Binder Activities

Equity decisions can become confusing when leaders begin with the solution—more time? a different format? an exception? This guide starts somewhere else. It helps you determine what must remain fair and consistent, where access is breaking down, and what adjustment would actually address that gap.

Use it when a rule, activity, resource, deadline, or participation structure seems equally available—but not equally usable.

1. Step 1Clarify What Must Stay

   What is the actual purpose, standard, deadline, safety requirement, or outcome? Be specific.

   Ask:

   • •What truly needs to be the same?
   What must stay consistent:

2. Step 2Locate the Access Gap

   Where is the current design becoming difficult to use? Consider pace, communication, timing, technology, environment, resources, trust, or another condition.

   Ask:

   • •What is preventing a fair opportunity to meet the expectation?
   Where the access gap is:

3. Step 3Decide What Can Change

   Separate the requirement from the method.

   Ask:

   • •What part of the current design is flexible because it is not essential to the outcome?
   What can change:

4. Step 4Match Support to the Gap

   Choose an adjustment that actually addresses the issue. Avoid adding support simply because it sounds inclusive.

   Ask:

   • •Does this change solve the access problem I identified?
   The support that fits the gap:

5. Step 5Make the Alternative Count

   Check whether the adjusted method gives the person a legitimate opportunity to participate and influence the result. This is where the framework becomes specifically about equity.

   Ask:

   • •Will this contribution be treated as equally credible and meaningful?
   How I’ll make sure it carries equal weight:

6. Step 6Review the Outcome

   After the change, look at what happened.

   Ask:

   • •Did access improve?
   • •Was the shared standard maintained?
   • •Did the alternative carry equal weight?
   • •Is another adjustment needed?
   How I’ll know whether it worked:

Use it when you find yourself asking, “Would changing this be unfair?” The guide helps you replace that question with: “What needs to remain consistent—and what can change so the expectation is genuinely accessible?”

Your responses save automatically in this browser.

Think about a situation where giving everyone the same rule, format, time, or opportunity initially felt fairest.

1. Step 1Notice

   Ask:

   • •What was being offered or required?
   • •What made treating everyone the same feel fair or important to you?
   • •What concern comes up when you imagine adjusting the approach for someone?

   For example:

   • •“Other people will think it is unfair.”
   • •“Everyone should follow the same rule.”
   • •“If I change it once, I’ll have to change it for everyone.”
   • •“Different support means lowering the expectation.”
   What I noticed:

2. Step 2Name

   Ask:

   • •What belief about fairness is underneath that reaction?
   • •Are you treating consistency of method as the same thing as consistency of expectation?
   • •What do you believe everyone should receive equally?
   The belief about fairness underneath:

3. Step 3Check

   Ask:

   • •What is the actual purpose or standard?
   • •Is the current method essential to meeting it?
   • •Could the same rule or format create a predictable access gap for someone?
   • •Would an adjustment change the expectation—or only the conditions for meeting it?
   • •Am I protecting fairness, or am I protecting familiarity?
   What I find when I check:

4. Step 4Choose

   Ask:

   • •What could remain consistent?
   • •What could reasonably change?
   • •What support would address the access gap without removing responsibility or lowering the purpose?
   • •How will you ensure that the adjusted form of participation is treated as equally legitimate?
   What I would keep and what I would adjust:

Your responses save automatically in this browser.

Bring one de-identified requirement, activity, deadline, participation structure, or access challenge you want to examine. You do not need to share another person’s private information or explain why someone needed support.

During class, you can test whether the proposed adjustment addresses the actual barrier, maintains the purpose, protects dignity, and creates a genuinely fair opportunity to participate.

Before you share: remove names and identifying details, leave out private or confidential information, focus on the situation rather than a person as the problem, and share only what you are comfortable and authorized to discuss.

1. The shared expectation:

   The access gap I identified:

   What I think could change:

   What should remain consistent:

   How I would make sure the alternative carries meaningful weight:

Your responses save automatically in this browser.