Search

Courses: This class activity is suited for the basic course on public speaking (to discuss issues related to identity, privilege, and audience analysis), interpersonal communication, intercultural communication, and communication pedagogy. Objectives: By completing this 30- to 45-minute activity, students should be able to: (1) define privilege; (2) explain how privilege operates through an intersectional lens; (3) discuss how they experience privilege as college students; and (4) identify strategies that university administrators, faculty, staff, and student peers can use to support the educational success of students with different levels of privilege.

Despite its pervasiveness, many students do not realize how online communication can impact their careers and relationships. Cyber-vetting occurs when people use online search engines, social networking sites, and other Internet tools to uncover information about others. Because cyber-vetting is a relatively new concept, most communication textbooks have yet to include information about it, and many instructors do not know how to teach their students systematically about the fundamentals of cyber-vetting. This activity aims to address these issues by providing the steps to teach students about the fundamentals of cyber-vetting. By completing this activity, students should be able to: (a) explain the importance and pervasiveness of cyber-vetting; (b) investigate how their identities are portrayed online; and (c) implement strategies to make their online personas more professional. This activity is suited for a variety of communication courses, including those that focus on business communication, social media, interviewing, interpersonal and organizational communication, communication ethics, and new media.

As individuals who use their privilege to reduce prejudice, educate others about social justice, and actively stop discrimination, faculty allies can play a vital role in transforming universities to be more equitable, diverse, and inclusive. However, discrepancies persist in how faculty define privilege and communicate allyship. Drawing from standpoint theory, we examined discursive divergences in how 105 full-time faculty defined and experienced privilege and how they enacted allyship in the workplace. Participants tended to conceptualize privilege as a set of advantages and lack of structural barriers for people based on their group membership(s). Discursive differences emerged regarding the degree to which faculty participants perceived privilege to be un/earned and rooted in structural power, and some participants took ownership of their social privilege while others discursively elided it. When asked to identify specific ally actions, participants often described broad behaviors that aimed to help individuals in interpersonal contexts but did not address actions aimed at dismantling inequitable power structures, revising biased policies, and transforming toxic organizational cultures. Our findings highlight the need for trainings that clarify conceptualizations of privilege and help faculty translate their understanding of allyship into communicative actions that stop discrimination at interpersonal and institutional levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]