Skip to main content


Carrie Welsh  00:01

You’re listening to Ethics & Education. I’m Carrie Welsh. This episode is the third part of a series co-produced by Rebecca Taylor and Ashley Floyd Kuntz. Rebecca and Ashley are the editors of a new book called Ethics in Higher Education: Promoting Equity and Inclusion Through Case-Based Inquiry.


Carrie Welsh  00:27

And in this episode,


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  00:30

Yeah, mine is recording, the bars are moving.


Carrie Welsh  00:35

We talk about the ethical dimensions of faculty using social media.


TJ Stewart  00:39

There was a time where you know, there were only printed journals, you had to go to a conference to hear a talk from a professor. Now it’s like, can I draft 280 characters on Twitter a tweet, right. And so I think that that is a really powerful possibility,


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  00:54

when it the the pluses and minuses of social media is that anybody has a microphone. stories get repeated over and over. And I think that that is like very clearly like an ethically fraught territory that you’re getting into.


Carrie Welsh  01:07

Here’s Rebecca Taylor.


Rebecca Taylor  01:10

Social media can get complicated. So in this episode, we wanted to explore what’s ethically valuable and what’s ethically fraught about faculty using social media. How should we be thinking about it? Jacob Fei is the education director at open mind. I met him years ago at philosophy camp and Institute for graduate students and philosophy of education. He thinks a lot about how we engage in civic discourse. We invited him to talk with three professors about using social media. Here’s Jake.


Jacob Fay  01:39

I was really excited to talk to other people about this issue. What’s it like to be public about your research in this way? And what’s the risk? I talked with three people: theoretical physicist, Chanda Prescod-Weinstein,


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  01:56

I am Chanda Prescod-Weinstein. I am an assistant professor of physics and core faculty and Women’s and Gender Studies at the University of New Hampshire and I’m also the author of The disordered Cosmos, a journey into dark matter space, time and dreams deferred.


Jacob Fay  02:09

Chanda also does work in social epistemology, and she has over 95,000 Twitter followers. For Chanda, he power of social media is that it flattens traditional hierarchies. It can be a space for building collective power. I also spoke with TJ Stewart. TJ is a scholar of higher education institutions. He focuses on equity for those at the margins.


TJ Stewart  02:38

Hi, my name is Dr. TJ Stewart. He and him are my pronouns. I’m an assistant professor at Iowa State University in the higher education and student affairs program. I’m very glad to be here.


Jacob Fay  02:52

TJ brings a lens of institutional theory to the discussion. For him, higher ed is a public good. And social media is one way for academic resources to be public. And finally, I spoke with philosopher Harry Brighouse.


Harry Brighouse  03:09

I am Harry Brighouse. I teach philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where I also direct the Center for Ethics and Education.


Jacob Fay  03:18

Harry thinks about social media use through the lens of professional ethics. He thinks that faculty need to develop professional norms around how to use social media. So the first thing I was curious about was what’s ethically valuable about faculty using social media? Here’s TJ Stewart.


TJ Stewart  03:41

I want to start from the premise that I think that academia’s purpose, or higher education’s purpose is to be a public good, right. And I think it’s important because to think through sort of what are the most ethically sort of positive things, you have to think about, well, what is higher education for, what are we supposed to be doing? And I think it’s, you know, to sort of make society better. I think it’s supposed to allow us to solve really complex problems that impact the lives of people, not only in the places where the institutions exist, right, but but globally, I think what it has allowed is an opportunity to sort of remove maybe some barriers and some layers between sort of what the Academy does around teaching, learning, research, and being able to bring some of that to lots of people at once, right. And so there was a time where, you know, there were only printed journals, you had to go to a conference to hear a talk from a professor, it might take many years for the work that the academy was doing to trickle down to the people whose lives it was supposed to impact. Now, it’s like, can I draft 280 characters on Twitter, I hit tweet, right to a link of my findings to a resource, whatever the case may be. And so I think that that is a really powerful possibility. At that we allow people to access aspects of academia in ways that maybe they haven’t before.


Jacob Fay  05:09

Harry Brighouse agrees that sharing knowledge is one of the main values of social media. He says there are three main good things about faculty using social media.


Harry Brighouse  05:22

So I think there are three, I guess there are three main things in normal times. So one is the ability to disseminate just basically the ability to disseminate knowledge beyond the immediate circles that you know. So, you know, you go to conferences, but people who aren’t at conferences, they don’t learn the stuff that’s at the conferences. But if you put it through Twitter, or you put it through a blog, or you put it through even Facebook, some people use Facebook this way. People who want to know things don’t necessarily have to go anywhere to get them. And I’m really, first of all, just talking about other scholars, one’s peers. The second that, the way I’ve used it most, sort of that I found most valuable. And I think this is sort of an ethical thing is to develop your own ideas in a collaborative setting. So you again, you, can you, I suppose you expand the network of people who are helping you think about things and who you are helping think about things. There are definitely people who do that on Twitter, I don’t, and I don’t, I think it takes enormous skill to do that. I’ve seen plenty of people who, who, who do it. But I don’t have that skill. But I have used blogs that way. I contribute to crooked timber, which is, you know, blog is sort of old technology now. But even now, it’s still a fairly small number of people interacting can still be very useful. And then the third thing is just opening up, opening up to anybody who wants to know more about what’s going on, you know, in higher education. So, you know, a 15 year old high school kid can read any blog, can you know, watch what’s going on on Twitter, a retired 80 year old janitor or engineer can do that somebody who works in whatever industry and wants to have sort of abstract academic stimulation, that kind of thing that you get from, from a good college course, can get that through social media. Those are the three main things that I’ve that I’ve identified it as being sort of valuable for and those those seem very much like ethical dimensions,


Jacob Fay  07:54

Chanda Prescod-Weinstein says social media is especially valuable for scholars who have been marginalized in higher ed. For Chanda, using social media is both a way for people to find each other and to challenge unjust structures.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  08:11

Academia is extremely hierarchical. And I think that one of the contributions that social media and other forms of electronic communication makes is that it can flatten that hierarchy a little bit, or at least make it easier for us to maneuver around it, to find allies to find sponsors to find mentors, to find like minded thinkers that we can make connections with, without the barriers that geography cause and the associated like resources of Oh, I couldn’t go to that conference. And so I don’t meet those people. And for me, as a black woman in theoretical physics, as the only black woman in a tenure stream position in my sub discipline in theoretical physics, it’s been particularly important for me to connect with people and other disciplines who are thinking about some of the same questions that I am, but we wouldn’t necessarily be at the same conferences, because we’re in different disciplines.


Jacob Fay  09:09

Could you say a little bit more about the “we” that you mentioned there?


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  09:12

Yes. So I think “we” is like, really amorphous, right? And different people would say, No, don’t include me in that or do include me in that. I think, generally speaking, it’s anybody who lives on the outskirts of the traditional power structures and academia and who what I would I call in my my philosophy work. It’s a term a borrowed from Imani Perry’s Vaccae thing, the ideal patriarch, so those of us who are not the ideal patriarch, I say, those of us who are not white, who are not cisgender, or who are not heterosexual, who are not women, etc. The list the list goes on. All of us who potentially experienced marginalization in academia, find ourselves needing to navigate these power structures that were specifically designed at Our exclusion. In many cases, I think active exclusion, I don’t I think sometimes it’s framed as it as a passive problem. But there is an active structural problem. There’s active exclusion. And so I think social media allows us to move around, even if not transcend, or destroyed the barriers that act of exclusion creates between us and and around us.


Jacob Fay  10:25

Sorry that I’m like having so many interesting thoughts right now about that. Because I feel my my, my liberal theorist background saying, Oh, this is really interesting, because the the claims you’re making here are very much about in some ways, the structure of higher of higher education, right, and that, ethically, what social media is doing is disrupting injustices. And the basic the basic structure of higher education to borrow terms from from liberal theory. So it’s a real, it’s a, it’s a very interesting, intriguing take.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  11:01

I think, you know, just to just to add to that point, I think part of what’s happening on social media, so like, we already know that social media can be manipulated in some pretty serious and devastating ways, politically speaking. And so I don’t want to, you know, pitch it as like this, this utopian Haven, because it’s not right. But I do think that whenever you find yourself in spaces where people can organize with each other, which is like my framework is organizing in solidarity, that there’s a lot of potential there when people have the opportunity to have conversations with each other. And I think that that’s, that’s part of where the power in social media comes from. And that can go in both directions, right. And we’ve seen that with our politics over the last five years.


Jacob Fay  11:50

So I did wonder about the “other direction” Chanda mentioned. Here’s where we get into what’s ethically fraught about faculty using social media.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  12:01

I think certainly, it is a much easier space to spread rumors, right. And to actually engage in, for example, slander without repercussion, or with repercussions for the person who engaged in it, but also repercussions that can’t be redressed really for the victim. And so, you know, one of the pluses and minuses of social media is that anybody has a microphone. And if the right people see that microphone, they can turn up the volume, and amplify. And so stories get repeated over and over. And I think that that is like very clearly like an ethically fraught territory that you’re getting into.


Jacob Fay  12:46

And, of course, social media has power dynamics to.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  12:51

So I think one of the sites of tension between those two things is who gets to be an arbiter of what’s true? And what’s correct. And this is a particularly tense question when we are in areas of sociology, or anything really involving human dynamics. But then let’s see, we get into a scenario where we have a young black, non-binary person undergraduate in astronomy, let’s say, and they’ve decided to use social media as an opportunity to say what this professor was racist and transphobic towards me. So some people might say, well, that’s clearly like, we’re going into slander territory, right? That’s like a very clearly fraught, like, what if the student is making it up? Um, and so then it becomes a question of, you know, how frequently do we think that students make things like that, for what is our data? Tell us about that? And what is our data tell us about the prevalence of racism and transphobia in the discipline of astronomy? And are there other students who would be willing to backup like, say, like, I witnessed this, or I too experienced it, or I’m not transgender, but I experienced racism from the same professor. And so then this becomes a question of whose observation observations are salient when we’re talking about social phenomena, and whose interpretations of those observations are salient? So where, you know, someone’s white classmate, someone’s white cisgender classmate might say, well, I don’t think the professor really meant it. The student is like, I’ve been black my whole life. I’ve been aware that I’m trans for like five years and I know what racism and transphobia look like right? And so then that becomes a matter of it matters than if the context is white supremacist and hetero. Sexist.


Jacob Fay  14:49

TJ talked about the other side of that dilemma. Social media can also be used to bolster your reputation.


TJ Stewart  14:57

The other thing that I think is a bit fraught is we’ve crossed sort of a line when I think about it from an institutional perspective of social media being a place to share information, which I think inherently involves a level of vulnerability not only on the institutional level, but on the individual level. And it being a way for us to maintain or to clean up image reputation. And I think that has been sort of the big swing, when we think about it, we share information about our breakthroughs and research about the great work we’re doing as long as it serves to boost up the image of the institution. But it’s rarely used as a way to sort of self examine the institution and the ways we think about maybe painful histories and legacies, maybe problematic decisions that we’ve made. And so I think that to me, becomes ethically fraught, because it becomes a public relations machine, and not a way to tell the truth and be honest, sort of with the public and with constituents and people were supposed to support. And so, you know, I would just give an example, you know, one institution that, you know, I attended, right, there are some really troubling histories around for example, you know, chattel slavery. And so it becomes, for me sort of hypocritical when that institution wants to celebrate, and usually the date when the first African American students were admitted, or graduated, or etc, without a real sort of reckoning with sort of those histories, and not just a reckoning, but also also a remediation. Right? How do you sort of repair that history in that harm, particularly when some of it is ongoing. And so that is sort of what I’m talking about, I think it becomes a way for us to sort of sculpt these sort of pristine images of our institutions, as a way to say, as opposed to a way to say, we are imperfect, because you know, the institution, even when I say that, I’m always talking about the people. And I think using language like the institution sort of serves to invisible eyes, the individuals that make it run, if you believe education, academia is supposed to be a public good, then that then becomes an ethical issue. If you don’t, then you feel like the maybe perhaps you’re, you’re not supposed to be beholden to or accountable to sort of a public or to a truth in those same ways. And so that’s something that I think is also kind of a slippery slope.


Jacob Fay  17:17

And Harry focused on the impact on students in classrooms.


Harry Brighouse  17:22

For me, the big question has been, how much of my political and maybe ethical, controversial views do I reveal on social media, and I think this is a new problem. So there have always been people in academia who have access to a to a public stage. But they’ve been fairly limited number of people who have that. And for them there is that there is a dilemma like, I want to push forward this policy agenda. But in pushing it forward, I’m revealing to potential students or actual students exactly what I think about whatever it is, do I want to do that in an environment, and I think this is, you know, we newly have a very polarized and kind of vicious political environment, I want to be very careful about how I present myself, because I want every student who walks into my classroom, to presume that I’m going to treat them with respect and to presume, you know, to be able to learn from me. It’s not a new problem in one sense, because there were always some people who had that question, but now it’s a problem for everybody. I mean, anybody who uses Twitter, anybody who’s who blogs, which is far more people than ever used to have access to the public stage. They know that they’re, they know, I mean, they know that their students, and potential students can find out what they, how they, you know, what they say. And they also know that some students are curious enough to actually do that. I mean, you know, students do Google, you know, they mainly Google you through it, right. My professor, everybody isn’t right. My professors has been, you know, looked at many times by their students, but they do it on Twitter, they do it on on, you know, on the web more generally. So I think I’ve exercised, a very cautious probably at the sort of, you know, there’s a reasonable spectrum. I think of cautiousness about that, and I think I’m at the sort of far end of that. But I certainly think there are people who are past the other end of it people who are reckless and careless and who have, you know, I read what they write and I think if I, if I were a student walking into your classroom, I would not think I would not be presuming that you would treat me with respect. And that’s both because of the views they articulate, but it’s also sometimes very often it’s the way they are taking Like those views?


Jacob Fay  20:02

There’s really not much guidance out there, even from professional organizations. What should the norms be? What should guide faculty as they’re deciding whether or not to post something? Here’s hairy.


Harry Brighouse  20:16

One is that anything I say about what I think the norms should be, is really, really tentative and not, you know, is just sort of offered as something that we should be thinking about and discussing. The second thing, which is the more important thing is we have not thought this through as a profession. I mean, frankly, there’s a lot of things that it’s rather embarrassing. We haven’t thought through as a professional, I don’t think that there’s a careful well thought out debate about the ethics of disclosure in the classroom. Yes, there are people who’ve done that, but as a professional, I don’t think we’ve done that. And I think we need that, you know, we need we need, I feel uncomfortable, saying, oh, we should do X. When it’s just me saying it, not me, saying it having been part of a long standing and thoughtful discussion among people who disagree within our profession. You know, that said, you know, I would say that, I would say the ad hominem attacks, which I see frequently, and I see them frequently from academics, you know, they’re off the table somebody, as soon as somebody uses an ad hominem attack on somebody else on Twitter. I lose respect for them. And I think rightly, and I think I’m not going to take that person as seriously. But it’s kind of, you know, borderline dishonesty and misrepresentation. This has been done to me, I sort of very think about a case of somebody who was very, I think, cleverly misrepresenting the order of a discussion that I was in, to make me seem unreasonable. And, you know, I don’t I mean, I don’t think you should do that. I think we should have an understanding that you don’t do that. That said, I mean, and there are many other things, you know, how should we deal with swearing? I don’t know. I mean, people swear in class, but they don’t swear in class at anybody. They I mean, I hope they don’t, none of these things? Well, most of these things I don’t think should be firing offenses. And I think that’s another problem we have in academia, that that actually interferes with our ability to have good discussion of these norms, is the sort of respect for tenure. And the respect for academic freedom makes it difficult for people to say no, like that behavior is totally you know, that behavior is stuff we’re not going to engage in, and you shouldn’t be engaging in. And there should be sanctions, but those sanctions shouldn’t be losing your job. Right, there should be other sanctions, there are sanctions that fall short of losing your job. In most professions, there aren’t really an hours. So we know we need to think about that side of it too, not just what the norms should be, but also what the sanctions should be for violation of the norms.


Jacob Fay  23:34

I think it’s compelling that what Harry saying here about the ethics of disclosure, is that how faculty behave online can shape how students feel in their classrooms. Students might wonder if they will be welcomed in someone’s classroom, or if they’re going to get a fair shake, given what they might see happening online. The AAUP does have a statement on faculty social media use, which TJ refers to here, but it’s a pretty minimal general set of guidelines. And General norms aren’t really that helpful. They would only work in an ideal world, which we’re not in. For TJ, establishing general norms is riddled with complexity, especially in the context of social inequities.


TJ Stewart  24:23

If we lived in a perfect world, organizations like the AAUP would need to think about sort of carve outs, but sort of how do these policies impact people differently? If we are to bring in analysis, for example of social identity, right? If we lived in a perfect world, we wouldn’t need to think about that because the professor is a professor as a professor, right in academic as an academic, as an academic, you know, regardless of the types of things they might be studying. The reality is, and I think this has been sort of played out in real life. We’ve seen multiple sort of cases is that that matters in not necessarily always to the institution itself. But we have to think about, for example, how institutions are governed, how public and political pressure is brought to bear on the ways faculties are governed, or faculty members are governed or protected or not, irrespective of who you are, as a faculty member, this is how we should think about this particular issue. But the reality is, is that some faculty members are more likely to put in particular crosshairs and be experienced certain consequences because of who they are than others as what I was sort of getting at. And so I don’t know that there’s a necessarily clear sort of position or policy that the AAUP could have put forward, but a recognition of that reality, I think those statements are perfectly fine. Particularly if you find yourself with sort of the intersection of multiple sort of dominant identities, I think it becomes more complex and more fraught. If you’re at the sort of intersection of multiple minoritized identities, in addition to the type of work that you do.


Jacob Fay  26:07

TJ reminds us that positionality really matters.


TJ Stewart  26:12

So we are then making a statement around what are the proper uses or proper avenues to voice any concern, let alone this particular one, which was around issues of right of racism, perhaps of white supremacy, sort of as what sort of the undertone is? And so I think, well, you know, when we are thinking about that, not only within the case, but sort of within sort of the hidden reality in a public sphere, like, I think that that is sort of where a lot of institutions have, have tried to sort of make meaning around that. And so running this sort of two lane highway of, we know that our faculty are in the sort of public spheres. And so then what the institution then becomes is, rather than taking a stance, particularly on things that are not safe, right, because if it’s a safe topic, and students have no problem making a statement, so once Juneteenth became a federal holiday, it was all good to be all for Juneteenth, right and celebrating it and sending the tweets, even though there are people right, who might be frustrated with that or not think that that is worthy of celebration. But if there’s something like that we have no problem. But if it’s something that’s contested, then we have to sort of be careful. And we being the institution, and in terms of how we’re going to sort of affirm or disavow what someone has said. And so I think, you know, what would be really powerful in my mind, are is thinking through? Not necessarily, because we know that institutions are conservative by nature. And I don’t mean politically, I mean, our institutions desire to continue existing, and to can you continue existing for a long time, so the ways institutions make their decisions broadly, is what’s going to keep us thriving and alive and above water. So I just want to sort of preface with that. But you know, what that then what we sacrifice with that particular politic is speaking a truth, to power of being able to sort of wrestle with maybe, perhaps ugly parts of our world, particularly when you know, there’s an opportunity to support a faculty member or not. And we know that the stakes are totally different. If you’re like, professional administrative staff, right. So I just think that’s also important to name your we’re talking about faculty, which there’s certain levels of protection of what we can and can’t say. But if we’re talking about staff members, I mean, you can just forget it, if you step out of line of what this institution believes, should or should not be said, either about the institution itself or its politics. That’s something that many would not tolerate. And so especially if you’re an at will employee and not part of the Union. And so I think that when we’re thinking about sort of wrestling with sort of those complexities of how do we think through that, and how do we make decisions, and going back to the case that, you know, was so real brilliantly written is, it seems, and in my mind, it was here’s the clear choice, right. So and I’m sure other people will read it. And they think that there’s sort of a clear choice. Well, that’s why positionality matters. But the reality is, particularly those of us that study organizations and administration, if you take a step back, that there’s a lot of competing and conflicting sort of ways to think about that problem. And so then it goes back to sort of what are ethics, right? And ethics to whom, right ethics are, you know, are some shared values, but shared by whom? And what does that, you know, particularly mean, which is why I talked a little bit about the AAUP, from a sort of professorial perspective. But just because we’re talking about the academy doesn’t mean that those are sort of broadly infused in our decision making, because at the end of the day, we are fiscal institutions, we are political institutions, we are academic institutions, and so not to sort of super nerd out but when you think about organizational theory, you know, one of the says we have unclear goals and unclear technologies and when you think about sort of mission and money, their mission goals and their money, goods, and so you’re trying to, you know, keep all of these balls in play, while also keeping this pristine image and that is where sort of social media comes in and wreaks havoc on all of that, because it gives us access in ways we haven’t had in decades and decades before and in the academy and the profit story.


Jacob Fay  30:29

So, we heard Harry saying that we need some norms, but they’ve got to come out of an ongoing discussion. And then we heard TJ expand on the complication of norms. I really appreciate TJ’s emphasis on how essential it is to account for the realities of racism, white supremacy, and other pernicious parts of our world. reckoning with these realities, and thinking about the positionality of individual users has to be part of this conversation. So too, does recognizing the importance of faculty as teachers. As Harry points out, Chanda’s idea is that maybe faculty should be rewarded for the good ways they use social media, sharing ideas, promoting the public good, advancing justice, here’s chonda on how faculty activism on social media should be viewed as valuable service.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  31:27

So I think the larger context for this is that we actually don’t have the power. And again, I’m going to harken back to what is my way here, I’m going to say I’m using the definition I described earlier, that there are not good opportunities to call out racism and sexism, other marginalizing structural phenomenon, I think it’s important to recognize that we’re talking about structural phenomena. And to some extent, like any individual’s behavior is not really the point. The point is, is what’s happening on a larger scale, or how how all of these pieces come together to form the structural behavior. Oftentimes, people are going to social media, not because that’s how they wanted to get it handled, but because they don’t see any other avenue for getting it handled. Right. I think the the most public sort of set of examples about this is around sexual misconduct and past the harasser. When someone has been found responsible in a title nine report, that doesn’t mean that the harasser doesn’t get passed to another institution, and doesn’t subsequently have more victims. But sometimes, that’s what survivors victims, however they see themselves, that’s how they want to handle it. And they feel like this is the only power that they have in this situation. And I think so when someone is saying, this is the only power I have in this situation. And I’m doing it because I want to protect people, I want to address this person who’s actually harmful in the field, that is absolutely a service.


Jacob Fay  32:50

Chanda talks about an example, where a black woman scholar uses Twitter to call out racism in the hiring practices of a white male colleague, just like the case in chapter three of Rebecca and Ashley’s book, Ethics in Higher Education.


Chanda Prescod-Weinstein  33:04

And I think what’s key here is that she is offering in her role as an expert on the racial dynamics of her discipline, she is offering a theory about what has happened in his lab, and the sociological phenomena that are at work and his hiring processes. Right, she is offering an intellectual theory of what she considers to be maybe a crime, right, but she’s offering her intellectual theory of the sociological dynamics. And so it needs to be handled as an intellectual theory. And this is one of the reasons it’s covered by academic freedom. So that’s one piece. The second piece is and this goes back to the question that I was talking about earlier with who constitutes a competent observer is that we have to ask the question, if why wouldn’t people trust her judgment on this? And what is it about her identity? Or about the way she said the thing which again, is going to be tied to ideas about her identity that makes people question whether, you know, she’s just being a mean girl, as opposed to someone who’s bringing the full week of her intellectual training and expertise and lived experience as a black woman to bear on this question. And so in my, in my social epistemology work, I call this white empiricism I actually have a name for this, which is the idea that her data, and her thinking about this is actually less important, because she’s not the ideal patriarch, because she doesn’t fulfill this role of being the ideal observer in the situation, but her observations about the situation are less important and maybe just petty, rather than intellectually meritorious.


Jacob Fay  34:56

Chanda is pushing us to reframe activism on social Media, we should see it as both intellectual contribution and as a service to the academy. Using social media becomes an extension of the role of expert and researcher. It’s clear that social media has a lot of promise for faculty and for higher ed in general. But its use can also lead to some really thorny ethical dilemmas. positionality power and privilege really affect how faculty decide whether or not to post something. I’m glad I was able to talk to Chanda, TJ and Harry. But I also think it’s just the beginning of a broader conversation that higher ed needs to have.


Rebecca Taylor  35:51

Thanks so much for listening. I’m Rebecca Taylor. I’m an assistant professor at the University of Illinois. And I’m Ashley Floyd Kuntz. I’m a clinical assistant professor at Florida International University. Ashley and I are the editors of the book Ethics in Higher Education: Promoting Equity and Inclusion Through Case-Baased Inquiry, and we made teaching guides about these episodes. Those are linked in our show notes.


Carrie Welsh  36:16

This episode was produced by Rebecca Taylor, Ashley Floyd Kuntz, Jessica Harless and Carrie Welsh.