American University · Pre-Intervention Portfolio

Positionality, Mapped.

Social Identity Map & 6P Positionality Diagram

Daniel Umana

American University · Ed.D. Leadership & Policy · EDU 703

Critical AI literacy is becoming the new digital divide. This is where I stand inside that problem.

Explore the maps

Section 01 · Reflexivity Tool

Social Identity Map

After Jacobson & Mustafa (2019). Me at the center, my eight social identities around me. Each cluster reads in three tiers — the identity, its social positioning at AU, and the emotions tied to it. Tap any identity for the full reflection.

  • Tier 1 — Identity. Social identities that shape how I navigate American University.
  • Tier 2 — Social positioning. How that identity shapes my experience at AU (position, privilege, asset, deficit, access).
  • Tier 3 — Emotions & feelings. What I feel tied to that identity while navigating AU.
Daniel Umana

Section 02 · 6P Analysis

Positionality Diagram

The policy-to-practice system around a potential racist problem of practice at Montgomery College. Phase 1 (Macro) is the cycle of Policy → Protocols → Processing. Phase 2 (Micro) is the triangle of Power People → Practices → Positionality. Tap any node for its full analysis.

Phase 1 · Macro cycle Phase 2 · Micro triangle Stakeholders
Educational Context of Inquiry / Problem of PracticeEducational Context of Inquiry

Section 03

The Through-Line

Three statements that connect the two maps — from the system to the self.

01

The spine: the individual-burden assumption

Policy 70001 names the equity risk out loud, then hands each student the job of "taking reasonable steps to understand" AI on their own. It treats equitable access as already provided. For a first-gen student of color with no prior exposure, that level playing field is a fiction.

02

Permission is not preparation

Montgomery College leans cautious; American University's guidance is permissive and even refuses AI-detection tools. They look like opposites. But both offload the work of becoming literate and securing access onto the individual. Whether a college bans AI or blesses it, the same machine runs underneath.

03

The positionality knife

I live on both sides of that machine. At MC I administer the individual-burden assumption; at AU I am subject to it. Technology lifted me through an early access most of my peers lacked, so I am prone to selling AI literacy as the fix — the very “technical fix” Crooks warns cannot solve structural problems. The antiracist move is targeted universalism: make critical AI literacy required and structural, not opt-in.

“Permission is not preparation.”

Section 04

Theory & Sources

Frameworks

  • Social Identity Map

    Jacobson, D., & Mustafa, N. (2019). Social identity map: A reflexivity tool for practicing explicit positionality in critical qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18.

  • 6P Analysis Framework

    Course framework for mapping Policy, Protocols, Processing, Power People, Practices, and Positionality around a problem of practice.

Theory tags

systems thinkingtargeted universalismtechnological redliningwhite-supremacy culturehuman-centered AIstructural racism

Citations

  1. 1.Crooks, R. (2022). Toward people's community control of technology: Race, access, and education. Social Science Research Council.
  2. 2.Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
  3. 3.Menendian, S., & Watt, C. (2008). Systems thinking and race primer. Kirwan Institute, The Ohio State University.
  4. 4.Okun, T. (1999). Characteristics of white supremacy culture. dRworks.
  5. 5.UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research.
  6. 6.EdTrust. (2024). Navigating the promise and peril of AI for students of color.
  7. 7.WGU Labs. (2023). AI as the new digital divide for first-generation students.
  8. 8.Getting Smart. (2024). Artificial intelligence: The new digital divide.
  9. 9.Golding, J. M., et al. (2024). Generative AI and college students: Use and perceptions. Teaching of Psychology.
  10. 10.Onal, S. A., et al. (2025). Patterns of ChatGPT usage and perceived benefits on academic performance across disciplines. Education and Information Technologies.
  11. 11.Flaherty, C. (2025). The digital divide: Student generative AI access. Inside Higher Ed.
  12. 12.Montgomery College Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness. (2024). Fall 2024 enrollment highlights.