ARC Subcommittee: Communications and Outreach • December 3, 2020 MINUTES I OVERVIEW The second meeting of the School of the Art Institute of Chicago’s (SAIC) Anti-Racism Committee (ARC), Communications and Outreach Subcommittee, was held on Thursday, December 3, 2020 online from 2:00–3:00 p.m A ATTENDING Michael Blackman, assistant dean of student affairs for student support and conflict resolution; Scott Hendrickson, vice president of marketing and communications (co-chair); Jake Linn, undergraduate student; Allie n Steve Mullen, associate professor; Josh Rios, assistant professor, adjunct; Sarah Ross, assistant professor; Katrina Valera, director of student affairs for diversity and inclusion (co-chair); Jeff Ward, special assistant for executive communications (notetaker) B VISITING Jefferson Pinder, director of diversity, equity, and inclusion for academic affairs (ARC co-chair) C AGENDA o Introduction o Website Review II WEBSITE REVIEW After a brief review of their charge and community commitment, subcommittee members discussed the elements they would like to have in a communications plan As a tool for their conversation, members had previously reviewed the anti-racism and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) information from other schools’ and organizations’ websites and shared their impressions, which included: A WEBSITES OBSERVED Members looked at websites from these organizations: Association of American Medical Colleges; Brown University; California College of the Arts; California Institute of the Arts; Chicago Freedom School, Cornell University; Duke University; Johns Hopkins Universities; Maryland Institute College of Art; Minneapolis College of Art and Design; New York University; Oberlin College and Conservatory; Poetry Foundation; Pratt; Society of Black Engineers; The New School; University of New Hampshire; University of Vermont; Wheaton College; and other schools listed in a USA Today article on the most diverse campuses Page of ARC Subcommittee: Communications and Outreach • December 3, 2020 MINUTES B APPROACHES TO CONSIDER During discussion, members found the following to be good features for anti-racism and DEI communications: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Admitting to institutional shortcomings, problems, and harms—historical and ongoing—in language that is not defensive; rather, it should take ownership of having room for improvement, even be apologetic Frank language, free of institutional vagaries Language that was not timid in its aspirations, avoiding phrases like “striving toward anti-racism” Making specific commitments, with timelines, financial commitments, outcomes, and specific managing personnel, “the institution is committed to achieving X over the next Y years; these efforts are being overseen by Z, the Z’s TITLE.” Short, clear communication of commitments and actions, an archive of letters difficult to glean intention from Resources that feel unscripted and genuine, videos a good tool to reach this Idea of intellectual inheritance, “debt to Black artists” Inclusion of religion and disability as well as international student concerns in DEI Clarity about opposition to anti-Blackness as part of anti-racism/DEI commitment Clarity about what DEI means, not just a definition, per se, but explain and showing “this is what diversity looks like,” these are tents of equity,” etc Evidence of ongoing dialogue in departments about anti-racism and DEI Lists of focus topics, aligning events, readings, curriculum, etc into focus, broad-based conversation throughout school Interactive, two-way dialogues, potentially via canvas More tools for student-led contributions to List of more ways to get involved, e.g., events, forums Meeting minutes Ongoing form to collect anti-racism/DEI ideas and initiatives Clarity about where to go when you have a specific problem in need of redress, as opposed to have anti-racism/DEI feedback, advice, and ideas to share Feedback and survey tools should be carefully designed to clarify that the data is going to ARC, ensuring that students in need can find assistance Organizational structure based on topic area and interests, as opposed to resources offered; exhaustive list of resources offered makes it hard to find the what you’re looking for Especially after pandemic, more utilization of off-web resources, e.g., digisigns, flyers Talk externally as well as internally, taking on role of thought leader publicly; being a leader in the field Resources and framing that would encourage individuals to interrogate their own beliefs, practices, and privilege Page of COMMUNITY GUIDELINES Valera reviewed a series of community guidelines ARC’s communication and outreach subcommittee meeting sessions would follow to ensure everyone who wanted to had the opportunity to speak They were: • • • • • • • • • • • • Respect: Try to build a respectful conversation Intention vs Impact: Take responsibility for effect of words, even if the impact us unintentional Oops, ouch: Respectfully call attention to slights in the moment Take space; make space for diverse voices: Contribute to the conversation, while being attentive to making space for others Intersectional intervention and advocacy: Build a conversation the recognizes and supports individuals multiplicity of identities One Lizzo, one flute: One person should speak at a time Land the plane: Be focused, so there can be time for more voices Understand before you’re understood: Listen Be open to being challenged: Welcome feedback, especially about assumptions and generalizations Green, yellow, red: expect and accept discomfort: You will encounter discomfort in a space of learning Be committee to changing your opinion: It is okay to have your ideas challenged, and change them in the face of more information and reflection What is said, stays; what is learned, leaves: The integrity of the story made in discussion, and the individual narrative people may share, stays at the meeting; what we learn and decide can be shared with the community