Embedding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion into a Kinesiology Curriculum: A Detailed Report of a Curriculum Redesign

Abstract

Students need to be properly prepared by their education to work respectfully and effectively with diverse populations and in diverse environments. Our purpose is twofold: (i) to provide a thorough description of the curriculum redesign process for an undergraduate kinesiology and health promotion (KHP) program, and (ii) to use our experience to provide more general recommendations to other departments and universities undergoing curricular redesign. The catalyst for this redesign was the conversion from a quarter-system to a semester-system and the opportunities for improvement identified through that process. The redesign was guided by a newly created departmental strategic plan, faculty professional development trainings, student feedback, faculty hirings and their areas of expertise, and industry demands. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) was mindfully embedded into the curriculum to reflect the department-, college-, and university-level core value of inclusivity. The redesign allows prospective KHP students to complete several courses that address DEI themes, in addition to the courses that build their technical competencies. Providing foundational exposure to DEI concepts through the undergraduate curriculum can better prepare students to work in diverse settings. As such, this report provides other programs with a framework to follow to make curriculum more DEI centric for their students.

1. Introduction

In recent years, there has been a drive to make higher education more equitable and inclusive in its curriculum and institutional practices across kinesiology departments (Russell et al. 2021). As described by Morgan and Houghton, “an inclusive curriculum design approach is one that takes into account students’ educational, cultural, and social background and experience as well as the presence of any physical or sensory impairment and their mental well-being” (Morgan and Houghton 2011, p. 5). In response to this call-to-action, the California State University (CSU) system implemented a new general education requirement into their undergraduate curriculum which requires all admitted students, starting in Fall 2021, to complete a 3-unit course in Ethnic Studies (Wrynn 2020). In addition, all 23 universities in the CSU system and their individual departments are required to incorporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) into their curriculum. Making these changes to the curriculum has several benefits not only for students, but also for communities and future employers. For example, Carleton noted that a shifting student body means the expectations students have of their educational experiences are shifting as well, where meaningful curriculums that expose students to a broader range of perspectives may better prepare students to contribute to their communities and ultimately the workforce (Carleton 2021).

This is of particular importance to kinesiology undergraduate students who plan to transition into fields such health and wellness, medicine, physical education, or rehabilitation. As a health professional or physical educator, prospective students are expected to treat and work equitably with diverse populations (Sotto-Santiago et al. 2021; Davis 2010). Delaying DEI education until students are enrolled in a graduate program can put them at a disadvantage as they will be expected to learn DEI concepts while also learning training techniques within their clinical or classroom environment. Students that choose not to continue on to graduate school need DEI education to adequately work with students, athletes, patients, and clients after graduation. As such, it appears that earlier exposure is advantageous for these students, as they can build a foundation and embody DEI principles prior to them starting a career (Grove et al. 2021). Given the importance of kinesiology and kinesiology-related programs adequately preparing graduates to work with diverse populations in diverse work environments (Davis 2010; Grove et al. 2021; Marra et al. 2010; Chappell and Provident 2020; Wilson et al. 2014), the purpose of this report is twofold: (i) to provide a thorough description of the curriculum redesign process for an undergraduate kinesiology and health promotion (KHP) program, and (ii) to use our experience to provide more general recommendations to other departments and universities undergoing curricular redesign. Below, we share how our modified curriculum provides technical competencies as well as cultural proficiencies as it relates to DEI, which aims to better prepare graduates seeking professional careers across various fields.

1.1. Review of Literature

Morgan and Houghton write, “an inclusive curriculum redesign recognizes that students have multiple identities that are shaped by their previous experiences and that a diverse range of personal circumstances influence how they study” (Morgan and Houghton 2011, p. 8). While DEI is not a new concept in higher education, it is now being more widely adopted (Hilton et al. 2021). However, it has been suggested that it must go beyond just a course topic and should be embodied by all faculty and staff as an integral part of the institution’s culture (Barnett 2020). When DEI is embodied as part of the culture, it can improve educational outcomes (Barnett 2020). The concepts of DEI have been defined in education as (Nivet et al. 2016):

• Diversity: Creating an optimal learning environment for everyone regardless of differing ideas, cultures, opinions, and experiences. This includes, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, age, marital status, abilities, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and expression, and socioeconomic status.
• Equity: Providing the opportunity for everyone to attain their full potential.
• Inclusion: Creating a climate that fosters respect, a sense of belonging, and value for all within the community.

Based on planned behavior theory, the attitudes of individuals are often influenced by perceptions that people have toward a targeted population (Ajzen 1991). These behavioral beliefs produce a favorable or unfavorable attitude, which is linked to the behavior. In other words, an individual’s beliefs and attitudes may shape behaviors against specific populations, possibly creating significant barriers to equality and inclusion.

Kinesiology students interested in fields such as pre-healthcare often have been trained in biological science with little emphasis placed on standardized training on cultural competency, structural inequities, and the need for multicultural training (Chappell and Provident 2020). Utilizing culturally responsive teaching strategies across the curriculum may now allow these students to see how they can employ principles that respect and value diversity and equity as well (Block and Weatherford 2013; Curtis et al. 2019). In some educational programs, such as athletic training and physical therapy, DEI practices have traditionally focused on race and ethnicity. The attention to race and ethnicity is warranted given the racial disparity among certified professionals; approximately 31% of athletes and 40% of the US population identify as non-White while 10% of head athletic trainers and 23% of licensed physical therapists identify as non-White (Perrin 2000; Matthews et al. 2021). However, culturally inclusive health care has been recommended to provide more holistic, patient-centered care (Grove et al. 2021). For example, Wilson and colleagues suggest that cultural competency in health professional education should also include sexual and gender diversity to address potentially unfavorable attitudes toward queer individuals (Wilson et al. 2014). There is value in developing an understanding of DEI from a broader perspective of structural inequalities and intersecting identities (e.g., women, LBGTQ+, indigenous communities, persons with disabilities, low socioeconomic status). Furthermore, promoting DEI within a kinesiology and health-promotion curriculum may retain more individuals from diverse backgrounds within the field. Evidence suggests that a more inclusive curriculum is associated with student retention and engagement (Thomas 2002; Crosling et al. 2008). For these reasons, cultural competency, equality, and diversity concerns must be explored at the undergraduate and graduate levels to drive the kinesiology curriculum and future professionals forward to appropriately address all persons’ needs in our diverse society (James-Hassan 2016).

1.2. Polytechnic Experience

The curriculum redesign described in this report took part in the KHP department within the College of Science of the California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (CPP). CPP is one of the 23 universities within the CSU system. CPP is currently one of three polytechnics in the CSU and one of 12 such institutions nationwide. The polytechnic approach is “learn by doing,” which uniquely provides students with hands on experience and vocational practice across all educational areas (Alva and Shen 2019). CPP has adopted an inclusive polytechnic educational model built on the following elements: application of knowledge; critical thinking and problem solving; creativity, discovery and innovation; diverse and multi-disciplinary perspectives; integration of technology; collaborative learning; community and global engagement; and professional and career readiness (Alva and Shen 2019).

The KHP department offers two undergraduate degrees in pedagogy and general kinesiology. Up until the 2021–2022 academic year, the general kinesiology degree option offered emphases in exercise science, health promotion, and sociocultural studies. Department graduates typically go on to professional careers in primary and secondary education, physical therapy, occupational therapy, adapted physical education, physician assistance, nursing, chiropractic medicine, strength and conditioning, personal training, community sport and recreation programs, athletic administration, coaching, and athletic training. The curriculum was designed to support success within these fields, but it has not been updated in several years to reflect the institution’s core values in a comprehensive matter. The curriculum was last revised from 2014 through 2016 during the university-wide conversion from the quarter-system to semesters. This conversion process allowed the faculty to re-evaluate and reflect on the curriculum, but changes were driven by university mandated deadlines, where submitting course proposals in a timely manner was prioritized over thoughtful integration of “best practices” learned through professional development workshops. The semester conversion allowed for a more expedited process for approval and implementation of new courses, reducing the process from two years to one academic year. However, the semester conversion also resulted in confusion for students that were caught between the different curriculums. There were also concerns raised that students were not properly consulted during the expedited curriculum revision process. After the adoption of the new semester curriculum, the KHP department fell out of compliance with the revised Executive Order 1071, a California State University policy that was originated in 2017 and approved in 2021 by the chancellor’s office, which mandates how many units must come from a student’s major. It became evident to the faculty that the curriculum could use further evaluation.

2. Curriculum Development (Materials and Methods)

2.1. Strategic Planning

Strategic planning is a common and important process that academic institutions go through in hopes of clarifying the direction of their departments, colleges, and universities. Based on the inclusive polytechnic educational model, the university established a 2017–2025 strategic plan. This plan identified university values as academic excellence, experiential learning, inclusivity, student learning and success, community engagement, and social and environmental responsibility (Coley 2022). As a result, the College of Science at CPP established their 2025 strategic plan. The mission of the college is to educate, mentor, and inspire students through scientific inquiry and hands-on learning, with core values centered on curiosity, integrity, collaboration, inclusivity, and innovation (Baski 2019).

Given that inclusivity is a core value both at the college- and university-level, the KHP department underwent its own strategic planning process to better align the department with the values of the college and institution. A third-party consulting agency (K2OH) facilitated the process that resulted in a comprehensive strategic plan that included a strategic initiative, vision, core values, and goals for the department for the next five years (Chase 2020). This plan provided the main framework for the curriculum redesign process. More specifically, the new document served as the overarching framework that guided the department’s discussions on program learning outcomes, continued course assessment, experiential learning opportunities, and eliminating inequity gaps in the curriculum (e.g., engaging in anti-racist pedagogy across all courses). Although based on feedback from all departmental stakeholders, including students, the development of the departmental strategic planning team included all tenure-line faculty (n = 11) and two full-time adjunct faculty. The process took five months during the 2019–2020 academic year and included several stages outlined below (Chase 2020):

• Evaluate the “current situation.” Evaluation was conducted through focus groups and one-to-one interviews with students and with faculty/staff. Each focus group and interviewee were asked the same questions to understand what key indicators represent future success of the department, behaviors that are and are not working, and what support the department needs most.
• Define “cornerstone behaviors” that relate to the college’s core values. This phase involved identifying ways in which the faculty, students, staff, and institutional peers are connected to and can demonstrate the core values.
• Determine important goals and defining departmental success. During this phase, the strategic planning team identified and analyzed the themes from stage 1, identified the KHP strategic objective, established goals and strategies to support the strategic objective, and developed Year 1 priorities.
• Provide opportunity for stakeholder input.

Through this process we established our strategic objective to investigate ways to advance the art and science of health and human movement (Chase 2020). To support our institution’s core value of inclusivity, one of our cornerstone behaviors is to foster diversity appreciation and equity for all individuals and maintain an adaptable curriculum (Chase 2020). Maintaining an adaptable curriculum is a central component of the department’s pledge to inclusivity due to the department’s all-encompassing approach to kinesiology. Department faculty have a background in pedagogy, socio-cultural perspectives, health promotion, and exercise science. It was important that the modified KHP curriculum was student-centered but also reflected the expertise of diverse faculty and industry needs. For these reasons, the strategic planning team set undergraduate curriculum revisions as a Year 1 objective.

2.2. Curriculum Planning Support

To support efforts to revise the curriculum, many of the KHP faculty attended university-sponsored learning opportunities on “best practices” of course development and secured a “Faculty-Led Curricular -Redesign Grant” for Student Achievement in the CSU. Professional development courses were supported by funding provided by the Chancellors Office in an effort to better equip instructors to teach remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several courses were offered through the Association of College and University Educators, Quality Matters, and the University’s Center for the Advancement for Faculty Excellence. These courses were focused on remote course design, learning management systems, best practices in course design, and student-centered course design. The courses all addressed equity in relation to best teaching practices. This included improving objectives to be student-centered by using more equitable and inclusive language and appropriate to the level of the course or the program. Several KHP faculty took advantage of these opportunities and completed multiple professional development courses.

The acquired grant was available to all degree programs within six CSU schools to support curriculum review and reform activities. To be considered for funding for this competitive grant, interested programs needed to apply. The KHP department was one of 15 programs to receive funding to support curriculum revision efforts over three cohorts. All programs that received funding took part in a faculty learning community with periodic meetings to exchange ideas and discuss progress. At the end of the grant period, all grantees presented accomplishments at the 2021 CSU Redesigning Our Majors Symposium.

2.3. Curriculum Redesign Retreat

Once departmental priorities were identified through strategic planning, funding was acquired, and professional development was completed, members of the KHP faculty took part in a five-day retreat (30 h) to redesign the undergraduate curriculum and implement the aforementioned best practices. The KHP faculty who volunteered their time included five tenure-track assistant-level and two tenured professor-level faculty, which represented 63% of the tenure-line faculty. The specialty areas of faculty that attended the retreat included pedagogy, adapted physical activity, sociocultural aspects of sport and exercise, exercise science, and health and wellness development through sport and exercise. Over the course of the retreat, the faculty re-evaluated and modified the program and student learning outcomes, revised the major core, renamed and revised the three emphases for the General Option, renamed and revised the Pedagogical Kinesiology Option, revised and approved several expanded course outlines, and discussed scaffolding and the sequencing of courses. The department’s strategic plan and field-specific accreditation requirements (e.g., Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP)) were the guiding documents for the curriculum changes, while our cornerstone behavior to foster diversity appreciation and equity for all individuals and maintain an adaptable curriculum was one of our key guiding principles.

3. Results

3.1. Curriculum Redesign

After faculty discussion, the KHP department decided to maintain the current undergraduate program structure while renaming the Pedagogical Kinesiology Option to Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) and two of the three emphases in the General Option. (Health Promotion was renamed to Public Health, and Sociocultural was renamed to Sport and Social Justice; see Figure 1.) Exercise science remained an emphasis within the General Option instead of its own option due to enrollment rates and faculty support. As the department grows and more faculty are hired, the possibility of creating a standalone exercise-science option will be re-evaluated.

In total, faculty revised all program and student learning outcomes, created 10 new courses, revised 24 courses, revised 12 courses within our major core, and revised four general education courses. This resulted in a total of 50 total new and revised course proposals. A notable revision to the program learning outcomes included revising our culminating outcome (Program Learning Outcome #5) from “Through experiential learning experiences, graduates will take an active role to address challenges facing the public within the context of kinesiology” to “Graduates will evaluate ethical dilemmas and take an active role to address challenges facing the public within the context of kinesiology and health promotion.” By adding the ethical considerations within the outcome, we now set the expectation that our graduates will consider DEI principles, which is supported by and evaluated through our revised curriculum.

3.1.1. Core Curriculum Revisions

Revisions to our core, which affect all KHP students, were based on student demands expressed during the strategic planning process and our core value on inclusivity. We replaced the physics requirement with nutrition because nutrition is more applicable for the PETE, Public Health, and Sport and Social Justice students. Exercise science students still have availability within their required credits to take physics as an elective to fulfill graduate pre-requisite requirements. In an effort to promote inclusivity of content, we added two new courses to the major core: Foundations of Adapted Physical Activity and Philosophical and Ethical Issues. Additionally, we added the following course learning outcome (CLO) to our Introduction to Kinesiology and Health Promotion course: explain how issues related to diversity are relevant within the field of kinesiology and health promotion (e.g., disability, race, religion, gender, sexuality, social class, and/or age). Previously, Contemporary Issues in Kinesiology and Health Promotion was the lone course in the core curriculum that could address DEI issues. Revising the CLOs in Introduction to Kinesiology and Health Promotion provides an introduction of how intersecting identities play a role within the field within a foundational and introductory course within the major. Both Foundations of Adapted Physical Activity and Philosophical and Ethical Issues explicitly engage with DEI issues through the following student learning outcomes (SLOs): SLO 1: Students will apply fundamental concepts, theories, methods, and research within the field of kinesiology and health promotion; SLO 2a: Students will use oral skills to communicate persuasively and coherently; SLO 2b: Students will use written skills to communicate persuasively and coherently; SLO 4a: Students will demonstrate critical thinking within the diverse sub-disciplines of kinesiology and health promotion; SLO 4b: Students will create solutions to advance the art and science of human movement; SLO 5a: Students will defend ethical positions within health and human movement. Adding the Foundations of Adapted Physical Activity course to our core curriculum also exposes our students to education on individuals with disabilities, an important addition given that a large portion of our students inevitably go on to work with this population in their careers.

Adding the two additional courses to the core offers our students more opportunities to learn and discuss DEI within the context of kinesiology. In addition, there are several courses within the core that align with the department’s Program Learning Outcome #5 related to ethical considerations, such as Movement Education for Diverse Populations and Philosophical and Ethical Issues. Not all of the courses directly address DEI issues, but they challenge students to consider ethical factors related to kinesiology and health promotion. For example, the first CLO for Foundations of Adapted Physical Activity states that on successful completion of the course, students will be able to explain the philosophical, historical, legal, and ethical foundations of adapted physical activity, adapted physical education, and adaptive sport.

3.1.2. Options and Emphases Revisions

Given that a purpose of this report is to provide more general recommendations to other departments and universities undergoing curricular redesign (see General Recommendations section below), our intention is to keep discussion of our non-core curriculum revisions brief. Regarding the newly renamed PETE Option, while we were unable to convert the Option into a blended program that would offer students an adapted physical education credential due to not having enough units available, we were able to simplify the process for students by converting the 1–2 unit courses into 3–4 unit courses (i.e., less courses needed but same amount of contact hours). Notably, we created a more inclusive program by increasing the adapted physical education content for these students. With regard to the General Option, the decision to stay with the three emphases was a consensus departmental decision. The benefit of this is that it offers a broad general option core of classes which will help provide students with a more well-rounded education. By acknowledging that “an inclusive curriculum redesign recognizes that students have multiple identities” (Morgan and Houghton 2011, p. 8), this approach also provides some flexibility within individual student’s schedules to explore the topics that they are interested in, which also allows for some cross-over of courses between emphases.

Courses selected to be in the general option core were determined based on field-specific requirements (e.g., CAAHEP) and desired industry skills. These courses include Health Psychology, Internship, Principles of Management, and Research Methods in Health and Human Movement. For example, based on our major core curriculum and the general option core, the general pre-requisite courses for some rehabilitation and medical programs are satisfied, which means that any of our students that follow this track could go on to a graduate program. Conceivably a public health or sport and social justice student, who is required to take more courses related to DEI, may wish to continue with a degree in rehabilitation, but most of the students who wish to continue their education to pursue rehabilitation will enroll in our exercise-science emphasis.

Each of the three emphases in the General Option contain a list of required and optional courses. Notably, there is at least one course that clearly addresses DEI themes that is required for students in each of the three emphases. In the Sport and Social Justice emphasis, students are required to enroll in both Sport, Media, and Social Justice and Sport, US Culture, and Social Justice courses. These courses will utilize a social-justice framework to examine the intersection between sport, culture, US society, and media. In particular, theoretical and methodological insights from sociology, history, ethnic and women’s studies, media studies, queer studies, anthropology, and kinesiology will be used to examine the role of sport in US culture and to explore how sport and media reproduce and challenge dominant Western socio-cultural perspectives. In the Public Health emphasis, students are required to enroll in the Health Disparities and Social Justice course. This course also adds to our DEI efforts by exploring concepts of health equity and determinants of health disparities for diverse groups in US society (CLO #1 and #3). In the Exercise Science emphasis, students are required to enroll in the Exercise Prescription and Fitness Testing for Diverse Populations course. This course is a separate lecture meant to complement the general exercise prescription and fitness testing course. In taking a secondary class that explicitly examines diverse populations, students will get more exposure on what working with an array of populations may look like. This goes beyond special populations such as older adults, pregnant individuals, and children, but also includes those with physical and intellectual disabilities. This course extends the concepts introduced in Foundations of Adapted Physical Activity to teaching students how to determine safe and effective exercise programs to achieve desired outcomes and goals for diverse populations (CLO #2); use the Frequency, Intensity, Time, and Type (FITT) principle to modify an exercise program for diverse populations (CLO #3); prescribe and implement exercise programs for diverse populations (CLO #4); and conduct a pretest clinical evaluation and health-related fitness test by following the exercise-test sequence for diverse populations (CLO #5). These revisions directly support our value of inclusivity and presented an opportunity for intentional scaffolding of knowledge, while simultaneously addressing student feedback retrieved through the strategic planning process.

4. Discussion

We provided a detailed report of our curriculum redesign process and the newly adapted curriculum. We believe that our new curriculum marries technical competencies as well as cultural proficiencies related to DEI. Although this process was specific to the KHP department at CPP, our experience and results can provide insight to other undergraduate kinesiology programs and programs undergoing/planning a curricular redesign.

4.1. Educational Relevance

Curriculum should be revised on a routine basis to ensure that the course offerings meet the current industry needs and match the interests of current students. Embedding DEI within curriculum development is important to provide a holistic perspective on how to apply technical concepts to various populations. This is particularly salient at the undergraduate level as not all students go on to pursue a graduate degree and may otherwise miss out on obtaining a foundational understanding of diversity and inclusion considerations. This importance was recognized by the CSU system which has led to the system-wide mandate to require an ethnic studies course within the general education core. Requiring an ethnic studies course is a step in the direction of DEI, but it primarily addresses the racial and ethnic component of DEI. In our modified curriculum, we consider racial and ethnic differences as well as other identities that impact DEI (e.g., gender, sexuality, religion, nationality, ability). This promotes more cultural competence in kinesiology graduates such as athletic trainers who will likely work with diverse populations including physically and intellectually disabled (Valier et al. 2021), queer (Nye et al. 2019), and non-US native athletes (Stanton et al. 2022). These diversity themes are addressed in several courses in the department, making DEI a part of the educational identity of the department, faculty, and students. In addition, our modified curriculum covers ability-level. Previously, our pedagogy students primarily received training in working with people of different levels of ability. Revising the curriculum now provides our exercise science students with more training in working with active persons with physical disability. By offering a more DEI-centered curriculum early within their professional care, kinesiology students, regardless of specialization, will not need to adapt to these principles once they are enrolled in a graduate program or start practicing in the field.

4.2. Limitations

The curriculum presented in this report received full approval by the university during the Spring 2022 semester, and now appears in the university catalog for the 2022–2023 academic year. For this reason, we are unable to provide data on the efficacy of the implementation of the newly designed curriculum or lessons learned through any unintended consequences of the curriculum changes. Furthermore, we recognize that the mindful changes will not necessarily translate into effective implementation within the classroom. It is our intent to gather qualitative and quantitative data regarding student success and acceptance at the completion of the 2022–2023 academic year and beyond. The collection of these data will be an intentional piece of our departmental end-of-year discussion and will include exit surveys for students, course-level assessment by the department’s assessment committee, and better longitudinal tracking of where our alumni go. We are also scheduled to go through a program review during the 2022–2023 academic year, which may further help us determine the effectiveness of the curriculum redesign.

4.3. Successes

There are several successes to cite from our curriculum redesign process. Most notably, we prioritized (i) integrating our newly adapted strategic plan in our curricular changes, (ii) meeting the interests of our students and faculty, as expressed during our strategic planning, and (iii) better preparing students for their professional career. While addressing all of these areas, we also managed to embed DEI themes throughout the entire curriculum and not exclusively in one or two standalone courses. We renamed an option and two emphases to make them more publicly acceptable, which may improve our visibility and grow our program. Redesigning our curriculum in a systematic manner allowed us to scaffold and sequence the courses so that they build upon one another. For example, Exercise Prescription and Fitness Testing (+activity) is now a pre-requisite for Exercise Prescription and Fitness Testing for Diverse Populations. The curriculum redesign was a collaborative effort from multiple faculty within the KHP department across several different specialties. This interdisciplinary faculty involvement enabled us to undertake the redesign process without losing sight of the broader perspective and bring together various components of the curriculum into meaningful connections. Lastly, our curriculum better reflects the technical and cultural competency demands in the field.

4.4. General Recommendations

While the curricular redesign described in this report is specific to one university, this section is intended to provide additional information that is more transferable to other institutions by describing more of a generalized “how-to” that was learned throughout the experience. We hope that the 10 recommendations below can be applied to other programs to support strengthening DEI in their curricula. As such, for educators interested in revising their curriculum and/or embedding DEI themes specifically, we have the following suggestions:

• First and foremost, understand why a change is necessary. Are there any data to support the necessity of a curriculum redesign? Is there full faculty interest in a curriculum redesign, or is it only supported by some?
• When possible, start the curriculum redesign process with a strategic plan. The strategic plan offers a guide to align the program’s mission and value with the curriculum.
• Creating a thorough and impactful curriculum is a process. We recommend that faculty dedicate a substantial amount of time to make meaningful and strategic change and recognize that continual reassessment will be needed. This may include revising Program Learning Outcomes and individual course SLOs, particularly if the student body and faculty are growing in numbers.
• Consider the governance structure of your program. Who can be an effective facilitator (e.g., allow for open communication, keep the group focused on the task, resolve conflict, etc.)? Is it the department chair? Does your program have a curriculum committee? The size of a program’s faculty, and history of the program, may influence decisions; however, we highly encourage programs to support junior faculty as active contributors to curricular change and emphasize that there is not a hierarchical decision structure.
• Recognize that some faculty may feel ‘ownership’ over a particular course, especially if they have taught it for several years. As such, they may be reluctant to revise it or have other faculty suggest modifications, such as embedding DEI themes in a course that has historically not included them. This is where effective facilitation is key. The focus should stay on the overall goal of the redesign (i.e., the reason for change) and keeping it student-centered as much as possible rather than discussing faculty teaching approaches. Nevertheless, each participant should be heard from, including faculty members that are hesitant of change.
• Involve lecturers and students in the curricular revision process as well. Our program held focus groups with students that informed our strategic plan which served as the framework for our curricular redesign. Lecturers were also invited to take part in the development of the strategic plan.
• Do not add a standalone class for the sake of DEI. Embed these principles throughout the curriculum across multiple, if possible, all courses. For example, programs may wish to include more inclusive language within the course titles, descriptions, and/or learning outcomes. Although we did not share this information for all 50 of our revised courses, the faculty facilitating the curriculum redesign were very mindful to include inclusive language to all aspects of the expanded course outlines.
• If the redesign takes place during a specific time period, such as a five-day retreat that our program did, we recommend making it a working retreat to maximize productivity. Our program adopted the university’s “learn by doing” approach for our redesign. Participant engagement was increased by varying the structure of the meetings, such as providing opportunities to work in smaller groups, both with colleagues in the same research area and with colleagues from different areas of expertise.
• Be mindful that revising the scaffolding and/or sequencing of courses may consequently alter the previous pre- and co-requisites of a course. As such, your program may be required to consult with other departments that offer courses that must be taken by your students before formally submitting the revised course proposal(s) for consideration.
• If programs wish to embed DEI into their curriculum but a full curriculum redesign is not an option, we recommend thoughtfully re-evaluating the objectives of each course and being intentional about ongoing assessment. This may involve needing to connect with your university’s academic programs committee (or equivalent), which can also provide relevant resources related to program changes.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, DEI training of students should begin with their undergraduate education, particularly in fields such as kinesiology where graduates often go on to work with diverse populations. However, exposure to DEI concepts should not be limited to one or two courses; rather, it should be thoughtfully embedded across several courses within the curriculum. A strategic plan that integrates the department-, college-, and university-level core values should guide curriculum changes. We hope that detailing our experience with a curriculum redesign and providing recommendations is helpful for other programs that are considering redeveloping their curricula or are in the process of doing so.