stem4equity-banner image

CE 1: Civil Engineering Seminar

Inclusive Syllabus, Inclusive Language, Welcoming Environment

Reflection on Instructional Change for Equity-Minded Instruction:

CE 1 (Civil Engineering Seminar) is a course that is taken by freshmen and transfer students in their first semester at Sacramento State as an introduction to the field of civil engineering and general civil engineering profession and practice. The course change I implemented was to develop an inclusive syllabus with language that conforms to the demographics and backgrounds of our existing student body. There were two main reasons for selecting this change. First, the student body in the civil engineering (CE) program, particularly the CE 1 course has significantly changed over the last 10 years (time that I have been at Sacramento State). In the past, we used to get a majority of students in our major who were either joining the program because they had a parent or family member already in the civil engineering profession OR were motivated by a friend/colleague/mentor to pursue this career. Increasingly, the CE 1 class is hosting students who no longer belong to the above-mentioned category. Instead, we are receiving students from other majors and backgrounds, particularly minority students who are either exploring the options of a civil engineering profession (not yet sold on it) or are coming from first-generation college student backgrounds and are in pursuit of a stable, well-paying, profession to secure their future. Although I do not have hard evidence for this, anecdotally, this has been observed to be the case by all civil engineering faculty in the department. Therefore, there was a need to address the needs of the changing demographics in the CE program and an opportunity to welcome students from non-traditional backgrounds compared with the past. The second reason for selecting this strategy was my aim to scrutinize and critically analyze my teaching practices in this course from the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) perspective. While being aware of the significance and need for promoting DEI practices, I haven't had the opportunity to translate that into meaningful changes in my teaching practices and course. I hope to use the revision of my syllabus in this class as a stepping stone to more in-depth changes in teaching practices and the way the course is administered to the changing demographics of students. For the abovementioned two reasons, I created a revised syllabus that sets a more welcoming and inclusive tone in the class for students of all backgrounds and preparations and aim to revisit my own teaching practices to conform to the needs of the current student makeup in this class and in general in the CE major.

The specific steps I undertook to implement the strategy of developing and inclusive syllabus for the CE 1 class are as follows:
1. I reviewed several documents, reports, and references shared through the STEM4Equity resources to try to get an in-depth understanding of why is it important to revise the syllabus, how to actually do it, and most important, how it can impact students and instructor teaching. The first resource that I utilize to start educating myself on the topic of developing inclusive practices was to review the "STEM Teaching Handbook" shared through STEM4Equity. This gave me a starting point to review several resources, documents, and reports resulting in my selection of two most useful resources that I utilized in my activity to critically review my syllabus and practices in the class. The first was the "Syllabus Review Guide" developed by the Center for Urban Education, Rossier School of Education and the second was the "Survey your Syllabus" developed by the Center for Teaching and Learning at Amherst College.
2. Based on the above-mentioned two resources, I analyzed my current syllabus and critically reviewed each and every line and sentence to see how I could revise the syllabus. In the end, significant changes were made to the syllabus in almost all sections with not only revisions to the language but also to certain practices within the class as described in the syllabus. For example, my original syllabus simply stated in one line that late work would not be accepted, even though I would provide accommodations to the students for extenuating circumstances, something I never clarified in the syllabus. The new syllabus now includes a more inclusive language describing the importance of submitting work on time yet flexibility in case students are facing extenuating circumstances. It achieves the same goal as in the original syllabus but with a more inclusive tone. Another example is the assessments in the class, which include writing and professional practice related assignments. I revised the assignment language to provide more context and inclusive language to help students better understand why they need to complete these assignments and what benefits they can get from them in the context of learning about the civil engineering profession.

In order to assess the changes in the revised syllabus, I developed a 9 question survey to measure how students perceived the revised syllabus in specific metrics such as promoting a more inclusive and welcoming environment while providing clarify and flexibility in being successful in the class. The syllabi were shared with the students in class and students were allowed time to review and respond to the survey questions after reviewing both the original and revised syllabi. The survey questions and responses are presented in the linked document below.

CE1 - Inclusive Syllabus Survey Responses

Based on the student responses to the survey questions and my experience of speaking with students in the class, it was clear that the students responded positively to the changes in the syllabus, the use of inclusive language which created a welcoming environment and set a positive tone in the class. Furthermore, the additional detail and context provided for assessment in the course were beneficial to the students in developing an understanding as to why these activities were important and relevant to their introduction to civil engineering and I hope would result in better engagement in the class and welcome students from all backgrounds.

The student responses to the survey are document in a word document, which I cannot include here but I hope to present in detail in the future as part of the final report and poster. Overall, the responses to most of the questions in the survey are positive towards the revised syllabus.

**Evidence of Instructional Change**
Revised CE 1 Syllabus	Sample Survey Response
Sample page from CE 1 course revised syllabus with more inclusive language on attendance policy and grade	Student response to comparison between original and revised syllabus in CE course

Changes in Course Syllabus and Schedules:

Pre Minigrant - Syllabus and Schedule

Post Minigrant - Syllabus and Schedule

Minigrant Impact Data:

Pre Minigrant - DFW rate, Equity gap data

Post Minigrant - DFW rate, Equity gap data (*To be completed for FINAL report)

**Faculty Bio**
Faculty Picture
	Ghazan Khan is an expert in the field of Transportation Safety and has over 20 years of research, academic, and practical experience working in the broader field of Transportation Engineering. He is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Civil Engineering at California State University Sacramento. His teaching and research activities encompass a multitude of areas related to Traffic Operations and Safety, Transportation Database and Asset Management, and applications of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Statistics in Transportation Engineering. Dr. Khan joined the Department of Civil Engineering at Sacramento State in 2013.

STEM4Equity: US Dept. of Education STEMHSI P031C210012
*Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Sacramento State.