Every group has some kind of rules that govern group behaviour, but these rules are usually implicit (unstated) and invisible, especially to those outside the group.

Group agreements make those rules explicit and visible by articulating, usually in writing, how a group of people will engage with one another in a particular context.

A group of people engaged in a public protest, for example, know that it is acceptable to shout, sing, wave large signs and disrupt people’s daily activities in a way that would be unacceptable in many other contexts. Those rules govern all the people engaged in the group, but they are rarely stated and those new to the group learn by observing and mimicking what other group members do.

The same is true in a classroom. All students bring with them the hidden rules they have learned in other educational contexts; the instructor also brings their own expectations. Because those rules are usually not discussed, a class of 20 students and one instructor might include 21 different understandings of what the rules for classroom behaviour are or should be.

The value of the group agreement, then, is that it allows students to share their own expectations and preferences, while also learning that not everyone shares their perspective. Supported and guided by the instructor, students work together through conversation and consensus-building to figure out how best to meet or revise these various expectations. The instructor plays a key role in this conversation, particularly in protecting the interests of vulnerable students: Group agreements in classrooms can never be “majority rules” decisions if even one student will be hurt or negatively impacted by the group’s decision.

“When thinking about the classroom experience, one of the fault lines seems to arise when two people believe they are operating from a similar understanding … only to have experience show them that that was not the case.”
— Nura Ali and Annie Canto, The Anti-Racist Classroom, 2019

The first draft of a group agreement typically focuses on the strongest points of consensus among the group. Any points that generate disagreement or high levels of uncertainty indicate a need for more thought or conversation which can be picked up in later class meetings. In this way, you can keep revisiting your group agreement throughout the course as your class community evolves.

The most important feature of a group agreement is that it originates from and reflects the input of the group as a whole. A set of rules that is created by one member of the group (i.e., the instructor) is not a group agreement: it is a list of class rules.

Group agreements start from a conversation about how members of a particular group want to be and work together. They are powerful because they dedicate class time to thinking through participant values and priorities as a group of learners. The process is just as important as the written document that follows.

Topics for group agreements are potentially limitless and will vary according to each group, but some common ones among ECU faculty include:

• Group values: what kinds of values will guide the group in the classroom, which may also relate to the wider university community?
• Class participation: in what ways can people show up and be present for the group? And when is there flexibility for this and when is there not?
• Respect for self and others: in what ways can people show respect for themselves and for each other’s different lived experiences?
• Technology use in the class: when is okay to be on phones or screens? When is it not?
• Priorities and practices for critiques or other peer feedback activities: how can people show care for the person whose work is being discussed? What kinds of feedback are helpful and/or what kinds should be avoided in this group?
• Processes for managing conflict in the group: how can people pursue a resolution to a conflict with a group member? What happens when people violate the agreement in some way?
• Processes for responding to hurtful content or conduct that might come up in course materials or group discussions? What systems can the group create for dealing with these kinds of issues depending on their level of harm?

After the conversation, the group needs to decide how to represent the conversation in writing:

• What are the main or most important priorities that have emerged through the conversation?
• Who will write the initial draft and how will others give feedback on or edit it?
• How will the group manage differences of opinion or disagreements about what to include at this stage?
• Where will this text live and when or how will it become “final”? (if it does, see below)

Many instructors find using a collaborative technology such as Miro, Jamboard or Google docs at this stage incredibly useful, as it allows students to compose together and see the text develop and change.

Enacting, revisiting and revising group agreements unfolds over a whole term, not a single class: While creating an initial group agreement is incredibly beneficial for building group cohesion, it is not a “one and done” exercise. The instructors who have had the most success with group agreements build regular reviews and continued discussions about the agreement throughout the term.

Particularly valuable times for revisiting the agreement are:

• Before peer feedback activities (critiques and peer review)
• Any time there has been increased tension or conflict in the class
• Prior to introducing a difficult topic or issue
• If you feel that class participation or engagement is flagging
• Or any time you feel the class could benefit from a little more connection.

Here is a list of books on the anti-racist classroom developed by Nura Ali and Annie Canto as part of their research into anti-racist pedagogical practices and compiled by librarian Ana Diab.