TAG is meant to be a responsive and inclusive process. One of the core concerns addressed in the structure of criteria and nomination process is to avoid address exclusionary barriers to participation in TAG. It is equally important not to direct faculty in their approach, but to honor the academic independence and agency of those interested in entering into as well as those already doing this work.

By having a flexible set of criteria through which faculty can incorporate TAG in the way that works naturally with their teaching style and course content, TAG allows for diversity in pedagogical approach and accessibility to a broader scope of disciplines and existing coursework.

• Submission of updated syllabus that adheres to, provides evidence and integration of TAG criteria as defined in the TAG rubric.

• Up to 500 (or most appropriate maximum word count) words by participating faculty describing their approach and how they plan to or currently integrate TAG and fulfill criteria in their class as outlined or otherwise evident on the submitted syllabus.

(This can be optional, but very useful for faculty when: a) entering into this work for the first time, b) the syllabus requires further context/explanation, or c) for courses that may require a unique and/or complex approach. It will also provide the review committee with substantially more information through which to make their decision and likely eliminate the additional labor of requesting further explanatory information and/or context.

• Option to provide links and/or uploads (in PDF) of supportive/supplemental documentation

• Who/what has dominated in your discipline? Which scholars and scholarship have been left out?

• How do race and racialized processes interact with your entire discipline?

• What single narratives are you telling yourself about students, and how does that affect grading, behavior management, and other interactions?

• Do you and the academic materials you use uphold whiteness or do they center and lift up the voices and experiences of people of color?

• Do you include scholarship and materials that offer a range of perspectives or counter-perspectives and lift up the expertise and experiences of Black, Indigenous, Latino/a/x, Asian and other people of color?

• Do you include course materials that examine the role of race, power and equity/inequity? For example:

  • Race, gender and inclusion;

  • Health disparities, educational access and achievement, political engagement,

  • Social mobility, economic and environmental justice, and human rights

  • Questions of interest to communities minoritized, marginalized or underrepresented by higher education.

As with a successful peer review for scholarly publication, the TAG review board requires demonstrated competency in the discipline. Utilizing departmental/faculty independence, appropriate bylaws, standardized metrics can provide independence from undue influence or pressure on members that might influence decisions to benefit third parties and/or compromise the integrity and/or safety of the review board and defined purpose.

Also in line with the standards of a peer review board is the inclusion of those who may not hold a PhD or Faculty, but are qualified through other means (like directly representative experience, direct impact, and proven history of engagement), providing unique contributions to an inclusive and diverse perspective and positionality within the decision making process.

Role of TAG Selection/Assessment Review Board (Committee):

• To determine whether or not a nominated class fulfills the criteria for TAG

• Decisions and decision making power held by members of the committee may be protected as an extension of existing institutionalized Faculty and Departmental independence regarding course content and pedagogy, and independence of Student scholarship and active civic and community engagement (https://www.jmu.edu/jmuplans/mission-vision-values.shtml).

• Goals and outcomes as defined by the TAG criteria rubric are in line with institutional standards and priorities of a creating a safe environment for all students and fostering an equitable and inclusive campus climate and educational experience to better equip students for their futures as defined in Core Qualities and University Goals of JMU's Strategic Plan for 2020-2026

*Stated JMU Institutional goals include, but are not limited to: a “campus climate that is inclusive and equitable,” Implementing policies, programs and practices to increase the diversity,” “value a culture of diversity in teaching, research, and service,” a “holistic learning environment,” “develop programs that are responsive to the needs of the Commonwealth, nation and the world,” “evolve it’s educational and business model to serve the public good,” “create a campus environment that encourages students to have strong personal relationships healthy identity, and accountability for their choices.”

(https://www.jmu.edu/jmuplans/core-qualities-goals.shtml)

Assessing Qualifications & Composition of Review Board (Committee)

• Composition of Review Board must include Faculty/Staff and Students

• Nominated by self or other with demonstrated competencies and investment in TAG criteria

• Nominated Faculty/Staff must have proven competencies and investment in TAG criteria demonstrated through scholarly work, curriculum, and/or experience both personal and professional

• Nominated Students must have proven competencies and investment in TAG criteria demonstrated through recommendation of qualified faculty (as defined above), scholarship, and/or active engagement and experience both extracurricular and professional