger community to ensure the values central to the evaluating their thoughts, beliefs, and biases about
institution reflect the values of the community. others (Ratts et al., 2016). The faculty members’ self-
Educational leaders who believe in advocacy evaluation of their identity enhances awareness of
strategically implement practices that support holding multiple identities (i.e., race, gender, sexual
belongingness and community for all stakeholders. orientation, ethnicity, gender expression, religion, SES,
We perceive faculty members to be instructional ability level) and different lenses through which they
leaders. Thus, there is an expectation that faculty view the world (Ratts et al., 2016). Awareness of the
members advocate and take responsibility for student diversity within may be useful for increasing faculty
learning. One instructional approach of faculty members members' appreciation for the diversity of their
with an equity mindset involves creating transformative students.
learning experiences for students. According to Mezirow Faculty need to create supportive learning
(2003), transformative learning experiences are effective environments where students feel safe to be themselves
because they generate beliefs and opinions that guide one and share their identities. When faculty established
to action. Faculty members can use transformational respectful and authentic relationships with students, the
learning opportunities to create and sustain a learning students will feel recognized and more included (Ratts
culture that directly influences student achievement and et al., 2016). Additionally, Trolian et al. (2016) found
inclusive learning (Kasworm & Bowles, 2012). that the quality of faculty-to-student interactions
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 63

influenced student motivation. When faculty members belief biases, which faculty members may have toward
value and embrace diversity, they are creating the potential learning success of certain groups of
conditions of equity. Therefore, valuing and embracing students. To create equitable learning environments,
diversity is an element of a strong education equity faculty members need to intentionally develop their
mindset model. actively open-minded thinking skills, a process that is
an essential element of a strong education equity
Open-Minded Thinking mindset.

One of the foremost goals in higher education is to Privilege

increase students’ reasoning ability (de Sousa, 2007).
Actively open-minded thinking (AOT) is a critical aspect McIntosh (1988) defined “white privilege” as a
of human thinking and reasoning (Baron, 1991, 1993, collection of unearned advantages that people of color
1995; Stanovich & West, 1997, 2000, 2008). Actively do not have as by default. These generally
open-minded thinking includes two approaches to unacknowledged advantages are commonly associated
rationality: (a) epistemic, based on an individual’s belief with obliviousness to issues and policies involving
system, also referred to as evidential rationality; and (b) culture and race, automatic inclusion into campus
instrumental, based on an individual getting what s/he social and academic programs, fewer assumptions
wants, also known as optimization of a person’s goal regarding educational and career goals, and assumed
fulfillment (Stanovich, 2011). normality of one’s language, traditions, and mores.
Actively open-minded thinking is analogous to Fundamentally, white privilege is the centering of the
learning dispositions and reflective thinking, which is a White ethnic identity as the benchmark for measuring
highly intellectual type of thinking, especially when diversity and differences.
grappling with new inquiries, ideas, and concepts It is important to note that white privilege is more
(Svedholm-Hikkinen & Lindeman, 2017). When higher than a collection of conveniences that whites enjoy in
education faculty members engage in teaching practices society. White privilege also denotes a structural
and methods that create a culture of inquiry in the system built on a legacy of oppression and exclusion
learning space, opportunities abound for students to targeting people of color. Racial privilege is
develop open-minded thinking. As Haran et al. (2013) entrenched in multiple functions of higher education
argued, students benefit when they “weigh new evidence institutions, such as the admission process, which may
against a favored belief, to spend sufficient time on a convey different perceptions for accepting the
problem… and to consider carefully the opinions of privileged and non-privileged students. For instance,
others in forming one’s own” (p. 189). To foster student at some institutions, admitted white students are
development of open-minded thinking, faculty members referred to using innocuous terms such as “legacy
must also embrace and engage in open-minded thinking, admissions,” while the policy of accepting non-White
which includes pondering issues of equity and inclusion. students is referred to in phrases such as “affirmative
Actively open-minded thinking is needed to learn about action.” The differential admission of students by race
the challenges and barriers diverse student populations is illuminated in the report of Arcidiacono and
may encounter when attending college. Therefore, we colleagues (2019), who detailed the significant racial
consider open-minded thinking to be an essential disparity in admissions at Harvard University, noting
element of a strong education equity mindset. that over three-quarters of White students admitted as
There is a potential for obstructed reasoning in the legacy candidates would have been rejected if they
absence of AOT, leading to “myside bias thinking” were held to the same academic standards of non-
(Toplak & Stanovich, 2003, p. 852). Myside bias is White students.
present when a person has an affinity to limit Intrinsic racial privilege contradicts the philosophy
considering facts, information, or evidence biased of a meritocratic education system in the United States
toward their beliefs. Furthermore, Toplak and - providing equitable educational opportunities based
Stanovich (2003) found, “it is not people who are solely on merit (Alvarado, 2010; Liu, 2011). Much of a
characterized by more or less myside bias, but their student’s higher education academic success is
beliefs that differ in the degree of belief bias … [and] controlled by gatekeepers, notably admissions officers
how strongly they are structured to repel contradictory and faculty members. Within the classroom, the
ideas” (p. 859). Active open-minded thinking has the transference of an equity-focused approach begins with
potential to diminish myside biases (Sa et al., 1999; the faculty member, which is why the study of faculty
Stanovich & West, 1997; Svedholm-Hikkinen & members’ education equity mindset is critical to
Lindeman, 2017), which is needed to envision and take establishing and supporting equity-focused educational
actions to achieve education equity. Moreover, Haron opportunities. We consider privilege to be an element
et al. (2013), declared the role of AOT is to reduce of a weak education equity mindset.
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 64

Deficit Thinking interested in who they are and cares about them
(McEvoy et al., 2013). For instance, Rogers (1961)
According to Valencia (2017), deficit thinking described an ideal, empathic relationship as being
refers to the notion that individual students fail in school fostered by a “continuing desire to understand” the other
because such students and their families experience person’s unique point of view (p. 34).
deficiencies that obstruct the learning process. Such Halpern (2007) similarly described empathic
items as limited intelligence, lack of motivation, and curiosity as a motivational process that promotes
inadequate home socialization contribute to the failure of distinguishing one’s own experience from another’s and
student achievement (Garcia & Guerra, 2004). Educators seeking to understand the other individual’s unique
who possess a deficit thinking mindset focus on the perspective. These lines of reasoning suggest that
qualities in a student’s life that hinder learning, blaming curiosity may facilitate empathic concern in any
the student for conditions they encounter that impede relationship, particularly if the empathizer is able to help
their learning (Davis & Museus, 2019; McKay & Devlin, meet the needs of others (Kashdan et al., 2011).
2016). Research on practitioner beliefs and expectations Expressing empathetic curiosity involves efforts to
highlights significant patterns of how personal beliefs understand others’ points of view and working to provide
about certain groups of students intersect with the meaningful and helpful support (Hartung & Renner,
academic performance of students (Ford et al., 2013; 2011).
Sharma, 2018). Deficit thinking contributes to low The potential importance of empathetic curiosity to
teacher expectations of students and can contribute to forming relationships and understanding the perceptions
achievement gaps among various students’ of others motivated us to include the construct as an
demographics (McKenzie & Phillips, 2016). element of a strong education equity mindset. Those
The prevailing thinking in higher education explains holding a strong education equity mindset are more
the learning and retention of certain groups of students likely to put forth the effort to get to know their students’
by framing students and their families as lacking the education needs. Responding to the education needs of
academic and cultural resources necessary to succeed in students may result in culturally responsive teaching and
what is presumed to be a fair and open educational a more equitable education system.
system and society (Smith, 2012; Solorzano, 1997).
Educators’ focus on the inadequacies of students and the Cultural Responsiveness
need to “fix” the students reflects deficit thinking
(McKenzie & Scheurich, 2008). With an emphasis on Ladson-Billings (1995) introduced the concept of
strengthening students’ deficits, educators ignore the “culturally-focused pedagogy” (p. 466) as a theoretical
impact of systemic and structural issues that hinder shift within teacher education. Ladson-Billings’
achievement and blame the students for lack of growth grounded theory study produced three core
(Aleman et al., 2017). Employing a deficit mindset to underpinnings of culturally responsive pedagogy: (a)
frame student difficulties perpetuates stereotypes and concepts of self and others, (b) social relations, and (c)
disregards higher education's role in perpetuating the conceptions of knowledge. Building on the work of
barriers to student success (Smith, 2012). We consider Ladson-Billings, Gay (2002) presented five core aspects
deficit thinking to be an element of a weak education of culturally responsive teaching that addressed (a)
equity mindset. cultural knowledge, (b) curriculum choices, (c)
community development in the classroom, (d) cross-
Empathetic Curiosity - Willingness to Learn About cultural communication, and (e) delivery of instruction.
Others At its core, culturally responsive teaching involves
filtering curriculum and content and “teaching strategies
Empathetic curiosity can simply be defined as being through their [marginalized students’] frames of
interested in others because you care about them reference” (Gay, 2010, p. 26). A goal of culturally
(Phillips, 2016). Being curious about another person’s responsive teaching is to move marginalized students to
emotional experience can lead to the formation of the position of “subjects in the instructional process, not
productive relationships (Espelage et al., 2004), mere objects” (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p. 76).
suggesting curiosity is a primary motivator of empathic Early work on cultural responsiveness was situated
concern for others. Empathetic curiosity is essential to primarily within K-12 education and K-12 teacher
the work of counselors and physicians due to the preparation (Heitner, & Jennings, 2016). However, more
importance of client-professional relationships. We recently, the concept has emerged within the broader
argue the empathetic curiosity of faculty members is a higher education environment (Museus, 2014), including
critical component of an education equity mindset. first-year instruction (Englert et al., 2019) and online
Students who are marginalized on college campuses may instruction (Heitner & Jennings, 2016). Heitner and
be more likely to succeed when they know someone is Jennings (2016) argued specifically for the need to
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 65

prepare and provide professional development focused Actions Representative of an Education Equity
on culturally responsive teaching for higher education Mindset
faculty members. We have included culturally
responsive teaching as an element of a strong education As we shared previously, an education equity
equity mindset because of the importance of increasing mindset, or way of thinking about situations, structures,
the success of those historically underrepresented in or processes related to conditions of equity in education,
postsecondary education. resides in an individual's mind. We maintain that actions
taken in relation to structures and situations within the
Self-Awareness context of equity processes are manifestations of an
education equity mindset. Thus, the actions taken to
We embrace the perspective of Baumeister (2005), increase equity, inclusion, and access reflect the relative
who claims self-awareness manifests as “anticipating strength of an education equity mindset. Further, actions
how others perceive you, evaluating yourself and your guided by an education equity mindset can result in
actions according to collective beliefs and values, and observable and measurable influence on the inclusion
caring about how others evaluate you” (p. 7). Baumeister and engagement of students in education. Therefore, we
also maintained self-awareness is essential for have considered the facets of a strong education equity
establishing and maintaining a sense of belongingness in mindset and developed a set of associated representative
organizations, groups, and cultures. Given Baumeister’s actions that a faculty member may engage in to support
definition, we argue self-awareness is a critical element inclusion, equity, and access (see Figure 2). In our
of an education equity mindset. When considering development of equity actions, we considered the
education equity, it is fundamental that faculty members possibility that some actions may be associated with
anticipate how others perceive them and evaluate multiple components of an education equity mindset.
themselves and their actions to determine alignment with Thus, actions such as lowering institutional barriers to
supporting access, inclusion, and retention of those increase inclusion, representation, and retention may be
historically underrepresented in postsecondary attributed to a combination of multiple mindset
education. components, so there is not a one-to-one alignment
Self-awareness is critical to becoming cognizant of between the education equity mindset elements and the
personal biases and perceptions of others (Nieto, 2006). mindset actions.
If faculty members lack deep self-awareness, they are
less likely to recognize holding implicit bias, the impact Method
on others when sharing microaggressions, or recognizing
differences in students' learning needs. As Chao (2006) The goal of our research was to answer our primary
shared, higher self-awareness is needed to develop a research question: “What is the education equity mindset
cultural identity which is critical to understanding how of postsecondary faculty members?” To achieve our
identities can differ based on culture. Understanding research goal, we decomposed our primary research
variations in culture is vital to an education equity question into the following guiding research questions:
mindset and the ability to respond to students differently • How strongly do faculty members express
based on their culture. Similarly, Reynolds (2011) equity mindset attributes and engage in
reported that increasing self-awareness around issues of associated actions?
multiculturalism can lead to discomfort due to the • How does the faculty members’ education
increased understanding of how personal choices and equity mindset vary with their personal and
perceptions may impact others. Self-awareness is critical professional variables?
to developing a personal and cultural identity which has
been found to enhance positive and more culturally Participants
aware interactions with people from other cultural
perspectives (Goren & Plaut, 2012). Our participants were faculty members working at
Given the importance of self-awareness to four-year universities in the central-southern region of
understanding oneself and relating to others, there is the United States. We invited 1,764 faculty members to
justification for considering self-awareness as an participate in our research, 208 responded to our
essential component of a strong education equity invitation and linked to our survey, of those 180
mindset. Being aware of one’s identity and how identity completed at least 90% of our survey items. The faculty
may differ due to culture is critical to understanding and members were on average 50.27 years old (SD = 11.75),
supporting the inclusion of others from cultures that have of which 106 were female, and 72 were male (2 declined
been historically underrepresented in postsecondary to provide a gender). The majority of the participants
education. were White (166), with 4 each of Asian, Hispanic, and
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 66

Figure 2
Actions Aligned with an Education Equity Mindset

other, and 2 identifying as Black. We present the development by identifying the critical attributes of a
distribution of the participants by discipline in Figure 3. postsecondary faculty member’s education equity
The majority of the participants (58%) taught mindset. Once we had the attributes identified and
primarily in a face-to-face format, followed by “other” defined, we began our survey development by creating
which was described as a combination of the three several open and free-response items for each attribute.
instructional formats (18%), online instruction (14%), The number of items we created for each attribute
and hybrid instruction (10%). In Figure 4, we present the exceeded our targeted goal for our survey.
level of students the participants primarily teach. A Once generated, we compiled our initial pool of
nearly equal percentage of participants taught at master’s items by attribute. We then examined each item for
degree-granting institutions (33%) and professional attribute alignment, potential redundancy, applicability
doctorate (34%), with 25% teaching at primarily to teaching in postsecondary education. As a result, we
undergraduate institutions and 8% teaching at a research- narrowed our survey to five items per attribute and
intensive university. prepared our survey for validation.
To validate our survey, we requested eight
Survey Development researchers working on equity issues in postsecondary
education to review the items and determine if each
In our search of the literature, we could not locate aligned with the associated attribute. Based on the
any extant instruments designed to assess postsecondary feedback from the experts, we restructured and refined a
faculty members’ education equity mindset. Therefore, handful of our items and made minor edits to several
we determined it would be necessary to create a survey others. Our final survey contained standard demographic
instrument to gather the data we desired for our items, 27 selected-response items, and four free-
exploratory study. We began our instrument response items.
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 67

Figure 3
Distribution of Participants by Discipline

Figure 4
Level of Students Taught in Primary Teaching Responsibilities
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 68

The selected-response items included statements education equity, our experience as postsecondary
such as “I explore how my students prefer to learn” and faculty members formally engaging in work to make the
“I design assignments to give my students choices” institution more inclusive, and the knowledge we gained
which we asked the participants to respond to using a through our literature review. We then applied the codes
five-point Likert scale. The free-response items included by collectively coding the first 20 qualitative items for
stems such as, “How have your students influenced your each of the four free-response items. Following our
teaching?” and “How do you support struggling initial round of coding, we collectively reviewed our
learners?” The participants responded by typing in text codes and the alignment with the corresponding
boxes of unlimited length. The calculated reliability of education equity attribute. We discussed our thought
our survey was a Cronbach’s alpha of .86 which processes for the responses in which our codings were
indicates an acceptable level of internal consistency. misaligned until we agreed on the most representative
coding. Our coding process allowed us to establish initial
Data Collection levels of interrater reliability and increase the
trustworthiness of our analysis. We then coded the
Following the authorization to conduct our research remaining responses by dividing the data into sections.
by the university IRB, we activated our online survey. Working in pairs, we independently coded a subset of the
We gathered the publicly accessible email addresses of items and then came back together as pairs to resolve any
faculty members working in universities located in the variations in the codes for the data, further enhancing our
south-central region of the United States from the interrater reliability. It is important to note that many of
institutions' websites. We emailed the faculty members the responses were found to convey more than one code.
an invitation to participate in our research which Thus, our results reflect response frequencies greater
included a link to our survey. We gathered data over a than our sample size.
four-week time span. We invited a total of 1,746
university faculty members to complete our survey. Results

Analysis Mindset Attributes and Actions

Quantitative Data Our first guiding research question asked, how

strongly do faculty members express equity mindset
Following data collection, we downloaded our attributes and engage in associated actions? To answer
dataset to a spreadsheet. We began conditioning the data this question, we began by calculating the means,
by removing the responses of those participants who did medians, and standard deviations of the participants’
not complete at least 90% of the selected-response items scores to our subscale composite variables (see Table 2).
of the survey. We also assured the free-response We found that the faculty members tended to lean toward
quantitative items did not contain qualitative data (e.g., disagreeing with working to lower institutional barriers
“35 years” entered for age changes to “35”). We then for students (M = 2.67, SD = .5, Med. = 2.6). The
imported the data into a statistical processing application participants tended to be neutral toward valuing and
for further conditioning. We used the software to replace embracing diversity (M = 3.36, SD = .55, Med. = 3.25)
the missing values of the occasional skipped response and were between neutral and agree with thinking in
with the series mean. Following data conditioned, we terms of life-long learning and growth-mindset (M =
calculated the descriptive statistics for all free-response 3.57, SD = .57, Med. = 3.5). The faculty members
items, reversed code the negatively stated items, and trended toward agreeing to being caring and
calculated the composite scores for our education equity compassionate for their students (M = 3.78, SD = .56,
mindset attributes. We completed our analysis by Med. = 3.75). The participants tended to agree that they
calculating multiple descriptive and inferential statistics advocate and take responsibility for student learning (M
using the personal and professional variables as either = 4.08, SD = .61, Med. = 4.25), work to create collective
factors or independent variables. and connected learning environments (M = 4.19, SD =
.61, Med. = 4.25), and engage in student-centered
Qualitative Data teaching (M = 4.23, SD = .5, Med. = 4.25). Our results
indicate a fragmented and varied education equity
Before analyzing the qualitative data, we developed mindset.
a set of codes aligned to each of our primary We continued our analysis by examining the
postsecondary faculty education equity mindset relationship among the equity mindset attributes by
attributes (see Table 1). In developing the codes, we calculating the correlations between the composite
relied on our knowledge from our prior research in scores for our attribute subscales (see Table 3). We
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 69

Table 1
Education Equity Mindset Attribute and Associated Codes

Education Equity Mindset Attribute Codes

Student-centered Teaching Adjust content and pace, focus on the syllabus, build relationships with
students, group work, flexible assignments, responding to each student as an
individual

Advocacy Change in policy, system changes, seeks workarounds, flexibility, move

beyond just teaching

Embrace Diversity Inclusive of different perspectives, recognition of capacity and ability,

recognition of the needs of diverse groups

Actively Open-Minded Thinking Inclusive of different perspectives, open to new ideas, engage in change, seeks
to locate barriers to the status quo

Empathetic Curiosity Sensitive to others, wanting to get to know students as individuals, adjust to
needs of individuals because of who they are, considers learning and teaching
to be a partnership, getting to know them as a person outside of a learning
activity

Cultural Responsiveness (awareness Recognize the challenges of groups of students, knows different students have
& action) different needs, adjusting to students based on their culture

Self-Awareness Recognize influence on others, aware of potential bias, multiple views and
perspectives

Deficit Thinking A mindset of low expectations, students lack the capacity to achieve, students
are unwilling to do the work, lazy, fixed mindset, students don't come
prepared, some students cannot succeed, lacks motivation, some people are
just not going to succeed in college

Privilege Treat all the same, I am the authority, in a position of power to make change,
students cannot adjust, students need to adapt to the system (or faculty
expectations), norming, others adjust to me, understanding of bias, it worked
for me, just takes hard work, I told them to get help

wanted to determine if there was consistency in the In Table 4, we present the mindset action, frequency of
responses to the subscales. We found all pairs of the code, and representative participant responses. We
variables were correlated at the p < .01 level of calculated the frequency by combining the coded
significance. Our results indicate that our subscales are responses to all four of our free-response items. We
related, which indicates that there is consistency in the found that the participants tended to focus on student-
actions and perceptions of the participants. The centered teaching (n = 452) but also conveyed high
significant correlations also suggest that our conceptions levels of privilege (n = 290). Similarly, the participants
and expressions of the attributes of an education equity shared perspectives reflective of open-minded thinking
mindset reflect the construct. (n = 274), but at almost the same level were responses
We examined the frequency and representative reflective of deficit thinking (n = 204). We coded a
responses to the qualitative items we coded in alignment moderate number of responses advocating and taking
with our education equity mindset actions (see Figure 2). responsibility for student success (n = 168), empathetic
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 70

Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations for Education Equity Subscales Composite Variable

Attribute (Subscale) Min Max Mean SD Median

Works to Lower Barriers 1.2 3.8 2.67 0.5 2.6

Values & Embraces Diversity 1.5 4.5 3.36 0.55 3.25

Life-Long Learning & Growth-Mindset 2.00 4.75 3.57 0.57 3.50

Caring & Compassionate 2.00 5.00 3.78 0.56 3.75

Advocacy & Responsibility for Student Success 2.25 5.00 4.08 0.61 4.25

Collectivist & Connectivist 1.25 5.00 4.19 0.61 4.25

Student-Centered Teaching 2.25 5.00 4.23 0.5 4.25

Table 3
Correlations between Composite Scores of Attribute Subscales

Values & Life-Long Caring & Advocacy & Collectivist & Student-
Embraces Learning & Compassionate Responsibility Connectivist centered
Diversity Growth- for Student Teaching
Mindset Success

Works to lower .40** .37** .32** .45** .31** .33**

barriers

Values & .49** .62** .52** .57** .52**

Embraces
Diversity

Life-Long .36** .49** .41** .30**

Learning &
Growth-Mindset

Caring & .53** .54** .48**

Compassionate

Advocacy & .50** .39**

Responsibility
for Student
Success

Collectivist .42**
Connectivist
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 71

Table 4
Education Equity Mindset Actions Frequency of Coding in Participants Responses and Representative Responses

Mindset Action Frequency Representative Participant Response

Student-centered 452 I meet with each student to develop goals and support structures.
Teaching (SCT) Work with them individually. For some assignments, I allow students to
turn them in early for feedback and to make corrections before the
assignment is due.
I find a strategy that has worked for them in the past and we work with it
or if they don’t have one then we begin to meet one on one until we find
the strategy that works for them.
Being bothered by the personal nature of my teaching or the creative way
I teach.

Privilege (P) 290 In recent years, students have failed to take advantage of the many
sources of assistance I offer.
I learn from my students every semester. Their contributions to discussion
help me see different perspectives on the literature we study.

Actively Open-Minded 274 Through multiple forms of feedback, including course evaluations, I
Thinking (OMT) constantly experiment with and adjust my courses to improve student
success without sacrificing rigor.
I am receptive to their feedback when they are struggling with learning
the content. If needed I try to find additional learning tools, change time
allotted for coverage of different topics, change how students are assessed
to meet the principles.
Some lower division classes have students who are under-prepared or
unmotivated.

Deficit Thinking (DT) 204 They would be prevented only by their lack of preparation from
prerequisite courses or their failure to want to work.
Provide extra time or additional support when necessary or needed.

Advocacy & 168 I no longer care if a young mother misses too many classes. Women are
Responsibility for disproportionately affected by childcare issues.
Student Success The first three modules of my course focus on learning about my students.
(ARSS) I learn about their backgrounds, their families, their biases, and their
goals. Based on the input they give me and the comments I share with
them, we establish a good sense of community and honesty.

Empathetic Curiosity 162 When my students share the challenges, they have balancing work,
(EC) family, education, it provides a different lens through which I view them.

There really should be nothing that prevents them from learning other
than my own failure to find the techniques to share the information in
ways that are helpful to students in finding connection and meaning in
the information.
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 72

Self-Awareness (SA) 152 I consider much more carefully how I communicate, showing respect and
being clear with my content

I make an effort to use examples in class that students can relate to and
make attempts to avoid triggering should a student disclose a history of a
specific trauma.

Cultural 94 I shape my writing prompts and my face-to-face responses to student

Responsiveness drafts according to what I've learned and continue to learn about the lives
(awareness+action) of my students and the culture in which they live.
(CR)
Each student comes with a different story and perspective that can shape
their leadership skills.

Values & Embraces 68 That said, the needs of each student can be so different from one to
Diversity (VED) another, one must be willing, and able to address each student's learning
differently.

curiosity (n = 162), and self-awareness (n = 152). education equity mindset attributes (see Table 5). We
Cultural awareness (n = 94) and valuing and embracing found multiple significant negative correlations between
diversity (n = 68) were the least frequently the number of students taught and mindset attributes. We
communicated mindset actions. Our results align with also found a significant negative correlation between age
the prediction that university faculty members are likely and working to lower barriers (r = -.23, p < .01) and
to hold a fragmented education equity mindset. between years the faculty member had worked in higher
Reviewing the data holistically, we interpreted the education and valuing and embracing diversity (r = -.22,
participants’ education equity mindset to be in the p < .01). Our data indicate that as age, years of
middle of the spectrum, representing a moderate experience in higher education, and the number of
mindset. students a faculty member teaches increases, there is a
Following our collective examination of responses, decrease in the level of commitment to the attributes of
we considered the frequencies by each free-response an education equity mindset.
prompt. In Figure 5, we present the results of our coding We continued our analysis by conducting either
for each item. We found that when the item focused on independent sample t-tests or ANOVA to determine if
student learning, the responses tended to focus on deficit our categorical variables were indicators of an education
thinking and privilege. However, when the focus on the equity mindset. We found gender to be a significant
prompt was on the faculty member, there was a shift in indicator for multiple variables (see Table 6). Our
the responses that reflected more student-centered analysis revealed females held a higher level of
teaching, self-awareness, and open-minded thinking. education equity mindset attributes than males.
These results indicate a potential disconnect between the Continuing our analysis, we conducted an ANOVA
education equity needs of students and the mindset of to examine the expressions of the education equity
faculty members. Further supporting our perspective is mindset attributes by discipline. We found significant
the consistently low frequency for valuing and differences (see Table 7) with pairwise analyses
embracing diversity and cultural responsiveness, which revealing STEM faculty members consistently expressed
indicates that the actions are likely not part of faculty significantly lower levels of education equity mindset
members’ mindset. attributes than faculty members in art, humanities, and
education.
Education Equity Mindset and Personal and Continuing our analysis, we found a significant
Professional Variables difference for education equity mindset attribute of
working to lower barriers by levels of students taught
Our second research question asked, how does the (F[5, 174] = 2.77, p = .02). Our pairwise analysis
faculty members’ education equity mindset vary with revealed faculty members who teach lower-division
their personal and professional variables? We began undergraduates had significantly higher levels of the
answering this question by calculating the correlations mindset attribute than faculty members who teach all
between our continuous personal and professional upper-division undergraduates. We found no difference
variables and the composite scores for our measure of by the format of the teaching or classification of the
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 73

Figure 5
Frequency of Codes for the Mindset Actions by Question Prompt

Table 6
Significant Differences for Mindset Attributes by Gender

Female - Mean Male - Mean

Mindset Attribute t p (significance)
(SD) (SD)
Values & Embraces Diversity 3.36 .001 4.20 (.56) 3.89 (.63)
Life-Long Learning & Growth Mindset 2.87 .005 3.88 (.54) 3.63 (.57)
Caring & Compassionate 2.18 .031 4.30 (.49) 4.13 (.49)
Advocates & Takes Responsibility for
3.96 <.001 3.48 (.54) 3.16 (.50)
Student Success
Collectivist & Connectivist 2.38 .018 4.28 (.52) 4.06 (.70)
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 74

Table 7
Analysis of Educational Equity Mindset Attributes by Discipline

Mindset Attribute F p Pairwise Analysis

Values & Embraces Diversity STEM < Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences,
5.06 <.001
Education
Student-centered Teaching STEM<Arts, Humanities, Education; Health Science
5.07 <.001
< Education; Social Science < Education
Caring & Compassionate STEM<Arts, Humanities, Education; Other < Arts,
4.91 <.001
Humanities; Health Science < Humanities
Collectivist & Connectivist STEM<Arts, Humanities, Education, Health
4.18 <.001
Sciences

institution. We did not have sufficient sample sizes to correlations also support the assumption that the
test for differences by ethnicity or by public or private attributes of an education equity mindset should be
institution. considered as a whole, particularly when trying to shift
faculty members’ mindsets. Thus, an implication for our
Discussion and Implications finding is the need to design professional development
opportunities intended to strengthen faculty members’
The goal of our research was to document the education equity mindset in ways that address the
education equity mindset of postsecondary faculty mindset as a whole.
members. We maintain that a strong education equity The coding of the faculty members' qualitative
mindset is critical to broadening participation and responses revealed a wide range of frequencies, which
creating inclusive learning environments where students indicates the participants are not necessarily thinking
who have been historically marginalized can feel they about their interactions with students in terms of a strong
belong in college and deserve a college education. Our education equity mindset. The range of frequencies
findings raise some interesting discussions and have reflects a fragmented education equity mindset or the
multiple implications for policy and practice. potential for perceptions that are parallel to those of an
education equity mindset but align with a different frame
Mindset Attributes and Actions of mind, such as an instructional leader mindset. A
potential fruitful line of future research is deeply
Through our analysis, we found that the participants exploring the frame of mind with which faculty member
expressed the attributes of an education equity mindset consider their teaching and how much of their mindset
at different levels. The participants expressed about half aligns with an education equity mindset.
of the attributes at levels reflective of a moderate We found that the participants’ emphasis on
education equity mindset. The results suggest that the education equity mindset actions shifted with the focus
participants did not hold a strong education equity on students and faculty members. When considering
mindset. It is possible that postsecondary faculty students’ challenges with learning, the participants
members do not consider equity as they concentrate on communicated issues of shortcomings with students,
their role as the instructor instead of focusing on sharing perceptions of student deficits, and conveyed
effective instruction for their students. The lack of a positions of personal privilege. However, when the focus
strong education equity mindset has the potential to keep was on what the faculty members were doing to increase
marginalizing certain student populations, which student learning, the emphasis shifted to student-
perpetuates conditions of inequity and exclusion. Faculty centered learning. Thus, our data suggest that faculty
members may need explicit, focused, and long-term members struggle with taking responsibility for students
professional development to help them understand issues not doing well in their courses. We conjecture faculty
of equity and inclusion and their role in increasing members are not approaching their teaching and student
opportunities for all. learning from the same perspective. However, we
Our finding of the significant correlations between speculate that faculty members who hold an education
all of our education equity mindset attributes suggests equity mindset are likely to be more consistent in
that the attributes are related, which is a premise of our considering their role independent of the focus on
mindset model. The correlations provide validation for students or faculty member engagement for learning.
the relationship of the attributes to the mindset. The Exploring the mindset of faculty members who are
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 75

consistent in taking responsibility for student learning explanation for the finding is STEM tends to be male
regardless of the framing of the situation is a needed line dominated, and males score lower on education equity
for future research. mindset. Similarly, arts, humanities, and education tend
to be female dominated, and females score higher on
Education Equity Mindset and Personal and education equity mindset. The implication for our
Professional Variables finding is the potential that marginalized students in
STEM education do not receive the support they need to
The inverse relationship between the mindset feel a sense of belongingness and inclusion. The weaker
attribute expression and faculty member age, years in levels of an education equity mindset among STEM
higher education, and by the number of students suggests faculty members may explain the lack of diversity in
that the mindset is associated with both the traits and the many STEM fields. The lack of diversity may be
state of faculty members. It was rather concerning to find exacerbated by the weaker education equity mindsets of
the consistent inverse relationships based on the number faculty members who teach upper-division
of students taught, given the faculty members influence undergraduate students (compared to those teaching
a greater number of students are less likely to hold a lower-division undergraduate students). To increase
strong education equity mindset. We speculate that the diversity and broader participation in STEM fields, there
more students a faculty member teaches, the weaker the is a need to strengthen the education equity mindset of
bond and connection is with the students, which STEM faculty members.
disassociates the faculty members from considering the Overall, our results indicate a need to explicitly
personal needs of their students. The disassociation may address members' education equity mindset to strengthen
be accompanied by an intense workload stressing faculty their mindset to position them to support inclusion,
members, which may be a barrier to forming an diversity, equity, and belonging. Leadership at
education equity mindset. Exploring why the number of universities may need to develop long-term initiatives
students a faculty member teaches is inversely related to that start with an education equity mindset inventory to
their education equity mindset requires additional raise faculty members' awareness of the current level of
research. their mindset. Based on their mindset strength, university
We found significant differences for gender, with leaders can develop interventions to increase faculty
females expressing the mindset attributes at significantly members' education equity mindset based on their
higher levels than males. We speculate that the female current mindset levels. We also recommend university
participants expressed higher equity mindsets due to leaders continue to monitor the strength of the education
experiencing gender inequity within higher education. In equity mindset of the faculty members in conjunction
addition, the male participants, who were nearly all with student diversity, retention, and completion. Again,
white, may have expressed lower equity mindsets due to the premise of our research is faculty members holding
the likelihood of being less personally affected by equity strong education equity mindsets will manifest in
issues in higher education. Further, we speculate that increased diversity of students attending the institution,
females tend to be more socially oriented in their higher retention of students, and more students
teaching while males tend to be more focused on content completing their degree programs.
delivery. The social orientation in teaching manifests in
developing relationships with students, which may then Limitations
lead to working to be more inclusive and equitable to
assure the success of all students. In contrast, the focus The first limitation of our research is the
on content delivery limits connecting with the students participation of faculty members from the same region
and puts the responsibility for learning on the students, of the United States. We recruited participants from
resulting in activities and perceptions aligned with a multiple institutions from a south-central region of the
weak education equity mindset. The implications for United States. While we did gather responses from
students are they may achieve more success with female faculty members working at a diversity of institutions,
faculty members. Our results also indicate a need for there is a possibility that faculty members in other
professional development to increase awareness and regions and different institutions may hold different
action for those least likely to be affected by situations perspectives. Future research should expand on our work
of inequity. There is a need to further research gender gathering data from faculty members in different
differences in education equity mindset and the locations and different cultures.
ramifications for student success. The second limitation of our research is the potential
Our analysis of education equity mindset attribute for a participation bias. It is possible the faculty members
expression by discipline revealed consistently in who participated in our study did so because of interest
significantly lower levels for STEM faculty members in the topic or the desire to learn more about support
compared to art, humanities, and education. A potential student success, and those who declined to participate
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 76

may not be as focused on student diversity and inclusion. (Working Paper No. w26316). National Bureau of
Again, we seem to have a diversity of responses Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/
suggesting we had a range of views represented in our w26316
sample. Future research may need to focus on gathering Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human
a greater variety of responses. agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1,
A third limitation of our study is the potential for 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-
desirability bias. The participants may have answered the 6916.2006.00011.x
items on the survey in ways that are perceived to be Baron, J. (1991). Beliefs about thinking. In J. Voss, D.
socially desirable but not necessarily representative of Perkins, & J. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and
the participants’ actual perceptions. Future research may education (pp. 169-186). Erlbaum.
need to include observations of practice and interviews Baron, J. (1993). Why teach thinking?–An essay.
of students to determine if the mindset we documented Applied Psychology, 42, 191–237. https://doi.org/
is observed and experienced by students. 10.1111/j.1464-0597.1993.tb00731.x
A fourth limitation was the nature of our data Baron, J. (1995). Myside bias in thinking about abortion.
collection, which is survey research. We did validate our Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 221-235.
survey and found it to have an acceptable level of https://doi.org/10.1080/13546789508256909
reliability, and included qualitative items for Barth, R. S. (2001). Learning by heart. Jossey-Bass.
triangulation and trustworthiness, which allowed us to Baumeister, R. F. (2005). The cultural animal: Human
gather meaningful data and report accurate results. nature, meaning, and social life. Oxford University
However, we were not able to follow up with the Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/
participants to determine why they answered as they did. 9780195167030.001.0001
Future research may include additional interviews of Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated
faculty members to determine why they answer significance of practitioner knowledge in the
education equity mindset questions the way they do. scholarship on student success. The Review of
Higher Education, 30(4), 441-469.
Conclusion https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2007.0032
Bensimon, E. M. (2012). The equity scorecard: Theory
Our goal was to provide a foundation for assessing of change. In E. M. Bensimon & L. Malcom (Eds.),
the strength of faculty members’ education equity Confronting equity issues on campus: Implementing
mindset. The strength of faculty members’ education the equity scorecard in theory and practice (pp. 17-
equity mindset is likely reflective of their ability to meet 44). Stylus Publishing.
the educational needs of marginalized and Cai, S. (2011). The age of synthesis: From cognitive
underrepresented students. Faculty members play a science to converging technologies and hereafter.
critical role in achieving goals for increased inclusion Chinese Science Bulletin, 56, 465–475.
and diversity on college campuses. However, if faculty https://doi.org/10.1007/s11434-010-4005-7
members hold a weak education equity mindset, they are Chao, R. (2006). Counselors’ multicultural
not likely to engage in actions necessary to broaden competencies: Race, training, ethnic identity, and
participation in postsecondary education. We hope color-blind racial attitudes. In G. R. Walz, J. C.
others will find our research useful and build upon our Bleuer, & R. K. Yep (Eds.), Vistas: Compelling
findings by exploring other facets of faculty members’ perspectives on counseling 2006 (pp. 73–76).
education equity mindset. American Counseling Association.
Conley, D. T. (2011). Building on the common core.
References Educational Leadership, 68(6), 16-20.
Cook-Sather, A., Des-Ogugua, C., & Bahti, M. (2018).
Alemán, E., Freire, J. A., McKinney, A., & Bernal, D. D. Articulating identities and analyzing belonging: A
(2017). School–university–community pathways to multistep intervention that affirms and informs a
higher education: Teacher perceptions, school diversity of students. Teaching in Higher Education,
culture and partnership building. The Urban 23(3), 374-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Review, 49(5), 852-873. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 13562517.2017.1391201
s11256-017-0424-y Dasgupta, N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and women in
Alvarado, L. A. (2010). Dispelling the meritocracy science, technology, engineering, and mathematics:
myth: Lessons for higher education and student STEMing the tide and broadening participation in
affairs educators. The Vermont Connection, 31(1), STEM careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral
10-20. and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/
Arcidiacono, P., Kinsler, J., & Ransom, T. (2019). 10.1177/2372732214549471
Legacy and athlete preferences at Harvard Davis, L., & Museus, S. (2019). What is deficit thinking?
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 77

An analysis of conceptualizations of deficit thinking diversity. Self and Identity, 11(2), 237-254.
and implications for scholarly research. NCID https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2011.556804
Currents, 1(1), 117-130. https://doi.org/10.3998/ Hall, C. W. (1996). The age of synthesis. Peter Lang.
currents.17387731.0001.110 Halpern, J. (2007). Empathy and patient–physician
de Sousa, R. (2007). Why think? Evolution and the conflicts. Journal of General Internal Medicine,
rational mind. Oxford University Press. 22(5), 696-700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-
Dweck, C. (2007). Mindset: The new psychology of 006-0102-3
success. Ballantine Books. Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The role of
Ehren, B.J. (2009). Response to intervention in actively open-minded thinking in information
secondary school: Is it on your radar screen. RtI acquisition, accuracy, and calibration. Judgment
Action Network. http://www.rtinetwork.org/Learn/ and Decision Making, 8(3), 188-201.
Why/ar/RadarScreen https://doi.org/10.1037/t41728-000
Englert, P., Begin, N., Bucalos, A., Wallitsch, K., Ellis, Harper, S. R., Patton, L. D., & Wooden, O. S. (2009).
G., & Stawser, M. G. (2019). Digging into difficult Access and equity for African American students in
topics: Cultivating community within the higher education: A critical race historical analysis
classroom. Journal of Faculty Development, 33(2), of policy efforts. The Journal of Higher Education,
25-30. 80(4), 389-414. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Espelage, D. L., Mebane, S. E., & Adams, R. S. (2004). 00221546.2009.11779022
Empathy, caring, and bullying: Toward an Hartung, F. M., & Renner, B. (2011). Social curiosity
understanding of complex associations. In D. L. and interpersonal perception: A judge × trait
Espelage & S. M. Swearer (Eds.), Bullying in interaction. Personality and Social Psychology
American schools: A social-ecological perspective Bulletin, 37(6), 796-814.
on prevention and intervention (pp. 37– 61). https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211400618
Erlbaum. Heitner, K. L., & Jennings, M. (2016). Culturally
Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., responsive teaching knowledge and practices of
Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W., & online faculty. Online Learning, 20(4), 54-78.
Beechum, N. O. (2012). Teaching adolescents to https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i4.1043
become learners: The role of noncognitive factors Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse
in shaping school performance: A critical literature problem solvers can outperform groups of high-
review. University of Chicago Consortium on ability problem solvers. Proceedings of the National
Chicago School Research. Academy of Sciences, 101(46), 16385-16389.
Ford, D. Y., Scott, M. T., Moore III, J. L., & Amos, S. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403723101
O. (2013). Gifted education and culturally different Hung, M., Smith, W. A., Voss, M. W., Franklin, J. D.,
students: Examining prejudice and discrimination Gu, Y., & Bounsanga, J. (2020). Exploring student
via microaggressions. Gifted Child Today, 36(3), achievement gaps in school districts across the
205–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/ United States. Education and Urban Society, 52(2),
1076217513487069 175-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/
French, R. P. (2016). The fuzziness of mindsets: 0013124519833442
Divergent conceptualizations and characterizations Jaschik, S. (2015). What the protests mean. Inside
of mindset theory and praxis. International Journal Higher Ed, 16.
of Organizational Analysis, 24(4), 673-691. Kashdan, T. B., McKnight, P. E., Fincham, F. D., &
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-09-2014-0797 Rose, P. (2011). When curiosity breeds intimacy:
Garcia, S. B., & Guerra, P. L. (2004). Deconstructing Taking advantage of intimacy opportunities and
deficit thinking: Working with educators to create transforming boring conversations. Journal of
more equitable learning environments. Education Personality, 79(6), 1369-1402.
and Urban Society, 36(2), 150-168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00697.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124503261322 Kasworm, C. E., & Bowles, T. A. (2012). Fostering
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive transformative learning in higher education settings.
teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106- In E. W. Taylor & P. Cranton (Eds.), The handbook
116. https://doi.org/10.1177/ of transformative learning: Theory, research, and
0022487102053002003 practice (pp. 388-407). Jossey-Bass.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: theory, Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of
research, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Press. Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.
Goren, M. J., & Plaut, V. C. (2012). Identity form https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465
matters: White racial identity and attitudes toward Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 78

pedagogy 2.0: A.K.A. the remix. Harvard Walthall, B. (2019b). Is equity on the mind?
Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84. Documenting teachers’ education equity mindset.
https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj1314854847 World Journal of Education, 9(5), 26-40.
51 https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v9n5p26
Liu, A. (2011). Unraveling the myth of meritocracy Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. L. (2019). Teaching and
within the context of US higher education. Higher learning integrated STEM: Using andragogy to
Education, 62, 383–397. foster an entrepreneurial mindset in the age of
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9394-7 synthesis. In A. Sahin & M. J. Mohr-Schroeder
Malcom-Piqueux, L., & Bensimon, E. M. (2017). Taking (Eds.) STEM education 2.0 myths and truths – What
equity-minded action to close equity gaps. Peer has K-12 STEM education research taught us? (pp.
Review, 19(2), 5-8. 53-71). Boston, MA: Brill Sense.
McEvoy, P., Baker, D., Plant, R., Hylton, K., & Mansell, https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004405400_004
W. (2013). Empathic curiosity: Resolving goal Nieto, J. (2006). The cultural plunge: Cultural
conflicts that generate emotional distress. Journal of immersion as a means of promoting self-awareness
Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 20(3), 273- and cultural sensitivity among student teachers.
278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(1), 75-84.
2850.2012.01926.x Phillips, R. (2016). Curious about others: Relational and
McIntosh, P. (1988). White privilege: Unpacking the empathetic curiosity for diverse societies. New
invisible knapsack. Peace and Freedom. Formations: A Journal of Culture/Theory/Politics,
https://psychology.umbc.edu/files/2016/10/White- 88(88), 123-142. https://doi.org/10.3898/
Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf NEWF.88.02.2016
McKay, J., & Devlin, M. (2016). ‘Low income doesn't Ratts, M. J., Singh, A. A., Nassar‐McMillan, S., Butler,
mean stupid and destined for failure': Challenging S. K., & McCullough, J. R. (2016). Multicultural
the deficit discourse around students from low SES and social justice counseling competencies:
backgrounds in higher education. International Guidelines for the counseling profession. Journal of
Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(4), 347-363. Multicultural Counseling and Development, 44(1),
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2015.1079273 28-48. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12035
McKenzie, K. B., & Phillips, G. A. (2016). Equity traps Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect
then and now: Deficit thinking, racial erasure and of student’s engagement during learning activities.
naïve acceptance of meritocracy. Whiteness and Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 257-
Education, 1(1), 26-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 267.
23793406.2016.1159600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
McKenzie, K. B., & Scheurich, J. J. (2008). Teacher Reynolds, A. L. (2011). Understanding the perceptions
resistance to improvement of schools with diverse and experiences of faculty who teach multicultural
students. International Journal of Leadership in counseling courses: An exploratory study. Training
Education, 11(2), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/ and Education in Professional Psychology, 5(3),
13603120801950122 167-174. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024613
Milner, H. R. (2010). Start where you are, but don’t stay Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person. Houghton
there. Harvard Education Press. Mifflin.
Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as Sa, W. C., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (1999). The
discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, domain specificity and generality of belief bias:
1(1), 58-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Searching for a generalizable critical thinking skill.
1541344603252172 Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 497–510.
Museus, S. D. (2014). The culturally engaging campus https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.497
environments (CECE) model: A new theory of Sharma, M. (2018). Seeping deficit thinking
success among racially diverse college student assumptions maintain the neoliberal education
populations. In M. B. Paulsen (Ed.). Higher agenda: Exploring three conceptual frameworks of
education: Handbook of theory and research: Vol. deficit thinking in inner-city schools. Education and
29. (pp. 189–227). Springer. https://doi.org/ Urban Society, 50(2), 136-154.
10.1007/978-94-017-8005-6_5 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124516682301
Nadelson, L. S., Albritton, S., Couture, V. G., Green, C., Smith, P. (2012). The trouble with higher education: A
Loyless, S. D., & Shaw, E. O. (2019a). Principals’ critical examination of our universities. Routledge.
perceptions of education equity: A mindset for https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203866344
practice. Journal of Education and Learning, 9 (1), Solorzano, D. G. (1997). Images and words that wound:
1-15. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v9n1p1 Critical race theory, racial stereotyping and teacher
Nadelson, L. S., Miller, R., Bang, N. M., Hu, H., & education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24(3), 5–
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 79

20. ____________________________
Spade, D. (2017). What’s wrong with rights? In S.
Goldberg (Ed). Sexuality and equality law (pp. LOUIS S. NADELSON, Ph.D. (2007, University of
383-404). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/ Nevada, Las Vegas) is a Professor and Department Chair
9781315088051-13 in the Department of Leadership Studies, College of
Stanovich, K. (2011). Rationality and the reflective Education, University of Central Arkansas. Informed by
mind. Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/ many years of teaching and leadership activities his
acprof:oso/9780195341140.001.0001 research interests included issues of equity and
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning inclusion, STEM teaching and learning, identity,
independently of prior belief and individual mindsets, and teacher leadership. He is currently the
differences in actively open-minded thinking. STEM executive editor of the Journal of Educational
Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342–357. Research.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.342
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual STACEY D. LOYLESS, Ed.D. is an Assistant Professor
differences in reasoning: Implications for the in the Department of Leadership Studies at the
rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain University of Central Arkansas. Dr. Loyless teaches
Sciences, 23, 645–665. https://doi.org/10.1017/ within the School Leadership, Management, and
S0140525X00003435 Administration program; he primarily centers research
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the failure efforts within these areas: educational equity,
of cognitive ability to predict myside and one- instructional design, school leadership mindsets, and
sided thinking biases. Thinking & Reasoning, 14, process systems integration.
129–167.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780701679764 MICHALE S. MILLS, Ed.D. (2000, University of
Starobin, S., Laanan, F. S., & Burger, C. J. (2010). Arkansas at Little Rock) is an Associate Professor in the
Role of community colleges: Broadening Department of Teaching and Learning at the University
participation among women and minorities in of Central Arkansas. He researches assessment
STEM. Journal of Women and Minorities in accountability and the practical uses of mobile
Science and Engineering, 16(1), 1-5. technology, with a particular focus on ensuring
https://doi.org/10.1615/ educational equity. He serves on the SXSWedu
JWomenMinorScienEng.v16.i1.10 Advisory Board and teaches a broad range of
Svedholm-Hakinen, A.M., & Lindeman, M. (2017). undergraduate and graduate courses in teacher
Actively open-minded thinking: Development of education.
a shortened scale and disentangling attitudes
towards knowledge and people. Thinking & ODUNOLA OYENIYI, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor
Reasoning, 24(1), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/ of School Counseling in the Department of Leadership
13546783.2017.1378723 Studies at the University of Central Arkansas. She
Theoharis, G. (2005). Arrogant humility: The identity, teaches school counseling courses in the counseling
calling, and leadership of urban social justice graduate program. She has worked in school, career,
principals. Paper presented at the University marriage and family, rehabilitation, and mental health
Council for Educational Administration Annual counseling settings. Her research interests include
Convention, Nashville, TN. faculty and student engagement, college students'
Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich. K. E. (2003). challenges and adjustment, suicide prevention, and drug
Associations between myside bias on an informal abuse and prevention. She has published articles on
reasoning task and amount of postsecondary college students' stress and adjustment, grief counseling
education. Applied Cognitive Psychology 17, among couples, COVID 19 and school counselors'
851-860. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.915 experience, substance abuse among adolescents, and
Trolian, T. L., Jach, E. A., Hanson, J. M., & social justice advocacy in counseling.
Pascarella, E. T. (2016). Influencing academic
motivation: The effects of student-faculty SHELLY ALBRITTON, Ph.D. (University of Southern
interaction. Journal of College Student Mississippi) retied in December 2021 from being a
Development, 57(7), 810-826. Professor of Leadership programs at the University of
https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2016.0080 Central Arkansas. She was a language arts and tech prep
Valencia, R. (2017). The evolution of deficit thinking: and career discovery teacher, K-12 parent liaison, and a
educational thought and practice. Routledge principal. Her scholarship examined projects-based
Publishing. learning in pre-service programs, principals as social
Nadelson et al. Success for All? 80

justice leaders, and the rural principal and the struggle to

advocate for LGBTQ students.

VALERIE G. COUTURE, Ph.D. is an Assistant

Professor in the Leadership Studies department at the
University of Central Arkansas in Conway, Arkansas.
She graduated with a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and
Supervision from the University of Arkansas. Her
research includes educational equity in K-20
environments, multicultural counseling competence, and
counseling skill development. She teaches graduate
courses in School Counseling and Leadership Studies.

THOMAS BRUICK, Ph.D. (2019, Colorado State

University) is an Assistant Professor at the University of
Central Arkansas. He currently teaches and serves as
program coordinator for the College Student Personnel
Administration program. His research explores the role
of environmental, experiential, and dispositional factors
in college student success with a specific focus on
conditionally admitted students.

CHARLOTTE RAINEY PARHAM, Ed.D. is an

Assistant Professor at the University of Central
Arkansas. Dr. Parham's research interest includes
education equity, school readiness, education leadership,
opportunity gaps, and disruptive innovation.