Diversity and equity are essential, fundamental pillars of a learning environment.

If
these pillars are neglected, then the learning process is compromised. The purpose of this plan
is to outline my pedagogical strategy of diversity and equity. It also serves as a personal and
professional charge to be an effective educator. I reject the hubris that I can accomplish all of
these flawlessly, however I will commit myself to growing every day. It is imperative that I
operate in urgency and competence, because one without the other is entirely insufficient and
harmful. This paper outlines my plan of how I define, approach, and integrate ideas around
equity, culturally relevant pedagogy, and social justice in the academic learning environment.
My diversity plan consists of regularly interrogating my own motivations and internal
prejudice. In particular, I will identify and dismantle an internal white savior complex, which is
motivated by a “missionary approach to teaching – one in which a teacher desires to ‘save’
students in a community” (Milner, 2014). Interrogating the white savior complex requires that I
acknowledge “the matrix of white privilege” and actively work to “weaken systems of
advantage” (McIntosh, 1988). Additionally, recognizing the savior complex removes me from
the forefront and establishes me in a place of humility. I strive to operate in a posture that
focuses on the individual potential of each student. As Nieto (2005) states teaching “may help
make one less self-centered, more responsive to others, more aware of one’s obligations
beyond oneself”. I am not a savior; I am a teacher. Teaching is not about self-promotion –
instead humbly creating an environment that celebrates the students’ lived experience and
fosters diverse perspectives.
As an educator, it is my responsibility to ensure that equity and social justice are at the
center of my instruction. At the foundation, I will strive to actively work against and disarm any
philosophies motivated by the deficit theory. For centuries, education in the United States
perpetuated inequity by operating under this theory, which suggests that students of color and
students of low socioeconomic status are inherently deficient and responsible for learning
challenges. Ladson-Billings (2014) writes that “the classroom environment disadvantaged
students, just by virtue of who they are. Characteristics such as race, class, gender, language,
immigrant status, culture, or sexual identity served to limit students’ opportunities because
others made judgements about their academic abilities.” The deficit theory posits that simply
working harder is a generalizable solution for all students, and it neglects to consider how
institutions have systemically worked against students of color. As Delpit (2006) summarizes,
“the general notion in this country is that children who belong to stigmatized groups are ‘less
than’ their middle-class, lighter skinned age-mates.” This constant barrage of historical inequity
is extremely harmful and has permeated the lives of students today. Children “readily
internalize these beliefs about themselves” (Delpit, 2006). Oftentimes educators give up on
students and fail to appreciate the individual potential of every single student to learn and to
succeed. During my first year of teaching, I witnessed firsthand how much students are able to
overcome when they are afforded every opportunity to learn. The deficit theory suggests this
isn’t possible, however in reality, every student can learn and possesses uniquely limitless
potential. It’s my responsibility to uphold this expectation on myself every single day and
consistently asking what is “right with these students and what happened in the classrooms of
teachers who seemed to experience pedagogical success with them” (Ladson-Billings, 2014).
A pivotal way that I plan to integrate equity and diversity in the classroom is by
implementing culturally relevant pedagogy. I define culturally relevant pedagogy as curriculum
and teaching strategies that celebrate and reflect my students’ lived experiences. If students
see themselves in the content they are leaning, then it is easier for connections and synthesis to
occur. Additionally, students may be more inclined to conduct further individual exploration of
material. Consequently, it is incumbent upon me to familiarize myself with the culture and lived
experiences of my students, because “when a teacher is familiar with aspects of a child’s
culture, then the teacher may be better able to assess the child’s competence. Many teachers,
unfamiliar with the language, the metaphors, or the environments of the children they teach,
may easily underestimate the children’s competence” (Delpit, 2006). Culturally relevant
pedagogy goes beyond merely the presentation of material – it seeks to make connections with
the students lived experiences as well as exposing students to new cultures that are different
than theirs. Cultural difference is celebrated and community can be established on mutual
respect and the simple joy of learning about others. As Delpit (2006) writes, “most parents do
want their children to learn about their own culture, but they also want them to learn about
the rest of the world. I have described what I want for my child as an academic house built on a
strong foundation of self-knowledge but with many windows and doors that look out onto the
rest of the world”.
Culturally relevant pedagogy also seeks to counter curriculum that is complacently
neutral and directly adverse to equity and diversity. As Sadowski (2003) writes, “if the language
and harassment of LGBT students experience make them feel painfully conspicuous at school,
the curriculum they are studying may do just the opposite”. If content is not reflective, then
students are likely to feel invisible. Additionally, curriculum and instruction must always be
progressive towards social justice. Ladson-Billings (2014) identifies ineffective, anti-justice
classrooms that “rarely pushed students to consider critical perspectives on policies and
practices that may have direct impact on their lives and communities.” It is vital that my
classroom is a space that provides rigorous mathematics instruction in concert with culturally-
sustaining pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 2014).
The physical and psychological structure of the classroom environment is important to
consider. Historically, classrooms have relied on the grid orientation, which is strict and
uninviting. However, I’ve found that arranging desks in either groups or arcs have been
effective at fostering inclusivity. Grid formations can manifest inequity because more
outspoken students often times end up with more teacher attention than soft-spoken students.
My plan is to prioritize every student, regardless of their level of engagement. I strive to create
a space where students feel safe to take academic risks and feel valued by their teacher. If a
student appears disengaged, then it is my responsibility to ensure they receive the assistance
they need. By fostering a sense of self-efficacy, students can be empowered to leverage their
own mastery experience to apply themselves to future endeavors. As Delpit (2006) observed, if
students “don’t feel connected to a teacher on an emotional level, then they will not learn, they
will not put out the effort”. My plan includes prioritizes this emotional connection with my
classroom.
Ultimately, I believe diversity, equity, and mathematics are significantly intertwined,
however they have been historically considered mutually exclusive. In particular, I reference the
recent fearmongering centered around critical race theory and social-emotional learning. When
discussing recent math textbook bans, Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida stated “math is about
getting the right answer…not about how you feel about the problem” (“A Look inside the
textbooks that Florida rejected, 2022). This sentiment is harmful, destructive, and counter to
my philosophy of mathematics – that mathematics is relevant, empowering, and vital to the
holistic development of students. This plan is an outline of how I will strive to combine
diversity, equity, and mathematics in order create a learning environment that is centered on
social justice and student flourishing.

Delpit, L. (2006). Lessons from teachers. Journal of Teacher Education. DOI:

Milner
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: a.k.a. the remix. Harvard
Educational Review.

Sadowski

Nieto, S. (2005). Why we teach. Teachers College Press

McIntosh
Goldstein, D., & Saul, S. (2022, April 22). “A Look inside the textbooks that Florida
rejected.” The New York Times. [Link]
[Link]