The idea of “voice” came up frequently when participants discussed what equity looks like to them. Most often this involved centering student voice and valuing student perspectives across important conversations and decisions in the school - a.k.a. giving students power and ownership - was identified as a key part of equity. This is the idea of “no decision about us without us.” 
‍
For participants, equity in practice would look like students having a seat at the table and a say in the decisions that mattered to them or affected their experience. At the very least, it should include students being allowed to develop their own views and perspectives on the content in class. Rather than recipients of school, students were imagined as co-creators of learning experiences and environments. 
‍
Furthermore, participants talked about how it’s important to have a diversity of student voices represented, everyone has a seat at the table, not just always going to the young people who are doing well, getting good grades, or have the best relationships with teachers. In addition, thinking about diversity in voices in terms of intersectionality, not just race, gender, class, age, ethnicity, language, but making sure different kinds of intersectional identities are heard and included and valued.

One of the ways diversity was talked about was in terms of representation. This was partly simply making sure different identities and perspectives were included in the curriculum - for instance, including female authors in books read, ensuring different kinds of families are included in stories, different identities of scientists in history and science, or ensuring everyone has access to an ethnic studies course. 

But it also means ensuring that teachers and other adults at the school are diverse. For instance, ensuring all students interact with teachers of different races and genders - black male teachers were identified as particularly important but difficult to find. And, that different student identities were represented in higher level courses and that all students had the opportunity to interact and work with other young people of diverse identities. 
‍
At times, “diversity” seems to get conflated with “race” in discussions. Participants talked about how there needs to be a value on multiple different kinds of diversity - cultural, racial, socioeconomic, gender, physical ability - and how it’s important to see how these different identities can intersect at times.

A part of this is seeing and accepting people as unique and whole people beyond any label to ensure everyone feels they can belong, regardless of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, gender, language, ability differences, or otherwise. As one participant mentioned, this means that "No one leaves feeling ‘no one even saw me; no one even knew I was there."

Another part of valuing diversity is ensuring students and educators learn about power, inequality, and inequity. Research has found that students of color who learn the world is fair can end up internalizing and blaming themselves for issues caused by systemic racism and unfair policies.

As 100 Days participants discussed equity meant that pedagogy was humanistic. For participants, this meant that:

1. All people, students, educators, families, and others, are seen and valued in their full humanity, regardless of performance;

2. Experiences are individualized or tailored to each person’s strengths, interests, needs, and areas of growth;

3. Learning is accessible to all, regardless of learning difference or need;

4. There’s an element of ownership and choice on the part of students;

5. and, Outcomes or “success” is measured beyond a singular standardized measure like test scores.

Fundamentally, humanistic pedagogy is an approach to education that “helps bring us alive.”