The inaugural “University Worth Fighting For” event of our Tenth Year Celebration

Despite a dark gloomy sky looking down on us from the Skylight room, the room shined bright and shimmered with the excitement and energy that would come to punctuate the event. Even before we formally began, the speakers and presenters were excitedly co-mingling with the audience, welcoming in old mentors and potential future CUNY Peer leaders alike. 

The event kicked off with Enrique Rodriguez Brito, an undergraduate at Queens College, who got a joyous cheer and applause for his double major in History and Philosophy, as he introduced the always impeccably dressed FI Faculty Co-Chair, Shelly Eversley. Dr. Eversley began with a touching speech about how the Futures Initiative has grown from its origins a decade ago. When Cathy Davidson founded FI, it was with a dream of connecting student-leaders with bold independent methods to become creators and changemakers in the world of education. 

Tonight’s event was a showcase of that hard work, as Shelly highlighted how the event today was pedagogically oriented first – signaling how the tools we learned today could be brought forward into tomorrow. Students in her Climate Justice class at Baruch were asked to work in self-selected groups and produce mini-documentaries, which debuted on CUNYTV’s “Sustainability Matters,” and were screened as part of the programming today. These students did the work of three classes – they developed a literacy for climate justice, created scripts, integrated data about the climate emergency, conducted interviews with scholars in the field, and edited everything together into a clean, comprehensible documentary feature. The students in the class were able to lead their path — they picked their teams, integrated their own knowledge, and really took the lead with their projects and goals to make the climate crisis personal to their own lives.

Dr. Eversley and her students had some amazing external mentors as well. First was Harriet, who is a lead camera operator and editor at CUNYTv, and helped the students through the technical side of making a documentary featurette. Another was Dr. Colby Coleman, the NYC Climate Justice Hub curriculum leader, whose whole job is to connect classes like Climate Justice at Baruch with the communities that are affected and working to combat these issues. Colby brought up the truism, “think globally, act locally” which he then proceeded to explain. The ecological crisis is enormous and global, so it’s often really important to get people invested in  ways to act locally, so they can connect the crisis with things that are going on in our neighborhoods, and ultimately become personally invested. For this class, Dr. Coleman connected our future directors with a community organization in the Lower East Side, GOLES.

The conversation then shifted from the experts to the students, as we had three speakers from Dr. Eversley’s class ready to introduce us to their outstanding work. Zachary Quintero (Class of 2025, Black and Latino Studies and Political Science double major) and Shania Adama (Class of 2025 Psychology major) were our first student voices. Shania started by highlighting how she applied all her prior experiments using Adobe and FinalCut in the course, and enjoyed the process of learning the different vocabulary and getting to connect with classmates. When it came time to choose a topic, Zach and Shania, along with X,  realized that they all have asthma, and decided to focus on how their neighborhoods had really high rates of asthma – a direct connection to the nearby industrial, highly polluted zones. Throughout you could tell just how much Shania had taken from the course – and how deeply it affected her. Zach was similarly impassioned, and discussed how they all connected through their own scary stories of asthma attacks, and realized that where you live played a big role in how they found their topic for the course. Zach also noted that he was inspired by our community seeing this documentary that they’d create and understanding how much it affected the students.

The first documentary, Asthma Valley, was sharply edited – with personal narration by Shania. Zachary spun around, showing the projects where his titi’s lived, the park he played in, the nearby school, and a massive, smoking powerplant in the foreground. The documentary was deeply moving, telling personal stories and powerful messages – the line, “clean Air is not a privilege,  it is a human right” really hit home, as the camera focused in on the smog pouring out in their neighborhoods. 

We also had another representative from a different group, Luke Rodriguez (Class of 2026, Economics Major) who talked about being intimidated by the choice of a topic, as in the context of the climate emergency, there are just so many possible problems to focus on. Nevertheless, Luke and his group had a lot of support from the faculty mentors and their fellow classmates, and through extensive research observed that flooding, extreme heat and poor air quality were what was most pressing for New Yorkers. 

The second documentary by Luke’s group, Roots and Resilience, focused on creating a brighter future by working with nature, not against it. The documentary began with many beautiful shots of the various greenery in NYC, as the voiceover reminded us how essential trees and green spaces are to making the city liveable. However, Not everyone in NYC has equal access to parks and natural spaces, as lower income areas have over 50% less tree cover. The visuals shifted to long shots of the urban sprawl as the voiceover expert explained the effects of redlining stood in strong contrast to the beauty only blocks away from where one of the documentarians grew up. The shift then to the visuals of climate activists and the work done to make urban environments were deeply moving, reminding us how important it is to make sure the splendor of nature is accessible to all New Yorkers, no matter where they live. 

  After the screening, Dr. Shelly Eversley and the student panelists highlighted the various course outcomes – They talked about how they were reading theory and history, literature and poetry, all in an attempt to make the climate crisis seem real. This Baruch course also marked another CUNY milestone, as the first time ever CUNYTv has worked directly with undergraduates in the classroom. One of the most startling facts was that in a class of 22, 16 students found internships in Climate Justice organizations immediately afterwards. In addition, Shelly found external funding through Wendy Haeman, which provided stipends for those who wanted to intern with organizations that didn’t have the resources to support a fellow. For Dr. Eversely, the greatest lesson was about trust: trust your students, and let them lead their voices, and trust in one another to get them across the line. 

Each of the students also highlighted how they had grown since the course’s conclusion. Zach got to speak with community members and make the work personal, as he was offered an internship at GOLES, and was able to focus on improving air quality for the LaGuardia projects & Bronx projects – the very place he’d filmed in the documentary. Luke highlighted how this course was his introduction to Climate Justice, and allowed him to connect and grow many of his skills in data research, community outreach and audio engineering. The experience has really stuck with him and given him a sense of a potential future career, as he’s now one of the first NYC Climate Justice Hub fellows, working alongside Dr. Colby Coleman. And for Shania, she learned that she had to let go of her expectations, and be open to collaborate and integrate the story and impact of the data they’d collected. Post class, Shania worked with a non-profit organization as a summer internship, learning the importance of being on the ground and directly engaging with the community around her. 

From climate justice to social justice, our event then pivoted into its second focus, on the CUNY Peer Leaders (CPL), one of the most lauded and successful programs to originate from the Futures Initiative. Our introduction came from Ingrid Barbosa, a business administration major at the Borough of Manhattan Community College and member of the newest cohort of CPLs. She highlighted a bit of the background of the CPL program, and highlighted how it focuses on equity, innovation, and higher education. For Ingrid, being part of CPL is already a very grounding, welcoming experience, as the program is suffused with a culture of care and justice.

Ingrid then introduced fellow CUNY Peer Leader, Sumruthi ‘Simmy’ Sharma, A Queensboro Community College student majoring in internet and information technology, who outlined how the CPL Program works. Each year, our faculty and staff at FI chose 30 – 40 students to join the program, where the “CPLs” will take part in biweekly meetings, either at the GC or online, engage in professional development, discuss the benefits and costs of graduate school. Each meeting, CPLs are encouraged to present and talk about anything and everything – from social justice topics, wellness, or  education. The students regularly present on their interested topics and create projects that they’re passionate about, attend enrichment activities. Being part of CPL also lightens the financial burdens on the students, as participation comes with a stipend, metrocard and often food. These enrichment activities such at attending a Broadway show are often new experiences to the CPLs, despite many students having lived their whole lives in New York. In the following Q&A, Ingrid, Simmy, and Enrique (our first presenter and event MC) all answered questions about how impactful being a CPL has been to them. Perhaps nothing got more cheers and laughs through the whole evening than Enrique proudly declaring that although he’d been part of the CUNY Peer Leaders for two years, we had, “Best believe I’m going to apply for that third year!”

The students then excitedly introduced our new CPL Facilitator, Sunisa Nuonsy. Prior to joining FI, Sunisa had taught high school for years, and saw her role in CUNY Peer Leaders  as a natural extension of her work with k-12 students. In both cases, Student centered, active learning was at the forefront of Sunisa’s work, as she mentioned how each CPL meeting opened the space with time to breathe deep, reflect, and energize before diving into the work. “We do this,” Sunisa noted, “because we want students to know we care for them as people – not a body, or a number, but as a person.”

To demonstrate how effective active learning and open discussion could be, Sunisa had us do a little check-in activity ourselves. Our prompt was, “What is a concern that you have when it comes to active learning or co-creating with your students (or with your teacher, if you’re a student)?” Each table had been given a few index cards and a variety of pens and different writing utensils. Sunisa gave people the freedom to respond in many ways – some wrote, others doodled. We were even allowed to write  in any language we’d like. As we began to scribble notes, Sunisa interjected to make us aware of the sound of active learning – tables were beginning to chatter and swap ideas and resources, with laughs and eureka moments sparking across the Skylight room, pops of joy and excitement despite it approaching 9 pm.

We then gathered back as a community and began to share our thoughts and conversations. One group talked about balance – how to be vulnerable with students but also still respectful of the power dynamics. There were questions about exploring the space, and how to bring students into the fold. Another dealt with burnout, and how active learning and co-creating could help stave that feeling off. my group expressed concern about how much we could do active learning – how could we work these mechanics into our already busy class schedules. In response, as we were shifting to our final presentation for the evening, Sunisa gave us an answer, explaining how these activities are a good way of leading into discussion. Activities like the Think/pair/share we just completed can be a crucial scaffolding and structure to take the risk to learn actively. The small group or table discussions are a low stakes way to share intimately before sharing more broadly. 

From this active place, we moved into our final presentation of the evening, as Enrique next introduced Dr. Christina Katopodis, who co-authored with Cathy N. Davidson The New College Classroom, winner of the Frederick W. Ness Book Award from the American Association of Colleges and Universities. Dr. Katopodis’s talk was about pedagogy, and worked well to bring together the various activities, celebrations, and work of the evening. Christina started with a request to the audience: take a moment to write down, “what makes you feel like you belong.” As we moved seamlessly into our second Think-Pair-Share, Dr. Katopodis -perhaps sensing a bit of weariness in the audience – wryly remarked, “Don’t overthink – we’re academics, we’re always overthinking it.” The answers were varied – “seeing others like you,” feeling a connection, being part of a community, similar or shared struggles. Others highlighted Humor, jokes, and joy as important to belonging. One group noted the importance of agency, having a job or a role to play – having something “to do.” One small point Christina noted herself was the hallway hellos – being welcomed in and greeted as you go about your day, something she (and I think many of us) really missed during the pandemic. 

Dr. Katopodis highlighted how active learning and engagement did not have to be a major production or require a full pedagogical overhaul, but could be small incremental changes. One idea she mentioned was doing a think/pair/share that asks “What concern do you have about ____?” Dr. Katopodis noted how this prompt makes students feel like you’re in a struggle together, and allows them to share strategies for encountering that struggle. Then, once the group has built some comradery, the next step can be sharing advice with one another. Most critically, it’s a way to build trust – one of the most important elements to have in the classroom, as Dr. Eversley opening remarks highlighted. 

Similar, additional advice was to share your struggles – how you struggle with writing, and how you build trust with the classroom. Christina noted how, perhaps unexpectedly, the answers given by the students often had very little repetitions – which our own work today testified to. There were similarities, resonances, but we still had a wealth of varied responses. Dr. Katopodis noted how think-pair-shares like this are also a way to 100% participation – simply by collecting these index cards at the end of the day, and sometimes writing back. Dr. Katopodis highlighted how it doesn’t need to be verbal engagement, but can be written. What’s important is that students believe they have something to contribute and something that matters.

Another key point of Dr. Katopodis’s presentation was being invited towards being seen. By this, Christina meant that we as educators should incorporate student input into future meetings, and as a way to signal attendance. We can incorporate the suggestions and ideas into what we do – and in doing so, we’re engaging in a model of peer-to-peer learning, which is where students learn better by working together. Student engagement correlates with student success, and one important metric is maximizing student speaking time. Most college students graduate with only speaking when forced to, and 89% of the time is filled with the professor speaking (on average). When we only answer questions from the ones who raise their hands, we teach the other students that their opinions don’t matter, even if we don’t intend to do so. Talk time is directly correlated with student success, and humans are naturally inquisitive, as Dr. Katopodis’s own sons demonstrated to her, through their “why?” phases. And yet, she could already see the inquisitiveness phasing out of her eldest son Liam, 4, as he begins to attend preschool and kindergarten. 

Dr. Katopodis noted that this loss of creativity and questioning is by design. industrialized education from the 1870s stamped out the joy and replaced it with this rigor that keeps us from the material that sustains us. And this is not just a k-12 problem. In the nineteenth century, Harvard decided professors didn’t need teacher training, because you’re an expert in your field. The effect has been to stamp out curiosity and joy in the world. Dr. Katopodis powerfully noted how backwards that logic truly is, questioning, “Without questions, how would we evolve and change? How would we fit into this changing world?” 

One way Christina highlighted how to evolve as educators was through Co-creation steps. Ask the students to write down all the ways they can think of learning in 90 seconds, then practice listening by not verbally interrupting their partner as each shares their thoughts. From there, have the groups build up to  4-5, and collaborate on a course expectation or policy for participation. Then, you can have the small groups combine, and work to fuse and synthesize assessments that they will need to submit. In total, this will give you more diverse ways to engage, than if you just went with the traditional “raised hand” approach. Critically, this whole process is about engaging students in a two-way dialogue so that they can have the space and opportunity to contribute, have the freedom to be able to create trust between themselves and their classmates, as well as with you as the educator.

Of course, these practices don’t always work – as Dr. Katopodis noted. We all mess up, and sometimes students might be unprepared or lower energy for some reason. The question then becomes: how do you recover? Christina suggested that good recovery strategy can be exit tickets: you can write it on a physical note card “What burning question do you still have?” “what did you learn today that will keep you up at night?” “If you can’t think of anything, then what haven’t we been talking about that we should be talking about?” Similarly, If you have a multiple choice exam, and are not happy with the results, simply have them all take it again a week after but have them take it with a partner- this works to improve recall and collaboration.

Another idea that came up in the Q&A, was the idea of a fishbowl discussion. This is a way to facilitate difficult conversations. People having a dialogue in the “inner circle”, they’re talking, and then others on the outside are listening and observing. The people on the outside, get to do a shoulder tap when they have something to say/contribute. Everyone gets the opportunity to be inside the fishbowl. It’s about getting a chance to focus on listening and focusing on the conversation, noticing how you behave and feel in conversations, as well as noticing how you feel when you’re on the inside the fishbowl vs on the outside.

Another questioner wanted to know about how to make the material “relevant” or “exciting” for the students. Dr. Katopodis’s answer was a little surprising – it is not your job to make it relevant, that is the student’s, as they’re always changing and have new growth needs. Ultimately, content knowledge fades over time – it is not anyone’s fault, it just happens with our brains. Instead, Dr. Katopodis noted that what they’ll remember is a personal or emotional connection to the materia. People remember emotional narratives, and self directed expectations for much longer than content. So our job as educators is to get the students to tell their own stories, and produce something that is real and tangible. This could be an oral presentation, tutoring each other, forming peer-to-peer connections, or just writing something down. To get ideas to stick in their heads, Dr. Katopodis stressed the importance of repeated exposure, as well as getting students to think about the use and application of the material.

Questions then opened up to the whole group of presenters for the evening bringing Dr. Eversley and her junior documentarians, as well as Sunisa and the CUNY Peer Leaders, into communion with Dr. Katopodis. An early question originated from the panelists themselves, as Christina asked Shelly and her students when did they get invested in their Climate Justice class, and where did grading “fall away?” For the students, there was a definite switch when the material moved from a global setting to something personal and connected to their own lives. This marked the shift from passive learning to a connected, emerging experience (such as documentary filmmaking in this case), which all the professors agreed was the ultimate, ideal goal for any classroom setting.

And as for the moment where grading fell away – it actually ended never falling per se, because grades were never really the focus to begin with. Luke Rodriguez noted that Dr. Eversley never mentioned grades the whole semester, and just asked them individually, “What grade do you think you deserve?” which was eye-opening for many of the students. For Shania Adama, this was a pretty existential question – as it forced her to really sit with what each piece of work was worth, allowing her to reconsider what actually mattered in the classroom. Zach Quintero added that the class did not grade on perfection, but instead on each of them doing their part. Dr. Eversley concluded by highlighting how important it was to be understanding of a student’s complex lives. As such she is very flexibility with due dates, and only asks the students to turn the work in when it’s done. Shelly ended her comment on an excellent motto for education: “Write what you can, learn what you can, and that’s it” 

The next question was to Sunisa’s group, as an audience member asked an excellent hypothetical: Imagine the audience are all juniors at CUNY, what would you say to us to get us to take that class or be in that program? What advice would you give? What is it and why should we join? Our MC Enrique answered first, noting the CUNY Peer Leaders is a place where diverse voices from diverse people are incredibly celebrated and valued. For him, a program like that, in New York City, is critical, as the CPLs learn how to speak on a variety of topics. Enrique also mentioned the stipend, but noted how it was not just money – but instead represented direct aid when the rent or electricity bill comes through. Having a program that’s there that helps personally and financially is a great reason to keep applying and remaining in the program. Powerfully, Enrique concluded, “If it weren’t for the program, I would have stopped at undergrad, and wouldn’t be applying for my Master’s in History. This program makes me want to be better” 

Other students additionally chimed in on why we should want to join the CUNY Peer Leaders. Ingrid highlighted the creative freedom to express your interests on whatever you want. For your work, you can do creative work, or write papers – either way they are learning about leadership and how to support one another. She noted that because of the stipend, it was a lot like joining the workforce and starting your career, getting them to start imagining a life beyond college. Simmy highlighted how the program really lets the students branch out and do new things they’ve never done before – as they all end up connecting their interests beyond their own major, and their own campus, to something that’s bigger than any one person. For her, it was ultimately about making connections, and seeing how that might lead you beyond your expected career, to something you didn’t even know to be excited about!

Dr. Katopodis then zoomed us out to the bigger picture, and talked about how we can make education a more rewarding experience. She describes feeling that there’s a really important transition from all of evaluation being determined externally (which starts so early that you lose sight of your inner light, joy and who you are and what you value and care about most about your own performance). To avoid this feeling of the advice only coming from the professor, Christina asks students to do self evaluation constantly, which starts with a cover letter from the first week where they list 3 goals and then have to detail practical steps to reach their goals. One month later, the self evaluation process starts. Then two months later, you write about how those goals might’ve changed. Then at the end, their evaluation is about how they changed and how they view themselves. There are no surprises about their grades, for the student & for the instructor. It also keeps the instructor in the loop about how the student is doing throughout the semester. Ultimately, for Dr. Katopodis, this is about empowered learning: how do you encourage a person in your class to feel powerful, to feel like they have the tools, to adapt, to manage the challenges that we all face in life constantly.

This led to a really moving and poignant final note about care, and the importance of feeling cared for in education. Dr. Eversley noted that most of us in the audience were instructors, but this event was such a unique experience because we had the undergraduates here to share their knowledge with us, and signals how we all want to highlight their contributions. One way Shelly does this is by beginning the syllabus with a statement of care. The first statement is “I care about you / We (the institution) cares about you” and then stating how. Be it altering them to the food pantry on campus, the writing center, or just listing your student hours, inviting them to come and talk about whatever, stating that you have candy and that you want them to come and be with you during that time.

While this recap might read as a lot of material to cover in about two hours let me assure you: it never felt difficult or boring. Not a single person left early, and the room regularly rocked with laughter and joy as we all celebrated the students and professors leading our discussion about the Future of Education. The time flew by – I was the timekeeper, and even I rapidly lost track of the minutes as we delved into the mechanics and specifics of how to teach for a better future. If you were ever curious on how to have good conversations in the classroom, the lessons shared today are invaluable advice given in an exciting, innovative way. 

We hope you’ll tune back in for our next anniversary event, on November 4th 5pm to 7pm, in the same Skylight Room, focusing on the Future of Research. It’s sure to be another wonderful way to spend an evening learning together.