At CSU Channel Islands, we have long espoused servingness as an institutional value that extends beyond enrollment, demographics, labels, and statistics. It’s a celebration of our community, and as Gina Ann Garcia describes, intentional cultivation of institutional structures, practices, and outcomes that ensure Latine students (and, by extension, all students) thrive.
In celebration of HSI week, TLi has previously shared how learning design can function as a vehicle for servingness. We put this value into action through the everyday choices that we make about how classes are structured, how knowledge is valued, and how students experience belonging. At CSU Channel Islands, we are fortunate to have access to rich Institutional Research data dashboards with information about who we serve, and our sustained momentum in data, practice, and leadership has contributed to our repeated recognition with the Seal of Excelencia. In Teaching and Learning Innovations, learning design is where servingness comes alive and becomes a set of actions. With this post, we seek to apply Garcia’s conceptual framework to learning design, including some reflections on opportunities and concerns related to emerging technologies, like generative AI.
Servingness in Learning Design
Garcia, Núñez, and Sansone (2019) define servingness in three interrelated ways: structures, practices, and outcomes. When applied specifically to learning design, servingness means moving beyond content delivery to designing learning spaces and experiences as places of affirmation and possibility.
Structures become the policies and environments that frame learning: syllabi, grading methods, accessibility practices, and community agreements (sometimes referred to as classroom norms). More than administrative details, these are the first signals that tell students whether they belong in the course. In learning design, we might consider the following question:
- In what ways do my syllabi and course structures (e.g., grading; communication) welcome students to the class, affirm their belonging, communicate high expectations, and position students for success?
Practices are the day-to-day pedagogical moves, like culturally responsive teaching, affirming feedback, participatory activities, and reflective application assignments. This is the point where theory intersects with reality, where students see whether their knowledge and experiences are recognized or ignored. In learning design, we might consider the following:
- In what ways do the learning activities in my class tap into my students’ funds of knowledge, inviting them to draw connections between the learning objectives, the content, and their experiences or interests?
When applied to learning design, outcomes are what students take away beyond grades: persistence, validation, a sense of belonging, and the ability to see themselves as knowledge contributors. This is the ultimate test of servingness, not just whether students pass the class, but whether they leave empowered to succeed in the future. We might think about the following:
- In what ways does my course design foster persistence and affirm students’ sense of belonging so that they can envision themselves as scholars and leaders beyond the classroom?
Navigating New Challenges: Servingness in the Age of AI
The diffusion of generative AI and AI-powered tools in higher education continues to surface equity dilemmas, particularly as HSIs are committed to dismantling disparities in the education system. The same tools that can support multilingual access to readings, feedback, or instructions have also reinforced cultural biases. These same tools that can personalize learning and offer on-demand access to instructional aides can be used as a crutch for learning and replace peer interaction that supports community and belonging on campus. And, the same tools that can relieve some administrative burden from teaching also risk engendering a transactional experience between faculty and students. How do we reconcile such dilemmas?
In a recent post for ¿Qué Pasa, HSIs? Taber and Villareal (2025) advocated for educators to align AI implementation with servingness actions. They described promising ways that HSIs could enact linguistic servingness by leveraging AI translation features for navigating college inquiries, admissions, and communications with students and families. The authors also described ways that students could draw from AI-powered learning and accessibility tools to support “transitioning from structured high school environments to more autonomous college experiences” (Using AI for Navigating and Enriching the Student Experience, para. 2) and to empower students to remove barriers that may impede learning. These, plus their points about equitable access to AI-powered tools, echo some of the conversations that we have experienced in our Summer AI Residencies and in the wider CSU.
Drawing from the Servingness framework and the lens of learning design, we can consider additional questions as they pertain to generative AI (and, perhaps, other emerging technologies):
- How might we leverage AI to design syllabi or course structures that are clear, more accessible, or even multilingual? Note: Consider attending one of our upcoming UDOIT workshops or booking a consultation with our Specialist in Accessibility and Inclusive Design.
- How can we connect AI to cultural contexts and empower students to shape AI as part of our pedagogical practices?
- How can we thoughtfully leverage AI in ways that aren’t tied to a transaction linking learning activities to grade outcomes, but that allow for more relational teaching or creative expression?
Servingness isn’t about making learning easier; it’s about making it more relevant, more affirming, and more connected to the cultural wealth our students already possess. It’s about recognizing that when we design learning experiences that truly serve our Latine students, we create environments where all students thrive. We do this by listening, as Dr. Tadashi Dozono shared in his reflection on the work of the Equity Inquiry Project. We continue to explore these questions and how to listen more in the new academic year. We invite you to partner with us and share your thinking or examples as you enact servingness in your learning design practices.
References
California State University Channel Islands. (2025). Campus numbers. Institutional Research. https://www.csuci.edu/ir/campus-numbers/index.htm
California State University Channel Islands. (n.d.). Hispanic-serving institution guide. DEIA & Justice LibGuide. https://libguides.csuci.edu/deiaj/HSI
California State University Channel Islands. (n.d.). Provost’s message. Division of Academic Affairs. https://www.csuci.edu/daa/provost-message.htm
de la Torre, A., & Frazee, J. (2024). A call to action to address inequity in AI access. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/views/2024/04/04/call-action-address-inequity-ai-access-opinion
Dozono, T. & Gonzalez, L. (2023). President’s Teaching and Innovation Award: Dr. Tadashi Dozono. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/rockstar/presidents-teaching-and-innovation-award-dr-tadashi-dozono/
Excelencia in Education. (n.d.). Seal of Excelencia framework. https://www.edexcelencia.org/seal-excelencia/seal-excelencia-framework
Garcia, G.A. (n.d.). ¿Qué Pasa, HSIs? Blog. https://www.ginaanngarcia.com/blog
Garcia, G. A., Núñez, A.-M., & Sansone, V. A. (2019). Toward a Multidimensional Conceptual Framework for Understanding “Servingness” in Hispanic-Serving Institutions: A Synthesis of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 745-784. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654319864591
Gonzalez, L. (2024). TLi’s Summer AI Residency: Exploration, Learning, & Community. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/innovation/tlis-summer-ai-residency-exploration-learning-community/
Jordan, R. (2022). Re-thinking collaboration: Strategies for culturally responsive group work. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/faculty-development/re-thinking-collaboration-strategies-for-culturally-responsive-group-work/
Lomax, D. (2022). Culturally responsive teaching: Sweet connection and deeper learning through culture. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/uncategorized/culturally-responsive-teaching-sweet-connection-and-deeper-learning-through-culture%ef%bf%bc/
Lomax, D., Eberhardt-Alstot, M., & Gonzalez, L. (2023). “Servingness” through culturally sustaining learning design. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/teaching-learning/servingness-through-culturally-sustaining-learning-design/
Peñaranda, A. (2025). From outcomes to effective learning with Course Tuner. Teaching & Learning Innovations. https://tlinnovations.cikeys.com/innovation/from-outcomes-to-effective-learning-with-coursetuner/
Taber, T., & Villarreal, C. D. (2025). Aligning servingness goals with Artificial Intelligence (AI) possibilities. ¿Qué Pasa, HSIs?. https://www.ginaanngarcia.com/post/aligning-servingness-goals-with-ai-possibilities
