Month: July 2020

Posted on

Discussion Post Week of Week of 6/29

  1. As Wong enters the conversation around diversity and inclusion she adds a few unique points. One specific point she includes is the difference between equity and equality. You can see her discussing equity vs equality in many sections throughout the text, it is most prevalent in the section titled Equity vs. Equality. The discussion of diversity and inclusion often mentions equality and why we need it but Wong’s addition of Equity helps point in the direction of how we do it. A significant part of that section explains what equity is “Recognizing that certain groups of people have experienced (and continue to experience) disproportionate hardship, harm and disadvantage highlights”. This is significant because it shows that to achieve equality we must recognize the differences and not assume that everyone has the same experience. Later on in the text in the Supporting Others to Make Change, equity and equality are mentioned again when mentioning key points that to improve we must “focus on equity rather than equality; acknowledge and affirm differences rather than ignore and deny them; and pay attention to how exclusionary practices show up at interpersonal and structural levels”. That key point contributes to strategies of how to move forward in including and maintaining diverse environments by opening our minds, asking the right questions. seeing differences, and thinking more inclusively.

2.  The way that Wong structures her writing, including headers with clear titles, help the reader map out what the overall message is. This keeps the text clear and concise rarely leaving the reader to wonder what does one statement has to do with the other. Another way Wong keeps everything related is through using certain connective sentence patterns, her transitions are seamlessly connecting her last sentence and her next sentence. For example, when starting a new paragraph Wong uses elaborative terms such as “in contrast” and “Rather than” to introduce a new point in reference to her last.

Posted on

Discussion – Week of 6/29

Wong’s article is in a professional journal for those in the safety industry. Therefore, I thought the focus on the need for a review of safety protocols which include consideration of gender diversity was particularly powerful. She does a lot of work providing context, going into a lot of discussion about diversity in the workplace and what that’s meant in the past. She effectively acknowledges that many of her readers will likely be familiar with past diversity efforts, but won’t have really considered how they apply to their industry. Many of the uniforms, equipment, and fitness for duty tests were designed for men because the work was predominately being done by men. Wong stresses that as the gender diversity of the workforce increases, those uniforms, equipment and fitness for duty tests will need to change to meet that new reality. What might be safe for a man of average build may not be safe for a woman or person identifying as femme.

Throughout this first paragraph, Wong reuses the word “messages” to drive home her point. Some might have reached for their thesaurus, but in this case, the choice is quite deliberate. Wong is attempting to raise awareness of how not taking steps to address practices that may be considered exclusionary, that it’s sending a signal to those who feel excluded, and that signal is a reminder of their exclusion.

“On interpersonal and structural levels, such conditions communicate messages that people do not belong, that their needs are not recognized or deemed important enough to address, and that there is little interest in making things easier or more accessible for them to be successful. Such messages are at the core of most exclusionary practices. Continuously receiving these messages and having to navigate various obstacles can drain energy and take a significant toll on a person’s psychological, emotional and physical well-being, thereby reproducing yet another form of inequity with respect to how different workers are able to experience the workplace itself.

 In the second paragraph, Wong provides a solution to the problem raised in the prior paragraph. She effectively summarizes the prior paragraph with two key words: “tension” and “burdens”.

Part of creating more inclusive workplaces involves addressing this tension. It is important to raise awareness among those with the privilege of not having to think twice about how they function so they can be more responsive to others’ needs and simultaneously alleviate burdens for those who must be extra conscious and aware to simply get by.”

 

Posted on

Discussion Prompts Week of 6/29

  1. Throughout this class, we have talked and read about numerous topics regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion. Wong adds to this ongoing conversation in this article she wrote about organizational culture. The section I would like to focus on is the paragraphs under the subheading titled Privilege, Marginalization and Differences in Experiences on page 28 and 29. this section caught my eye and I think it is critical to this conversation of diversity. Wong states how in order to create an inclusive culture for a diverse workplace, one must become aware of social identities and how they are perceived in places such as a place of work. People have been going into this conversation with the mentality that people are all the same or should be the same. However it is important to see the differences in identities and experiences and not just go off of what has been the norm. In the next paragraph, Wong uses an example of gender to further convey her message. She states that “once one begins to critically reflect on how gender shapes peoples’ everyday experiences in profoundly different ways, the influence of gendered norms and gender bias can be found in nearly all corners of an organization’s culture.” It’s important to first identify and become aware of the surroundings to then make it easier to learn and address.
  2. Wong does a really good job at “connecting the parts” throughout her entire article. The way the article flows from one section to another with the use of the subheadings makes it much easier to read and locate main ideas. In addition to the subheadings, she uses manifold transition words to also help connect her ideas and make it flow. The words “in contrast” were used on page 29 in which Wong identifies the difference in ideas and as a result, sets the reader up in a way that they can follow more easily.
Posted on

Week of 6/29 – Discussion

  1. For me one of the most significant pieces Wong adds is found under the ‘Starting with Better Question’ section.  By prompting the audience to reflect and ask more targeted, meaningful questions, she’s teaching others how to welcome more people to be apart of the conversation. In doing so it creates a more hospitable discussion and overall enables one to reach larger audiences. One of the biggest difficulties for entering any controversial issue is learning where to start. From personal experience I found this become true whenever I tried to enter political discussions. Given the vast amount of media coverage, events, and body of literature, I felt overwhelmed never knowing how to approach an issue. Because of that, I found myself often shy away from discussing these topics, unsure of how my perspective could ever add to what other enlightened perspectives already knew. Wong acknowledges how overwhelming this can become whilst pointing where to begin. She not only addresses the incomplete and thoughtful questions one could ask but adds how it can begin to shift our thinking on the issue. Instead of having a corporate company ask ‘who else can we bring on board,’ for example, she proposes a deeper alternative that looks at ‘who is not being represented at the table and in what ways how have we kept out?’ As Wong puts it, “these questions invite examination of potentially exclusionary aspects” targeting the deeper source of the issue, rather than merely scratching over the surface. It places responsibility on the organization which in turn is more likely to move an organization to be more inclusive. Emphasis is added to what questions we should ask versus what we might (negatively) assume.

2. Immediately following that last paragraph, Wong makes a compelling argument on the distinction between equality vs equity. Smoothly transitioning from counters to claims, she first does so by recognizing the issues specific groups of people then and even now have had (identifying ‘it’ is a recurring argument in her article). The extra note saying people “continue to experience” disproportionate harm, hardships, and disadvantages adds a dimension of time and scale signaling that this issue is problematically static.

She later explains how assumptions, such as believing that equality associates sameness for everyone, can become the root of these issues. While the idea that we’re “treated the same and get the same things” may entertain groups of people, Wong discredits it immediately in the following sentence by saying “however,  treating everyone the same is a surefire way to exacerbate and reproduce inequalities.” Not only will it continue reproducing inequalities, but she adds it will more negatively aggregate the issue.

Wong goes further in explaining where this logic may come from which is powerful because it helps the reader or the naysayer identify an incomplete evaluation or assumption they might have made. As she puts it, while it “may seem counterintuitive, there are many examples that demonstrate how treating everyone the same is often more unfair…” Here she is backing up her claim by providing concrete examples on how all parties of the discussion can reevaluate themselves and instead, “actually have more equal opportunities to succeed.”

 

Posted on

prompts Benjamin Fisch

1.) Wong makes many points that add to this larger conversation about diversity and inclusion. One of the points that really stood out to me, is somewhat counterintuitive when thinking about it. The following quote sums up what is trying to be said. “Notions of equality are gen-erally associated with assumptions of sameness; when everyone is treated the same and gets the same things, this is assumed to ensure that everyone is treated fairly. However, treating everyone the same is a surefire way to exacerbate and reproduce inequal-ities, precisely because it actively obscures and denies relevant differences, including how different groups have historically been treated, which must be acknowledged to be fairly addressed at present.” The point of all of this is treating everyone the same in the workplace or in society actually would not work. It actually would back fire and lead to even more inequality.

Posted on

Prompts week of 6/29

  1. One particular contribution that I see to Wong adding to the larger conversation are her words under the “Privilege, Marginalization & Differences in Experience subtitle. This can be found on page 28. She writes, “It is important to raise awareness among those with the privilege of not having to think twice about how they function so they can be more responsive to others’ needs and simultaneously alleviate burdens for those who must be extra conscious and aware to simply get by.” I think this quote is significant because it is important to be an ally and a voice for those who struggle with carrying a burden that their skin color places on them. Inclusion is necessary in the workplace, and supporting your co-workers only happens when respect is present.
  2. Wong really connects her ideas through subheadings because I found this article way easier to read. Under “Starting With Better Questions,” Wong immediately uses the transition word “Approaching.” This sets up the reader in a way where they can clearly follow and ease into the section. Wong’s point in her sentence here that diversity and inclusion efforts can shift the understandings of specific issues leads into the rest of the paragraph smoothly.
Posted on

Week of 6/29 Discussion

  1. In  Wong’s article, the section “Starting from the Margins” brings a really good point to the discussion. She writes ” Again, different forms of support are not to be confused with special or unfair treatment simply because they are not intended for or used by everyone.” (Wong, pg. 3)

This is important because it deals with differences in peoples needs to get the equity they deserve. I’ve often heard the argument before that it’s not fair for people to get “special treatment” and Wong in a very matter of factly way shoots this argument down by simply pointing out that because not everybody is the same, people need different things in order to be on the same level playing field as others. This is a point that I think a lot of people forget and would be well suited to remember and acknowledge.

2. The last paragraph in the section ” Equity vs. Equality” has many examples of using language to connect the text. She starts out by using the pointing word “This” to go back to the metaphor she wrote about in the previous paragraph with the foot size and running shoes. Her use of “not only” to connect avoiding acknowledging our identities to unhealthy behaviors that make it out to our identity characteristics being undesirable was very powerful as well, I thought. These examples are on page 3 also.

Posted on

Discussion Week 6/29

1. I think one of the most significant contributions Wong made to our ongoing conversation of diversity is found in her section about “Equity vs Equality” (page 27 to 28). The paragraph was very eyeopening for myself when considering the conversation currently focusing on inclusion. A key point Wong made, that I never really considered, is that treating everyone the same would result in more inequality as everyone has different needs. It is to recognize those different needs employees have to ensure everyone is supported, helping to increase feelings of inclusivity because no everyone is the same. Her metaphor of running shoes and runners in a race was a great way to represent visually what she is saying: not everyone is the same shoe size, but all the runners should have a tailored shoe to help them run the best. This can be used when treating employees too, as every employee would have different needs butt if they are all met with the same urgency and respect then all the employees would be able to perform their best. I think highlighting this need for different levels of treatment is crucial, because no one is a carbon copy of the other. Some employees may need more support than others, but making that need for support a priority is what will change the work environment, providing more resources and care. Connecting this further with our ongoing conversation of inclusion while also promoting diversity, this comes to show that giving those what they specifically need will only improve a company. 
2. Wong utilizes the use of “connecting the parts” throughout the entire article, as she seamlessly flows from one topic of conversation to another through her subtitles and subheadings. One instance of this is is her transition into the subheading of “Starting with Better Questions” as Wong  transitions from providing the context of the situation, this being shifting the workplace environment, to starting the conversation about how to challenge the initiative to shift the workplace. Using the word “approaching” to begin the paragraph is a transition word as she elaborates more on how to shift these misunderstood issues with inclusion. Following in her next sentence, Wong uses the pointer word “it” claiming that understanding the backdrop of these inequities in the workplace can shift the questions used to “guide and inform” those who have trouble understanding means of inclusion. Repeated use of the word inequities highlights that it is the main issue at hand, that there are discrepancies when it comes to how different demographics of employees are treated. She continues to use the idea of repeating the phrase yourself but with a difference, as she further contends to changing the wording and meaning behind questions that challenge the issues of inequity in the workplace.

 

Posted on

Week of 6/29 Discussion Post

 

  1. In the beginning of her article, Wong says that in order to create a diverse workplace, we must start with inclusion. This is important because it is true for both the workplace, and many other areas. I could certainly relate this to education because inclusive schooling is such a hot topic right now. In order to create a diverse classroom, students from all backgrounds and abilities should be in one class together. Adopting a more inclusive ideology will allow for a more diverse environment. Wong believes that it is also important to acknowledge the fact that there are some groups of people who have experienced hardship because of their race, gender, ability, etc. Even though it seems like everyone receiving the same treatment means that everyone is treated fairly, this is not always true. For example, someone who has a disability may need accommodations in order to be successful whereas someone who does not have a disability does not need this. Overall, Wong’s article does a great job of showing the reader that in order to create inclusive environments, we must keep an open mind, and understand that we may be wrong about some things. 
  2. In my opinion, Wong does a great job of connecting her ideas and sentences using transitions throughout the entire article. One section in particular where she does this is the passage labeled “Supporting Others to Make Change”. In the first paragraph of this section, Wong says that it may seem difficult to help create more inclusive spaces. In the last sentence of this paragraph, Wong says, “Additional steps can be taken regarding who is asked to be involved in decision-making and which efforts are pursued in the name of culture change” (p. 30).  In the second paragraph, she goes back to talking about the fact that people who are different often experience hardships. However, this ends up connecting to how people can help create inclusive environments because she says that the people who are experiencing hardships are the best people to ask about how you should change. So, she is using this area to connect to the first paragraph of this section by talking about who should be involved in the decision making process.