Embedding Anti-Racism in the Community Development and Youth Work Programme (CDYW) 2020/2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall aim of the Le Chéile journey of the Community Development and Youth Work programme team was to embed anti-racism in the teaching, learning and assessment of the programme. Changes were introduced to modules in terms of new content, students were exposed to different perspectives and voices, and new workshops were designed for placement preparation around identifying and responding to racism. With regard to assessment, case studies were used to develop responses to the lived experiences of racism in community development, youth work and higher education settings. Lecturing staff increased their racial literacy through participation in anti-racism training and attending webinars. They developed their reflective practice with regard to anti-racism during a staff workshop and through the changes subsequently introduced in various modules. Students were supported to identify and respond to racism through the space created for discussion around race, racism, racial inequalities and responses with lectures in their modules, through engaging in anti-racism training and attending and participating in events such as the Le Chéile project anti-racism seminar. Lecturers and students co-created the knowledge and outputs - workshops, events, government submissions, and an anti-racism charter are some of the numerous examples of proactive anti-racism emanating from this project.\nThe project was informed by a piece of research which identified that CDYW students encountered racism on placement and felt ill-equipped to deal with it. In keeping with the programme values, a partnership approach was adopted for the Le Chéile project, with lecturers and students co-creating the knowledge and outputs. Staff and students learnt from each other during these webinars. At the Afri Hedge School Human Rights conference organised by Year 3 students they informed us about Direct Provision, the Black Lives Matter Movement and racism. Students and lecturers co-created an anti-racism charter and as part of the Le Chéile anti-racism webinar, year 4 students took Year 1 and 2 students and staff on a guided journey of their learning on racism and racial inequalities. During the COIL-VE exchange with Canada, lecturers and students had an opportunity to develop their intercultural competency through exchange with the Canadian counterparts and debate local topics from different perspectives. The impact of this project was not just restricted to the programme itself. The CDYW programme team partnered with the EDI Directorate on the project and staff and students critiqued and gave feedback regarding the TU Dublin Draft Action Plan for an Intercultural University with an initial focus on Race Equity. Outcomes have informed specific actions in the Strategy and Action Plan. An iterative process was used throughout with students’ lived experiences informing the scenarios that were used for lecturing staff and student workshops. Students gave feedback on and evaluated the actions of the programme and this work is ongoing.There is an overt and visible message in the programme, throughout the four years that we (the CDYW programme team and students) are actively and vocally anti-racist. This is reflected in modules, new workshops designed around pre-placement to identify and respond to racism and an anti-racism Charter co-created by lecturing staff and students. Space has been created though a programme anti-racism webinar and through changes at individual module level to discuss and respond to issues around race and racism where staff and students can learn from each other. Minority voices have been heard in the webinars, workshops and through texts and videos used in modules. Through the various actions on the project, including the two consultations, lecturing staff and students have proactively engaged in anti-racism at the programme level, in TU Dublin with our placement partners and beyond.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".