CRD 302 Blog

CRD 302: inclusive Community development

Social Identity Exercise

Name: Melanie Lyn

Self-description:

My career objective is to be an event planner/manager for a small private business.

I have spent the last four years working in the restaurant industry learning hospitality, logistics of private dining events, and quality service. As well as studying Meetings & Events at ASU, I am currently interning at Warehouse 215, an event venue in downtown Phoenix, learning about the responsibilities and logistics of a 2,500 standing capacity venue in the in the industry.

I am a detail-oriented, logical thinker with skills in food and beverage operations, leadership, and guest experience. I am a quick learner do well under pressure. I can be sarcastic or sweet, and I am always willing to help wherever I can.

CRD 302: Social Identity Exercise

Events with Impact: Building Sustainable and Inclusive Experiences

Becoming a Community Development Practitioner

Reflection

What is driving your interest in community development?

I want to inspire people in the event planning community to produce more sustainable events. The events industry is extremely wasteful. I want to promote bamboo over single use plastic: bamboo is one of the fastest growing plants and is extremely durable. I also want to encourage people to invest in or rent fabric tablecloths over flimsy plastic ones. By expanding interest in sustainable practices, we can make items in bulk and reduce the cost per consumer. Community development thrives when people come together around a shared concern (Sharpe, 2016). My work to reduce waste in events is not just about individual responsibility, but about mobilizing the event community to collaborate and take collective action. Sustainability is one of the guiding values Sharpe identifies as essential to community development, and by rethinking event practices, I am connecting my personal passion to this larger principle.

What role(s) do you see yourself having as a community development practitioner?

I see myself serving as both a resource and an advisor/challenger. As a resource, I can utilize specialists I know from each industry to collaborate on ideas and leverage their own resources to create new practices for the industry. As an advisor/challenger, after developing new sustainable procedures that are efficient and appealing, I can use my perspective to encourage other event planning companies and venues to bring them into practice.

Sharpe (2016) describes practitioners as facilitators, catalysts, and advocates, in addition to being resources. I see myself stepping into these roles as needed — sometimes facilitating partnerships between venues and suppliers, and other times advocating for sustainable practices to become the new industry standard.

What elements of your cultural identity and/or life experiences have shaped your perspectives, values, and goals

Working in the restaurant industry and at an event venue in a major city, and attending all kinds of events throughout my life, I have seen how wasteful the industry is: from lack of recycling programs to food waste, to the glorification of single-use items. My generation is worried about the health of the planet and our future, and we are striving to find ways to resolve some of the damage humans have caused.

Sharpe (2016) emphasizes that identity and lived experiences strongly influence how individuals engage in community development. My professional background in restaurants and events, combined with my generational perspective, positions me to approach sustainability with both urgency and credibility. By voicing my generation’s values, I am helping empower younger professionals in the industry to take a stand for change.

Batching 400 cocktails

Waste Management Phoenix Open:largest zero-waste sporting event.Photo Credit: Nick Piastowski / Golf.com via GOLF Media LLC

Companies pictured are examples, not meant to place blame or sole responsibility.

Action

Prepare for Praxis #6

The National Inclusion Project (NIP) training on Accessible and Inclusive Recreation is a free program that focuses on best practices in inclusive recreation. I am interested in learning how to build programs, communities, and events that are inclusive of people of all abilities. Many types of disabilities run in my family; people often see those with disabilities as less than, but that is not the case. I can use the training from the course in event planning to ensure marketing and registration are accessible, form a diverse planning committee, and be more aware in decisions like venue selection.

Sharpe (2016) stresses that equity and participation are central principles in community development. This training directly supports those values, giving me practical strategies to ensure that events do not exclude people with disabilities but instead create opportunities for full participation. By applying these lessons, I can embody the practitioner role of advocate described by Sharpe — ensuring that marginalized voices are considered in all event planning decisions.

SMART Goal:

By the end of the National Inclusion Project (NIP) training, I will design an event planning checklist that ensures all aspects of an event (marketing, registration, venue accessibility, and committee composition) meet inclusive and equitable standards. I will implement this checklist in at least one community event within the next three months and gather feedback from participants with disabilities to measure its effectiveness.

Sharpe, E. (2016). Community development : Applications for leisure, sport, and tourism. Sagamore Publishing, L.L.C..

Finding Community in Unexpected Places

Identity & Belonging

Melanie’s Interview.MP4

Interviewee: Melanie Wilson

Interviewer: Luyando Kalembo

Belonging is one of those concepts that feels simple until you start to really explore it. In reflecting on my experiences at ASU, I realized how much identity and community intersect, shaping how comfortable, supported, and engaged we feel on campus. This interview gave me a chance to unpack those layers and examine my own perspectives through the lens of the course material.

One of the most influential aspects of my identity is socioeconomic status. Supporting myself financially has taught me to value hard work and careful decision-making. It influences how I spend my money while still allowing for enjoyment in life. Alongside this, my mental health has had a profound effect on my self-perception and daily life. Returning to medication recently due to increased irritability and low motivation reminded me how central mental well-being is to the sense of self and belonging. These dimensions—both visible and invisible—play a critical role in how I navigate social and academic spaces.

A defining moment of belonging occurred during the Spring TSA trip in 2024, when I connected with a fellow student, Ellie. Neither of us knew many people at the time, but when we stayed in together, watched ghost hunter shows, and shared snacks, it was the first moment in a while I felt completely comfortable and “in place.” This moment highlighted the psychosocial dimension of inclusion described in our textbook (p. 30): feeling safe, accepted, and valued by peers. Small interactions like this can create a profound sense of community, even in unfamiliar environments.

ASU’s values around inclusivity and support resonate with me, but the alignment isn’t always perfect. For example, while I appreciate opportunities for students to form their own communities, I’ve noticed instances where the university’s actions contradict its messaging—such as offering space to commemorate individuals whose views do not align with inclusive values. This reflects a tension between organizational ideals and practices (organizational inclusion, pp. 34-35). Still, I see value in the spaces students create themselves, which foster belonging through shared interests and support networks.

To feel comfortable and respected at ASU, I find that clear communication, recognition of responsibilities, and experiential learning opportunities are essential. Being a visual and experiential learner, I thrive in environments where collaboration and open dialogue are encouraged. Similarly, stepping up in group projects and student organizations allows me to share my strengths, help organize tasks, and ensure that all voices are heard. These actions also reflect relational and participatory dimensions of inclusion: actively contributing to the community and fostering mutual respect (pp. 34-35).

Education at ASU is both a means to an end—preparing for a career in event planning—and an opportunity to engage meaningfully with the campus community. There are clear benefits to engagement, including networking, personal growth, and a stronger sense of belonging. However, barriers like finances, time constraints, transportation, and social anxiety can limit participation, illustrating the delicate balance students must maintain between responsibilities and community involvement (pp. 27-28).

Strategically, ASU could enhance inclusivity by addressing multiple dimensions of belonging. Psychosocially, smaller, intentional spaces can help students feel safe to connect. Relationally, encouraging collaboration across disciplines fosters broader peer networks. Organizationally, policies that incorporate flexibility—like varied class schedules—can reduce barriers for students balancing work, academics, and community engagement. Collectively, these efforts could make the ASU experience more equitable, supportive, and meaningful for all students.

This interview and reflection have reinforced the importance of intentional connection. Belonging is not just about fitting in; it’s about creating and participating in communities that recognize and respect individual identity. Moments of shared interests, supportive interactions, and opportunities for contribution have lasting impacts on engagement and satisfaction, echoing both personal experience and course concepts.

[Insert Image of Interview Here]

References

Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2011). Campus–community partnerships: The process of engagement. Journal of Higher Education, 82(3), 331–356.

ASU. (2024). Identity, diversity, and inclusion at ASU. Arizona State University.

Course Textbook. (2025). Title of Course Textbook. Publisher.

Speaking Beyond Words

Critical Incident Analysis

Reflection

It happened during a busy brunch shift at the restaurant where I was bartending. I was serving a woman who spoke little to no English. I don’t remember exactly what language she spoke, but I believe it was Spanish. I wanted to say something to her beyond just the basic service interactions — something that showed I cared about her experience.

After serving her food and drinks, I typed into my Apple Watch, “I hope you enjoyed everything.” The translation popped up: “Espero que haya disfrutado de todo.” I practiced saying it out loud, probably with shaky pronunciation, and then showed her the screen in case I got it wrong.

Her reaction surprised me. She lit up with the biggest smile, almost laughing with joy. She wasn’t just happy about the meal or the cocktail — she was touched that I had tried to connect with her in her own language.

In that moment, I realized how meaningful small efforts can be. The guest came from a cultural and linguistic background different from mine, but with just a few words, we shared a genuine connection.

The cultural characteristics were clear: the guest was a non-English speaker navigating an English-dominant environment. I was an American server with limited Spanish skills, relying on technology and gestures. My perspective was shaped by my upbringing, which taught me not to judge or assume but to meet people with kindness.

At first, I felt nervous about mispronouncing the phrase. My heart was beating faster than normal, and I felt myself smiling extra wide to cover my nerves. But compassion outweighed discomfort, and I pushed through because I wanted her to feel seen.

This situation highlights language as a dimension of diversity. It also reflects broader cultural dynamics: in the U.S., many people grow up learning only English, while in many countries, multilingualism is common (American Psychological Association, 2017). That gap can create barriers — but it can also create opportunities for connection when we’re willing to make the effort.

Action

Looking back, I believe I handled the situation well. Instead of doing the bare minimum with gestures or pointing, I found a creative solution and tried to bridge the language gap. It reminded me that hospitality is more than just food and drinks — it’s about making people feel welcome and respected.

My reaction likely mirrors others in the community who encounter language barriers. Many of us feel nervous, afraid of making mistakes, or unsure how to communicate. But the difference comes in whether we stop there or push past the discomfort. Intercultural communication research suggests that even small gestures of effort, such as learning basic words or showing respect for another language, can significantly improve relationships and reduce tension (Ting-Toomey, 2017).

To improve empathy and compassion in hospitality — and in our communities — we need more cultural awareness and practical tools. Encouraging language learning from an early age in the U.S. would make a huge difference. So would training hospitality workers in non-verbal communication strategies and showing them how technology, like translation apps, can build bridges. Most importantly, it takes a mindset of curiosity and respect. Hofstede’s cultural framework reminds us that cultural differences aren’t barriers to avoid but realities to embrace, shaping how we communicate and connect (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010).

That brunch shift taught me that even a few words can transform a routine service into a cross-cultural connection.

References

American Psychological Association. (2017). Multicultural guidelines: An ecological approach to context, identity, and intersectionality. American Psychologist, 72(9), 823–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000191

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Ting-Toomey, S. (2017). Communicating across cultures. The Guilford Press.

Stepping Into Faith: Experiencing a Christian Church

Cultural Plunge

Reflection

When I completed the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale, my scores showed that I am strongest in interaction engagement (3.4) and interaction attentiveness (3.4), meaning I naturally observe and notice details about how people behave, communicate, and interact. My interaction confidence (3) was moderate, suggesting I can engage with people who are different from me but sometimes hesitate. My lower scores in respect for cultural differences (2.5) and interaction enjoyment (2.7) reveal areas where I could grow, particularly in appreciating and enjoying interactions with people whose beliefs or values differ from my own.

I realized part of the reason for these lower scores is that I have stronger feelings toward certain religions than others. For example, I personally disagree with the beliefs of both the Mormon church I grew up in and Calvary Church, which made aspects of the service feel uncomfortable at times. Yet, there are other Christian churches whose practices or teachings I find easier to relate to, and there are some religions I encounter where I feel neutral and open, without judgment. This awareness helped me see that intercultural sensitivity is not just about observation or engagement — it’s also about recognizing biases and working to approach differences with respect and openness.

Because of these results, I intentionally selected an event where I could improve these areas: a Sunday service at Calvary Church, a non-denominational Christian church with locations across the state. I wanted to better understand my friend’s worldview, step into a space unfamiliar to me, and practice engaging with people whose beliefs differ from my own. I hoped this experience would increase my confidence in intercultural interactions, while also encouraging me to observe and reflect on cultural practices I hadn’t encountered before.

Before attending, I wrote down some of my prior perceptions and expectations:

Family: Growing up in Mormon church, I associated worship with many children and families. I wondered if a Christian service would be more diverse in age.
Age: I thought the service might be dominated by older adults.
Education: I assumed religious teaching might feel structured, almost like a classroom lesson.
Community vs. individuality: I expected worship to emphasize group rituals over personal expression.
Appearance and rituals: I anticipated formal dress, structured rituals, and possibly unfamiliar actions like communion or hand-raising.

These expectations were shaped by my background in Mormonism, conversations with friends, and portrayals of religion in media. The Building Cultural Competence article highlights how our cultural lens is shaped by prior experiences, and I could clearly see how my perceptions reflected assumptions I had accumulated over time.

Action

The service itself was unlike anything I had experienced before. One of the first differences was the live worship band, with guitars, drums, and singers leading the congregation. Unlike the organ or piano I remembered from Mormon services, the music was lively, energetic, and participatory. People stood, clapped, and raised their arms during songs. Observing this, I realized how differently faith can be expressed: for some, music is not just a tradition but an emotional, spiritual act.

Another difference was clothing. In Mormon church, formal attire is standard, while at Calvary, people wore casual t-shirts and jeans. The relaxed dress code seemed to lower barriers and create a welcoming environment.

The demographics of the congregation also stood out. While Mormon services are often dominated by families with children, this service included singles, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older couples. The congregation felt more varied in age and life stage, showing that participation in this community wasn’t limited to one type of person.

During the service, I felt welcomed and included. Greeters at the door smiled, shook my hand, and made me feel noticed. My friend introduced me to a few members of the congregation, which helped me feel comfortable and part of the community, even as an outsider.

In terms of inclusion, I observed several key components:

Recognition of humanity: Every visitor was greeted warmly, showing attentiveness to newcomers.
Solidarity: The congregation prayed for those in need, emphasizing community support.
Sense of belonging: Opportunities to participate in singing and community announcements made the experience feel interactive.
Principle of social justice: The pastor highlighted service opportunities to help the local community.

One interaction that stood out was when my friend introduced me to a woman sitting nearby. She welcomed me and asked if it was my first time attending. That small act of friendliness made me feel seen and reminded me how important simple gestures are in creating inclusion.

The church also demonstrated inclusive strategies throughout the service:

ABCD (Asset-Based Community Development): Members were invited to volunteer in ways that used their strengths, such as music or service projects.
Power sharing: Different members led prayers and readings, not just the pastor.
Reflective practice: The pastor encouraged attendees to reflect personally on the message.
Barrier removal: Casual dress, welcoming greeters, and clear guidance for newcomers helped lower intimidation.
Engagement of facilitators/resources: The band, greeters, and volunteers worked together to foster belonging.

This experience left me with several lingering questions:

How do different Christian denominations vary in their worship styles and beliefs?
How does being raised in a Christian church versus joining later in life affect a person’s sense of belonging?
How do churches welcome newcomers who may not share the same beliefs?

Reflecting on my intercultural sensitivity, I would place myself in the acceptance stage of the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS). Previously, I minimized religious differences by assuming they were all similar. Now I recognize that each tradition has unique practices, values, and worldviews. While I still don’t share Calvary Church’s beliefs, I came away with a deeper understanding of my friend’s perspective and more appreciation for the sense of community religion can provide.

This experience reinforced areas I still want to grow in. I observed attentively, but I could have been more confident in initiating conversations and asking questions about beliefs and practices. To continue developing intercultural sensitivity, I plan to attend interfaith dialogues, visit other religious communities, and engage with people from faiths or worldviews very different from my own. These experiences will help me increase both confidence and respect in cross-cultural interactions.

References

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity.

“Building Cultural Competence.” (Course material).

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse