ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES … · tional change in higher education and...

Kellogg Forum on Higher Education forthe Public Good: Contributing to thePractice of DemocracyBy John Burkhardt, director and Tony Chambers, associate director,

Kellogg Forum on Higher Education

for the Public Good

The work of the Kellogg Forumon Higher Education for thePublic Good is guided by this keybelief: higher education has thepotential to be a defining institu-tion within societies, but only if itunderstands the importance of itsrole as an independent, creative,and activist force.

Founded in 2000 at theUniversity of Michigan, TheKellogg Forum on HigherEducation for the Public Good has worked to increase significantly awareness, under-standing, commitment, and action relative to the public service role of higher educationin the United States. Funded with initial support from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation,the Forum operates on the basis of a social marketing model for promoting transforma-tional change in higher education and society.

What We Believe

Our research, conducted using national opinion surveys and focus groups, suggests thegeneral public—including college graduates, parents of college students, and studentsthemselves—have little understanding of a role for higher education that goes beyond itseconomic contributions. The motivation to attend college has been cultivated as anindividual investment, one that will be generally repaid in increased lifetime earnings.Broader benefits to society are often described solely in material terms in the way ofjobs, technology transfer, and economic development. We—that is, we in higher educa-tion—have done much to cultivate this limited understanding of higher education’sbenefits and societal contributions.

This minimalist transactional view of the academy has protected and advanced collegesand universities in many ways, but it comes at the expense of a larger role in society’sbroader transformation. It also avoids confronting the challenging ideal of constructing apluralistic democracy that is equitable and just. Compared to the things we do that pro-

D I G E S T

D erI IV S TYCommunicating Diversity in Higher Education

INST ITUT IONAL LEADERSHIPAND COMMITMENT

1: Kellogg Forum on Higher Educationfor the Public Good: Contributing to the Practice of Democracy

3: Tribal Colleges and Universities:Guided by Tribal Values

6: Commitment to Diversity inInstitutional Mission Statements

8: Valuing Equity: Recognizing theRights of the LGBT Community

CURR ICU LAR T RANSFORMAT ION

10: Creating Border Crossings:Dickinson College

16: Prejudice Across America: A Nationwide Trek

MAK ING D IVERS I T Y NEWS

12: Media Watch

RESEARCH

14: The Accountability Side of Diversity18: Percent Plans: How Successful Are

They?21: Campus Life for Gay, Lesbian,

Bisexual, and Transgender People

RESOURCES

20: Multimedia and Books

STUDENT EXPER I ENCE

22: The E Pluribus Unum Project

eDIV sityr DIGESTINS IDE

A S S O C I A T I O N O F A M E R I C A N C O L L E G E S A N D U N I V E R S I T I E S Volume 7, No. 1, 2

continued on page 2

National Leadership Dialogue participants at the Ann Arbor National Summit

This could be your last print issue of Diversity Digest! See back page for details.

Volume 7, No. 1, 2 2I N S T I T U T I O N A L L E A D E R S H I P A N D C O M M I T M E N T

DIVERSITY DIGEST

Volume 7, Number 1,2

Published by the Association of AmericanColleges and Universities, 1818 R Street,NW, Washington, DC 20009; tel 202/387-3760; fax 202/265-9532. Diversity Digest ispublished with support from the FordFoundation and is available on the Internet atwww.diversityweb.org/Digest

Diversity Digest AAC&U Staff

CARYN MCT IGHE MUS I LExecu t i ve Ed i to r

HEATHER D . WATH INGTONEdi to r

ANN KAMMERERProduc t ion Ed i to r

AAC&U Editorial Advisors

CAROL GEARY SCHNE IDERPres iden t

Diversity Digest Advisory Board

JOSÉ CA LDERÓNCHR I S T INE C LARKCAR LOS CORTESLAUR I E CRUMPACKERGWENDOLYN JORDAN DUNGYBOBBY FONGBEVER LY GUY - SHEF TA L LE L I ZABE TH L . HOL LANDERSY LV IA HURTADOPARKER JOHNSONLEE KNEFE LKAMPJACK MEACHAMLESTER MONTSENR IQUE “ R ICK” O LGU INJONE L L SANCHEZDARY L SM I THROBERT S T EE L ES TE PHEN SUM IDAUR I T R E I SMAN

NOTE: The opinions expressed by individualauthors in Diversity Digest are their own andare not necessarily those of the Digest’seditors or AAC&U.

eDIV sityr

vide transactional value, the responsibilityto provide transforming civic leadership isquite a bit more difficult.

What We Do

The Forum seeks to align and amplify theefforts of scholars, teachers, practitioners,and students, as well as partners outsidethe system of higher education, whosework is directed toward achieving thepublic service mission of higher education.

The Forum’s initial strategy to accom-plish this goal has been to convene, con-nect, and support leaders within and out-side of higher education who havecommitted to higher education’s role inaccomplishing public purposes and toassist them in working together to definethe concept of the “public good” in acontemporary society. We have hostedseveral National Leadership Dialogueswith college presidents, state legislators,faculty, researchers, non-profit organiza-tion leaders and many others inMaryland, California, Minnesota, andMichigan over the past year to facilitatestrong collaborations and a commonagenda. To further a collective commit-ment to the common agenda, we areplanning a Wingspread Conference in thefall of 2003. The Wingspread Conferencewill synthesize conversations and dissemi-nate the common agenda.

Secondly, the Forum seeks to expand,deepen and promote the application ofscholarship that will lead to a clearerunderstanding of the public service role ofU.S. colleges and universities. This strat-egy has led the Forum to support scholar-ship in key areas that promote betterunderstanding of how higher educationcan, and currently does, serve the publicgood; and connect that scholarship topractice through the formation of tar-

geted “research-practice” syndicates.Critical to this objective and consistent

with the long-term orientation of thelarger Forum agenda, the Forum is work-ing to inspire a new generation of highereducation scholars focused on the publicservice role of colleges and universities.Through our Intergenerational ScholarsNetwork, we are supporting the work ofnew scholars and facilitating mentor rela-tionships between senior and juniorscholars.

Our National Rising Scholars Award isdesigned for pre-tenured faculty, earlycareer practitioners, and advanced gradu-ate students in any discipline who engagein research that explores higher educa-tion’s role in serving the public good. Webegan this scholarship program in 2002.

Thirdly, the Forum is working toenhance the level of understanding withinthe general public about the contributionshigher education makes to the improve-ment of our lives, the defense of our free-doms, and the practice of democracy in adiverse society. While even attractingpublic attention, let alone changing per-spectives is a difficult undertaking, the

Kellogg Forum on Higher Education forthe Public Good continued from page 1

National Leadership Dialogue participants at Wye River, Maryland

continued on page 5

Volume 7, No. 1, 23

Today, Haskell still remains an institu-tion dedicated to educating AmericanIndians. But instead of focusing on theeradication of tribal identity, it is now acenter for advanced academic study andcultural preservation, educating about950 American Indian students.

The education of American Indiansfollowed an assimilation model from thelatter part of the nineteenth century untilvery recently. Attempts to erase tribalculture and use Western methods oflearning defined American Indian highereducation, and high dropout rates atAmerican colleges and universitiesensued as a result. In the 1960s, whenthe civil rights movement was gainingforce, a “self-determination” movementbegan among American Indian leaders toredefine tribal higher education.

Defining Education on

Their Own Terms

American Indian leaders recognized thepower of postsecondary education andthe benefits that it could bring to reser-vations and tribal culture. According toPaul Boyer, president of BoyerAssociates, Inc. and former and foundingeditor of the Tribal Colleges Journal, “Itwas the very first and most durable effortby tribes to identify and respond to theirown needs.” An institution that wasguided by tribal values and incorporated

methods of learning geared towardsAmerican Indian students would moreaptly prepare students for success. Lackof funding and the minimal resources ofthe tribes continue to be obstacles, buttheir perseverance confirms the belief

that community-based colleges of theirown can also strengthen their tribalnations.

Since the 1960s, thirty-five accreditedTribal Colleges and Universities havebeen established in the United States.The accomplishments of the TribalColleges are reflected in the rapidincrease in enrollment over the lasttwenty years. In 1982, enrollment at thecolleges stood at 2,100, but today, it hasreached about 30,000. Most TribalColleges are two-year institutions, serv-ing a population that generally lives ingeographically isolated areas where stu-dents have no other means of attaining apostsecondary education.

Hurdles, such as inadequate academicpreparation, that prevent AmericanIndian students from academic success atother higher education institutions arebeing removed by the Tribal Colleges.Boyer attributes progress to the individu-alized attention from caring faculty thatuse “strong and creative methods ofcommunicating to the students.”Approximately one-third of faculty areAmerican Indian, who serve as role mod-els to the students. Students areextremely satisfied with the educationthey receive from all faculty and, as aresult, they pursue it wholeheartedly,according to Delia Kundin, the

Tribal Colleges and Universities: Guided by Tribal Values,Advancing Academic StudyBy Lori Webster, Office of Diversity, Equity and Global Initiatives, AAC&U

HASKELL INDIAN NATIONS UNIVERSITY , ONE OF THE OLDEST AMERICAN INDIAN/ALASKA NATIVE UNIVERSITIES IN THE

UNITED STATES , WAS FOUNDED IN 1884 IN LAWRENCE, KANSAS AS PART OF THE SOLUTION TO THE “ INDIAN PROBLEM.” THE

UNITED STATES ADOPTED THE NOTION THAT EDUCATION WAS THE FASTEST AND MOST COMPLETE MEANS OF TEACHING

AMERICAN INDIAN CHILDREN THE “AMERICAN” WAY OF L IFE . BY REMOVING THE CHILDREN FROM THEIR COMMUNITIES , IT

WOULD REMOVE THE INFLUENCES OF THEIR CULTURE, A FACTOR PROHIBITING AMERICAN INDIANS FROM BECOMING “PRO-

DUCTIVE AND ACCEPTABLE MEMBERS” OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.

Seven pillars stand at the entrance ofTurtle Mountain College in Belcourt,ND. Each pillar reflects one of theseven teachings of the ojibwe, whichare the virtues that guide theChippewa tribe. The college man-dates that the faculty infuse these val-ues into everything they teach(www.turtle-mountain.cc.nd.us).

The forest has been central to thelives and well being of theMenominee Nation for 500 years.The Sustainable Development Instituteat the College of the MenomineeNation in Kishena, WI, examineshow the Menominee have incorpo-rated the forest and its spirit into theirlives and the progression of the tribe.It also examines how the tribe cansustain development in the presentwithout compromising the ability offuture generations to meet theirneeds (www.menominee.edu).

continued on page 4

I N T E G R A T I N G T H E V A L U E SO F T H E T R I B E

Volume 7, No. 1, 2 34 eDIV sityr

Institutional Advancement Specialist atthe College of the Menominee Nation inWisconsin.

Economic and Cultural Goals

The mission of the Tribal Colleges istwo-fold and reflects a spirit of self-determination. Created to strengthentribal nations, tribal colleges rely on twoprincipal strategies. First, they aim toprovide coursework that prepares stu-dents to find employment after theycomplete their degree or pursue furthereducation at a four-year institution.Many of the colleges, such as theCollege of the Menominee Nation, havetransfer agreements with affiliated stateuniversity systems, such as theUniversity of Wisconsin. Students thatgraduate from the college receive junior

status in the University of Wisconsinsystem. Students that enter into theworkforce help stimulate the economyof the tribal community. Boyer says,“There is a sense of empowerment givento American Indians when they holdjobs that are generally given to non-Indians.”

The second aim of the Tribal Collegesis to rebuild a sense of identity. The cul-tural identity of the tribe permeatesalmost every facet of life at the college.Different colleges have pursued variousways of integrating the values of theirtribe into the curriculum. Some tribesrequire cultural and language courses aspart of the general education courseworkwhile others do not designate specificcourses to teach about their heritage.Boyer points to the example of Turtle

Mountain College in Belcourt, NorthDakota. Leaders there believe that it isimpossible to separate culture from voca-tion because everything that they teachand do is American Indian, so the infu-sion of their values, culture, and lan-guage is incorporated into every one oftheir courses.

The close ties between Tribal Collegesand the communities they serve strength-ens the value system of the colleges.Unlike other higher education institu-tions, there is no clear distinctionbetween the college community and thecommunity-at-large. Boyer explains,“The colleges want to be centers of com-munity education. For many groups thecollege library is also the public library,and campuses sponsor community eventsfrom political forums to pow-wows.” In

Bay Mills Community College, Brimley, MIBlackfeet Community College, Browning, MTCankdeska Cikana Community College, Fort Totten, NDChief Dull Knife College, Lame Deer, MTCollege of Menominee Nation, Keshena, WICrownpoint Institute of Technology, Crownpoint, NMD-Q University, Davis, CADiné College, Tsaile, AZFond du Lac Tribal and Community College, Cloquet, MNFort Belknap College, Harlem, MTFort Berthold Community College, New Town, NDFort Peck Community College, Poplar, MTHaskell Indian Nations University, Lawrence, KSInstitute of American Indian Arts, Santa Fe, NMKeweenaw Bay Ojibwa Community College, Baraga, MILac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College, Hayward, WILeech Lake Tribal College, Cass Lake, MNLittle Big Horn College, Crow Agency, MT

Little Priest Tribal College, Winnebago, NENebraska Indian Community College, Macy, NENorthwest Indian College, Bellingham, WAOglala Lakota College, Kyle, SDRed Crow Community College, Cardston, AlbertaSaginaw Chippewa Tribal College, Mount Pleasant, MISalish Kootenai College, Pablo, MTSine Gleska University, Rosebud, SDSisseton Wahpeton Community College, Sisseton, SDSi Tanka University, Eagle Butter, SDSitting Bull College, Fort Yates, NDSouthwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, Albuquerque, NMStone Child College, Box Elder, MTTohono O’odham Community College, Sells, AZTurtle Mountain Community College, Belcourt, NDUnited Tribes Technical College, Bismarck, NDWhite Earth Tribal and Community College, Mahnomen, MN

T R I B A L C O L L E G E S

Tribal Colleges and Universities: Guided by Tribal Values,Advancing Academic Studycontinued from page 3

fact, Congress designated Tribal Collegesas land-grant institutions in 1994because of the solid ties between the col-leges, tribal lands, and economic devel-opment (AIHEC, 1999). Graduates arealso likely to remain in local communi-ties after earning their degrees contribut-ing to the strong outgrowth of service tothe communities.

By embracing rather than denyingtheir cultural heritage, Tribal Collegeshave integrated the principles and lessonsof the past into the curriculum in orderto create a learning process catering tothe needs of their students.

A Promising Future

While still facing challenges, Tribal col-leges are making a significant contribu-tion to rehabilitating their communitiesand sustaining their tribal identities.Although tribes are still worried aboutthe future of their communities, it isheartening to compare the percentage ofAmerican Indians in professions such as

teaching and nursing in the 1960s andtoday. “In the 1960s, there were virtu-ally none,” Boyer said, “but today thereis a tremendous increase. Seeing theirpeers working in their communities inthese professions and seeing AmericanIndians in leadership roles fundamen-tally changes the outlook of the commu-nity. It makes the impossible idea ofachievement become possible.”

The American Indian HigherEducation Consortium (AIHEC) is oneunifying force that has built a strong col-laborative movement for the TribalColleges. It assists in seeking a morediversified base of funding and gives avoice to the Tribal Colleges in thehigher education community. The valueof Tribal Colleges cannot be denied.They fill a gap left open by Westerneducation and offer the hope of increas-ing prosperity while sustaining thelegacy of their tribes.

To learn more about Tribal Colleges,visit www.aihec.org. �

Volume 7, No. 1, 25

forum is focusing informational efforts oninfluential intermediary representativesfor the public, especially legislators andtrustees, as well as reaching out to thepublic at large. Additionally, we havedeveloped partnerships with key profes-sional associations that represent highereducation and strategic policy groups thatprovide representation and leadership forhigher education.

The Kellogg Forum is invigorated byits work and is always seeking ways torefocus attention to higher education’s

civic mission. We believe that we mustwork to restore public understanding ofwhy college matters—not only to stu-dents and their families, but to all of soci-ety. We must raise the awareness of thatessential principle, even as we try to pro-mote greater expectations for our selves,our students, and the society that wetogether will create. For further information about theKellogg Forum on Higher Education forthe Public Good, see www.kelloggfo-rum.org. �

Kellogg Forum on Higher Education continued from page 2

AAC&U MEETINGSAND INSTITUTES

SENCER SUMMER INSTITUTE

Connecting science with civicengagement by teaching throughcomplex and unsolved public issues.August 8-12, 2003Santa Clara University, Californiawww.aacu.org/SENCER

NETWORK FOR ACADEMIC RENEWAL:

TECHNOLOGY, LEARNING, AND

INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT:

October 30–November 1, 2003Cambridge, Massachusettswww.aacu.org/meetings

ACHIEVING GREATER EXPECTATIONS

November 13–15, 2003Washington, DCwww.aacu.org/meetings

2004 ANNUAL MEETING

PRACTICING LIBERAL EDUCATION:

DEEPENING KNOWLEDGE, PURSUING

JUSTICE, TAKING ACTION

January 21–24, 2004Washington, DCwww.aacu.org/meetings

I N S T I T U T I O N A L L E A D E R S H I P A N D C O M M I T M E N TVolume 7, No. 1, 2 36 eDIV sityr

Commitment to Diversity in Institutional Mission StatementsBy Jack Meacham and Crystal Barrett, University at Buffalo—The State University of New York *

THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS OF ASSESSING THE SUCCESS OF THE MANY CAMPUS DIVERSITY INITIATIVES DURING RECENT

DECADES . FOR EXAMPLE, 63 PERCENT OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES REPORTED IN A NATIONAL SURVEY THAT THEY HAVE A

DIVERSITY REQUIREMENT FOR STUDENTS OR ARE DEVELOPING SUCH A REQUIREMENT (HUMPHREYS , 2000 ) . HOWEVER, THE

PRESENCE OF DIVERSITY SCHOLARSHIP AND COURSES IN THE CURRICULUM CAN REFLECT THE INTEREST AND ENTHUSIASM

OF ONLY A SMALL GROUP OF FACULTY OR A S INGLE CAMPUS ADMINISTRATOR, RATHER THAN A BROAD VIS ION AND DEEP

COMMITMENT TO STRENGTHENING DIVERSITY DIMENSIONS ON CAMPUS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE INCORPORATION OF DIVERSITY

SCHOLARSHIP INTO THE CURRICULUM MIGHT CEASE WHEN EXTERNAL GRANT FUNDS OR CAMPUS FUNDS FOR CURRICULUM

DEVELOPMENT ARE NOT RENEWED OR WHEN A KEY FACULTY MEMBER OR ADMINISTRATOR LEAVES THE CAMPUS.

One indicator of diversity vision andcommitment is an institution’s missionstatement. Typically, the mission state-ment must be reviewed and endorsed bythe campus’s board of trustees or govern-ing board, often following review andrecommendations by students and fac-ulty, by administrators at several levels,and by the campus’s provost and presi-dent. An institution’s mission statementrepresents a consensus on campus-widevalues, expectations for student learningand development, and a statement ofcampus priorities for many years ahead.

A strong mission statement can be aneffective framework for curriculum devel-opment, allocation of campus resources,and assessment of programs. Garcia, et al.(2001, p. 10), in their guide to assessingcampus diversity initiatives, suggest thatinstitutions progress through three stages.Only in the third stage is there an overallinstitutional plan for integrating diversityinto the educational mission and policies.

We wondered about the extent towhich diversity has become broadly anddeeply institutionalized in Americanhigher education. Are institutions com-mitted to having diversity among theirstudents? Is becoming knowledgeableabout diversity a common learning goal

for students? Is appreciation of diversityalso a common student learning goal?

Answering these questions by examin-ing mission statements is a conservativeapproach, for a campus could have madeoutstanding progress on student and cur-ricular diversity without necessarilyacknowledging this within a revised mis-sion statement. Thus we should expectthe numbers and proportions of cam-puses acknowledging diversity in theirmission statements to be relatively low,underestimating the actual extent ofdiversity among students and in the cur-riculum. Nevertheless, the examination ofmission statements provides an importantpicture of the breadth and depth of com-mitment to diversity in American highereducation.

Reviewing Institutional

Mission Statements

We reviewed the mission statements forinstitutions listed in The PrincetonReview’s The Best 331 Colleges (2002 edi-tion). This volume provided an initialsample that represented a wide range ofAmerican geography, large and smallcampuses, public and private institutions,and rural, suburban, and urban cam-puses. For each institution, we sought theWeb site that presented the mission state-

ment or, if no mission statement wasavailable, the campus’s purpose, vision,goals, or aims for students. We were ableto identify appropriate statements for 312institutions. These statements vary greatlyin length, from a single sentence tolengthy descriptions of goals. The resultsthat are reported in this article reflect ourindependent reading and coding of thesemission statements. When we disagreedin our initial coding, we reread and dis-cussed the mission statements togetherand revised our coding.

The diversity of America’s populationand college and university students hasincreased dramatically in recent decades.Is this increasing diversity acknowledgedin institutional mission statements? Wecoded whether each mission statementincludes diversity either as a descriptionof the students on campus or as a goal forthe composition of the student body.Student diversity is included within themission statements of 41.3 percent ofthese institutions (129 out of 312).

For example, “Beloit College is com-mitted to being an inclusive communityand believes that multiple perspectivesand experiences are essential to learning.We will recruit and retain students, fac-ulty, and staff who enhance the diversityof the campus community.” “The

* This research was supported by The Baldy Center for Law & Social Policy at the University at Buffalo—The State University of New York.

Volume 7, No. 1, 27

University of Nebraska—Lincoln pro-motes respect for and understanding ofcultural diversity in all aspects of society.It strives for a culturally diverse studentbody, faculty, and staff reflecting themulticultural nature of Nebraska and thenation.”

Becoming Knowledgeable

about Diversity

Many mission statements describe anideal student graduate of the institution.To what extent is diversity representedamong the goals for student learning anddevelopment? We asked whether the mis-sion statements include the expectationthat students should become knowledge-able about diversity. In our coding, weincluded phrases such as “become awareof diversity,” “become interested in diver-sity, and understand diversity.”

Becoming knowledgeable about diver-sity is included within the mission state-ments of only 11.2 percent of these insti-tutions (35 out of 312). To provide apoint of comparison, we considered theextent to which these mission statementsincluded international and global under-standing as a goal for students. This lattergoal is included within 16 percent of themission statements (50 out of 312). Thusthe expectation that students becomeknowledgeable about diversity is similarto—but slightly lower than—the expecta-tion that students increase their interna-tional and global understanding.

This student learning goal of becomingknowledgeable about diversity is illus-trated in the following examples:“Committed to the achievement of a plu-ralistic community, Hunter College offersa curriculum designed to meet the high-est standards while also fostering under-standing among groups from differentracial, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds.”Coe College’s mission statement includesthis sentence: “We believe that it isimportant for a liberal arts education to

cultivate in students a desire to under-stand, a capacity for tolerance, and anability to appreciate the ethnic and cul-tural diversity that make up humankind.”Here is an excerpt from MaryWashington College’s mission statement:“Consistent with the principles of liberallearning, the College places high valueupon cultural diversity and global aware-ness, and seeks through its curricularofferings to reflect that diversity and pro-mote that awareness.” The University ofGeorgia describes itself this way:“Through its programs and practices, it

seeks to foster the understanding of andrespect for cultural differences necessaryfor an enlightened and educated citi-zenry. It further provides for cultural,ethnic, gender, and racial diversity in thefaculty, staff, and student body.”

Does the extent to which becomingknowledgeable about diversity is a stu-dent learning goal vary geographically?In order to answer this question, wegrouped the 312 institutions in our sam-ple according to their regional accredit-ing association. Institutions affiliatedwith Middle States Association ofColleges and Schools, NorthwesternAssociation of Schools, Colleges, andUniversities, and New England

Association of Schools and Colleges weremost likely to include becoming knowl-edgeable about diversity in their missionstatements (the proportions range from16 percent to 19 percent).

Appreciating Diversity

Other mission statements included appre-ciating diversity as a goal for students. Inour coding, we included phrases such asrespecting, valuing, being tolerant of,being sensitive to, benefiting from, andwelcoming diversity. Appreciating diver-sity is included within the mission state-ments of 21.5 percent of these institu-tions (67 out of 312).

Appreciating diversity as a goal for stu-dents is illustrated by the following mis-sion statements: “The dialogue betweenfaith and learning at Agnes Scott Collegefosters not only academic freedom, butan appreciation of pluralism and a desirefor diversity.” At Case Western ReserveUniversity, “Integrity in all of theUniversity’s pursuits . . . requires that werecognize the dignity of each individual,that we appreciate and enjoy the rich cul-tural, racial, and ethnic diversity of ourcampus community, and that we respectthe contributions of all disciplines to theadvancement of knowledge.”

The phrases that we coded as appreci-ating diversity suggest that these institu-tions view changing the values of theirstudents as one of their roles. Is changingthe values of students a common expec-tation among American institutions ofhigher education? We reviewed the mis-sion statements for mention of change invalues as a goal for student development(personal growth was not included inthis category). For example, at MiamiUniversity, “Selected undergraduate pro-grams of quality should be offered withthe expectation of students achieving ahigh level of personal competence anddeveloping a personal value system.”

continued on page 9

Coe College’s mission statement

includes this sentence:“We believe

that it is important for a liberal

arts education to cultivate in

students a desire to understand, a

capacity for tolerance, and an

ability to appreciate the ethnic

and cultural diversity that make

up humankind.”

I N S T I T U T I O N A L L E A D E R S H I P A N D C O M M I T M E N TVolume 7, No. 1, 2 38 eDIV sityr

Valuing Equity: Recognizing the Rights of the LGBT CommunityBy Daniel Phoenix Singh, director of information technology and Heather D. Wathington, editor, AAC&U

IMAGINE LEARNING THAT YOUR PARTNER HAS BECOME SERIOUSLY ILL . YOU RUSH TO THE HOSPITAL TO SEE YOUR LOVED ONE.

BUT BEFORE YOU CAN SEE THEM A NURSE ASKS YOU IF YOU ARE A FAMILY RELATIVE. YOU STATE THAT YOU ARE FAMILY—

THE PARTNER OF THE PATIENT. YOU ENTER THE EMERGENCY CARE UNIT, ONLY TO LEARN THAT YOUR PARTNER IS IN NEED

OF MAJOR SURGERY. WHILE YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR PARTNER’S HEALTH, YOU ARE ABLE TO REST EASY—KNOWING

THAT YOU HAVE DOMESTIC PARTNER BENEFITS TO COVER ANY AND ALL MEDICAL COSTS. (WWW.LGBTCAMPUS.ORG)

This is the reality at more than 100 col-leges and universities who extend domesticpartner benefits (DPB) to staff and faculty.As higher education institutions haveincreasingly recognized the value of adiverse community, many have imple-mented DPB policies that prohibit dis-crimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual,and transgender (LGBT) individuals.(www.lgbtcampus.org)

In fact, many institutions are creatingmore equitable campus communities byexpressly including and recognizing LGBTindividuals. In addition to domestic part-ner benefits, institutions are also creatinginclusive non-discrimination policies.Both are designed to improve the qualityof life for LGBT persons, the institutionalclimate, and the campus learning environ-ment. The policies are also intended torecognize the rights and value of LGBTcommunity members.

Domestic Partner Benefits

Domestic partner benefits are oftendefined as applying to those in a long-term, committed relationship between twopeople that is a mutual commitment simi-lar to that of marriage. But employersoften set their own definitions of “domes-tic partner” when determining DPB. Someinstitutions grant benefits to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, but mostoften the benefits extend to same-sex part-ners only. Benefits typically include healthinsurance, dental care, relocation expenses,

etc. Currently, over 100 universities offerDPB including six Big Ten institutions, allIvy League institutions, and several stateuniversities, including the entireUniversity of California system. Several

institutions began to make changes in theearly nineties, but the vast majority hasinstituted benefits within the last fewyears. Institutions began offering benefitsto attract and retain the most talented fac-ulty and staff and to build a vibrant, justlearning community.

Domestic partner benefits vary depend-ing upon the institution. At EmoryUniversity in Atlanta, Georgia, domesticpartners of employees are eligible for the

same benefits granted to those of a marriedspouse. These benefits grant inclusion inthe employee’s health insurance and dentalinsurance, courtesy scholarships, andaccess to university facilities (e.g. library,the Physical Education Center, etc.). Inaddition, domestic partners are consideredfamily members when granting theemployee sick, medical, family, andfuneral leave.

Domestic partners of Emory students areeligible to utilize university facilities as well,but are unable to receive employee healthbenefits because Emory does not subsidizestudent health and dental insurance.

In Oregon, state law requires all publicagencies to provide DPB to all same-sexpartners and their legal dependents equalto the benefits provided to married part-ners and their legal dependents. Hence, atLane Community College in Eugene,Oregon, insurance, family tuition waiverbenefits, and leave benefits apply to domes-tic partners and (where applicable) to thelegal dependents of domestic partners.Lane’s policy is noteworthy because fewinstitutions include the legal dependents ofdomestic partners in their policies.

Non-Discrimination Policies

Nearly 400 colleges and universities havewritten non-discrimination policies inplace that include sexual orientation.These policies appear in employee hand-books or manuals and are publicized onWeb sites, employment and admissions

Nearly 400 colleges and

universities have written non-

discrimination policies in place

that include sexual orientation.

These policies appear in employee

handbooks or manuals and are

publicized on Web sites,

employment and admissions

applications and announcements,

and diversity materials.

Volume 7, No. 1, 29

applications and announcements, anddiversity materials. Non-discriminationpolicies state that discrimination will notbe tolerated, outline what qualifies as dis-crimination, and explain the conse-quences for violating such policies. Inaddition, most policies provide for aninvestigation into any allegations of dis-crimination.

Maintaining strong non-discrimina-tion policies is important because dis-crimination occurs frequently. TheHuman Rights Campaign’sDocumenting Discrimination Projecthas hundreds of case stories that docu-

ment discrimination toward LGBT per-sons. Dr. Susan Rankin of PennsylvaniaState University found that 36 percentof the LGBT undergraduates in herrecent study experienced some form ofdiscrimination. In addition, becausethere is no federal law that protects therights of LGBT individuals, it is impor-tant for colleges and universities toafford such protection. Some institu-tions—namely, University of Iowa,Brown University, and the StateUniversity of New York system—alsorecognize gender identity in their non-discrimination policies, ensuring that

the rights of transgendered individualsare equally protected.

Indeed, there are many steps to ensur-ing equity for LGBT individuals.Domestic partner benefits and non-dis-crimination policies are key steps in theright direction and they are important pol-icy initiatives that illustrate the value aninstitution places on fairness and equityfor each and every member of the campuscommunity.

For more information about domesticpartner benefits and non-descriminationpolicies, see www.hrc.org or www.lgbtcampus.org. �

Oberlin College aims “to expand students’social awareness, social responsibility, andcapacity for moral judgment so as to pre-pare them for intelligent and usefulresponse to the present and futuredemands of society.” Change in valueswas mentioned in 30.8 percent of theseinstitutional mission statements (96 outof 312), especially institutions affiliatedwith Southern Association of Colleges andSchools and North Central Association ofColleges and Schools (the proportionsrange from 34 percent to 44 percent).Thus the proportion of institutions thathave endorsed appreciating diversity as agoal for students is in the same range as—although lower than—the proportionendorsing changing students’ values.

Making Diversity a Goal

for Student Learning

In order to assess the extent to which mis-sion statements make explicit reference todiversity as a goal for student learning anddevelopment, we combined the frequen-cies for becoming knowledgeable aboutdiversity and for appreciating diversity(and checked that each institution was

represented only once). Diversity is alearning goal in the mission statements of27.2 percent of these institutions (85 outof 312). How should this proportion beinterpreted? Is 27.2 percent a high pro-portion or a low proportion?

In order to answer this question, wecompared the extent to which missionstatements include understanding com-puters and information technology as alearning goal for students. During thesame decades that the diversity ofAmerican’s population has increased,there has also been an increasing emphasison the use of computers and informationtechnology in education. For example,Clarkson University “provides each stu-dent with the opportunity to obtain out-standing capabilities in utilizing comput-ing and other 21st century technologies.”

Understanding technology is includedwithin only 9.9 percent of these missionstatements (31 out of 312). Thus—despite the enormous attention andresources devoted to computing andinformation technology—diversity is alearning goal for students on three timesas many campuses as understanding tech-

nology. In the light of this comparison,we can conclude that 27.2 percent ofinstitutions endorsing diversity as a goalfor student learning in their mission state-ments is a high proportion.

In general, the findings reported abovedo not vary as a function of whether theinstitutions are public or private, bywhether or not the institution has a reli-gious affiliation, by whether the campusenvironment is rural, suburban, or urban,by enrollment, by proportion of minoritystudents on campus, or by the academicratings and admission ratings assigned byThe Princeton Review. �

References

Garcia, Mildred, Cynthia A. Hudgins,Caryn McTighe Musil, Michael T.Nettles, William E. Sedlacek, and DarylG. Smith (2001). Assessing campus diver-sity initiatives: A guide for campus practi-tioners. Washington, D. C.: Associationof American Colleges and Universities.

Humpreys, Debra. 2000. National surveyfinds diversity requirements commonaround the country. Diversity Digest,5(1), 1-2.

Commitment to Diversity in Institutional Mission Statementscontinued from page 7

C U R R I C U L A R T R A N S F O R M A T I O NVolume 7, No. 1, 2 310 eDIV sityr

Creating Border Crossings: Dickinson College —At Home and AbroadJoyce Bylander, dean of students and Susan Rose, professor of sociology & community studies, Dickinson College

AT DICKINSON COLLEGE, WE ARE COMMITTED TO PREPARING OUR STUDENTS FOR GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP . IN ORDER TO

SUCCEED, OUR STUDENTS MUST BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEVELOP THE INTER-CULTURAL AWARENESS , KNOWLEDGE,

SKILLS , AND ATTITUDES THAT WILL PREPARE THEM FOR CITIZENSHIP IN OUR SOCIETY AND WORLD. UNTIL OUR STUDENTS

CAN TRULY APPRECIATE THAT THEY ARE PART OF ONE WORLD AND MANY PEOPLES , AT HOME AND ABROAD, THE UNIFYING

FORCE OF OUR EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS WILL NOT BE REALIZED.

Our challenge, then, is two-fold: to createan intellectual community that prepares allof its members to live creatively, produc-tively, and harmoniously in a multiculturalworld; and to diversify our present campuspopulation by providing an academic andsocial environment in which all studentsand faculty can thrive and contribute. Oneof the most effective ways we have found ofdoing this is to engage students in fieldworkwith diverse communities.

Dickinson has created two programsthat build student awareness, knowledge,and skills needed for the twenty-first cen-tury. The American and Global Mosaicprograms have brought diverse groups ofstudents together with residents andworkers in communities both close tohome (Steelton and Adams County,Pennsylvania) and as far away asComodoro Rivadavia in Patagonia,Argentina. The Crossing Borders pro-gram brings students from three collegesto share, study, and experience differentcultures together in a variety of campuscontexts.

American Mosaic Program

In Steelton and Adams County, studentsand faculty worked in research teams withcommunity members to collect oral histo-ries, organize archival data, and analyze cen-sus and socio-economic data that reveal theorigins and continuing development ofthese communities.

At its peak as a steel-producing town inthe late 1800s-early 1900s, Steelton drew

immigrants from many European coun-tries and African Americans from theSouth. It now claims some thirty-threeethnically diverse groups among 6,000 res-

idents. Hit hard by de-industrializationand the gradual closing of the steel plant,its residents, schools, and businesses arenow struggling economically.

Students, faculty, and residents joinedtogether to study migration, family, work,and religion; the ways in which mill workwas stratified by race and class; the interac-tion between Serbian and Croatian residentsover time; and the diverse backgrounds ofstudents in elementary and secondaryschools. These students, with guidance fromour college students, conducted their ownmulti-generational oral histories andbrought them back into the classroom forlively discussion.

To support their research, our studentswere simultaneously engaged in three inter-disciplinary courses on the PoliticalEconomy of De-Industrialization,Community Studies and Ethnography (amethods course), and Memoir andNarrative (a writing-intensive course).Whether in Steelton or in Adams Countywhere students worked with Latino andHaitian migrant workers, the focus is onU.S. domestic diversity, the connectionsbetween international/global issues anddomestic/local ones, border-crossings, andcollaborative fieldwork.

Global Mosaic Program

Building on the national award-winningAmerican Mosaic program, we thenexpanded our research to a comparativestudy of trans-Atlantic migration and eth-nic-labor relations in the United States andArgentina. In January 2001, we took elevenstudents to Patagonia, Argentina to collectoral histories of people who had grown upand worked in the oil company towns ofComodoro Rivadavia. Since 1907, whenpetroleum was discovered near the smallport of Comodoro Rivadavia, on thesparsely populated coast of centralPatagonia, company towns were developedby the Argentine state and foreign compa-nies to employ and house workers. The oilfields and the economic activities thatemerged around them (services, commerce,agriculture) drew a diverse labor force fromItaly, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Bulgaria,Russia, Poland, the former Yugoslavia,

The American and Global Mosaic

programs have brought diverse

groups of students together with

residents and workers in

communities both close to home

(Steelton and Adams County,

Pennsylvania) and as far away

as Comodoro Rivadavia in

Patagonia, Argentina.

Volume 7, No. 1, 211

Greece, South Africa (Boers), and Chile, aswell as internal migrants from northernArgentina. As these immigrant groups set-tled in the company towns and inComodoro Rivadavia, they developedmutual aid societies, labor organizations,and religious and social organizations.

Crossing Borders Program

The Mosaic and Crossing Borders pro-grams both were designed as innovativeeducational models to encourage culturallydiverse students to live, work, and studytogether in multiple contexts both withinthe United States and abroad. DickinsonCollege is a historically white college, andremains predominantly so. We are chal-lenged to engage primarily white studentsin meaningful dialogues about diversity,even as we work actively to diversify thestudent and faculty body. Paradoxically,many of our “white” students report feelingvery comfortable at Dickinson when theyfirst visit the campus and when they enroll,yet they also are disappointed by its lack ofdiversity.

With a strong record of excellent globaleducation programs, Dickinson was lesseffective in confronting issues concerningU.S. pluralism. In order to focus on inter-cultural education and communication—

both across and within nations—CrossingBorders envisioned a series of crossings:personal, institutional, disciplinary, lin-guistic, regional, national, and interna-tional. It brings together up to twenty stu-dents from Dickinson College (apredominantly white institution [PWI]),Xavier University, and Spelman College(both historically black institutions [HBI])to spend four weeks in the summer inCameroon, West Africa. Students thenreturn to Dickinson College for the fallsemester to continue their studies of mem-ory and representation, African diaspora,the Middle Passage, the Great Migration,and race and ethnic relations and commu-nity building in contemporary America. AtDickinson, all students take a CrossingBorders course together, in addition tothree courses of their own choosing. In thespring semester, students study either atSpelman or Xavier. Thus, the programworks at the intersections of global anddomestic diversity as students experience avariety of border crossings, both withintheir group, between them as Americansand Cameroonians, and then as theyreturn to the PWI and HBI campuses.

In all three locales, students have becomemuch more aware of the interplay betweenrace, class, and culture—and how it plays

out in contemporary America andCameroon—and in their own lives andrelationships. They came to more fullyappreciate both the distinctiveness andimportance of different experiences, stand-points, and perspectives and the similaritiesof experience, feelings, and values. One stu-dent commented:

I feel like I’ve grown a lot. I went into thisthinking: they’re throwing a whole bunchof white kids in with a whole bunch ofblack kids to see what would happen butit’s been much more than that and muchmore of an individual thing. I feel moreconfident with myself and with people Idon’t know. I’m much more likely to reachout to others and be open. It’s eerie howwell this process worked—and it is aprocess—it’s still going on.

Program Impact

These opportunities to become involvedin community life, to do empiricalresearch, to listen to others’ stories as wellas discover their own as part of theprocess, have made students’ border cross-ings all the more meaningful and rich. Farmore than diversity serving just as amulti-cultural backdrop, the Mosaic andCrossing Borders programs put diversityat the center of academic inquiry andexperience. To meet the demands of thecourse, students must become involvedand share deeply in the lives of peoplewho are different from themselves.Diversity is not just present, it is experi-enced and integrated.

These students not only came to thetable, they sat and ate with one anotherand drank deeply, lovingly—and we are allthe more strong and hopeful because of it.Such growth and meaningful exchangedoesn’t just happen on its own. It requiresthoughtful, deliberate planning to create aspace within which meaningful and sus-tained dialogue can take place. Our verysurvival as a country and world are depen-dent upon constructing such spaces andrelationships. �

Mosaic students

If you want to tell a reporter something,but don’t want to be quoted, tell thereporter: “The following is OFF THERECORD.” Make sure that the reporterexplicitly agrees when you are speakingoff the record. When you are donespeaking off the record, tell the reporterthat “we are now talking ON THERECORD again.”

Be aware, however, that off the recordinformation may still wind up in the arti-cle, if the reporter can find another sourceto say the information on the record.Good reporters know how to get anothersource to confirm information, especiallyif it makes a good story. They may eventell the other source that you told them theinformation. All “off the record” means isthat the information will not be attributedto you. When you speak off the record,you are giving the reporter backgroundinformation for their story. Don’t tell thereporter idle gossip.

If you don’t want something to appearin print, don’t tell it to them, even off therecord. Be very careful with on and offthe record. With established publications,if you say “the following is off the record”they tend to respect that. But reporters dosometimes make mistakes. With lesserpublications, just don’t tell them off therecord information.

If you get sandbagged, don’t becomedefensive. If you do, you’ll seem likeyou’re either whining or covering up.Definitely don’t overreact. Either referthem to someone else for the answer (andcall that person to give them a heads up),or answer the question with a question. Ittakes a lot of skill to put the proper spinon an answer, so don’t try until you havemore experience. If you have to answer,don’t talk to the specifics of the challenge,but the intent behind them. For example,

ON AND OFF THE RECORD

WISCONSINThe state of Wisconsin held a rally on October 28,2002, to commemorate thirty years of Title IXEducation Amendments of 1972. The ceremony inWisconsin included showing a new photographyexhibit that features the accomplishments of women ineducation. University of Wisconsin System PresidentKatharine Lyall participated in the celebration andsaid of Title IX: “Women are much better off for it andare flourishing as a result. In the UW System, it hasbeen a large part of the reason our student body is now over fifty percent women andthey can go into the fields of medicine and law. Enrollment used to be one-third femalewhen Title IX went into effect. Now it’s 55 percent.”

“Rally Celebrates Thirty Years of Title IX,” by Brenda Ingersoll, Wisconsin StateJournal, October 29, 2002

CALIFORNIAThe 2001-2002 study conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles HigherEducation Research Institute (HERI) found that an increasing number of college profes-sors are self-identifying themselves as “liberal” or “far left” politically. The 2001-2002survey found that the percentage of faculty identifying themselves as politically “con-

servative” has held steady since 1989 at 18 percent. The percentage of facultyidentifying themselves as “middle of the road” politically decreased

from 40 percent in 1989 to 34 percent, and the percentage of fac-ulty self-identifying as “liberal” politically increased from 42 percent

in 1989 to 48 percent. The shift was especially prominent amongwomen faculty, 54 percent of whom identified as “liberal” comparedto only 45 percent in 1989. Ninety-one percent of faculty respondents

indicated that a diverse student body enhances the educational expe-rience of students. Statistics were compiled from the responses of

32,840 full-time undergraduate faculty at 358 universities.Information is available on the HERI web site:

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/heri.html“Survey Says Faculty Leaning ‘Far Left,‘” by AndrewWhelan, The California Aggie, October 30, 2002

Diversity M

eDIV sityr M A K I N G D I V E R S I T Y N E W SVolume 7, No. 1, 2 12


state that privacy rules prevent you fromdiscussing student records, and describethe general procedures you follow inresolving problems. Changing the topiccan backfire on you. The right way tochange the topic is to toot your own hornon a related subject.

If you don’t want to answer a question,answer simply “no comment.” If you saythat you don’t want to answer in toomany words, you’re giving the reportersomething they can excerpt.

General Tips

• Spell out all names when talking to areporter. Not only will this help ensureyour name is spelled correctly, but itincreases the likelihood that they’ll quoteyou.

• Don’t be long-winded. Try to find theshortest possible way of answering thequestion. Sound bites are more likely tobe quoted than detailed explanationsbecause they are easier to remember, sotry to be concise. Try to say what youneed to say in thirty seconds.

• Avoid jargon. • Think before you talk. Don’t be so

eager for the interview that you launchinto an explanation without gatheringyour thoughts together.

• If being interviewed for TV, know inadvance what you’re going to do withyour hands. Don’t fidget. Don’t cross yourarms, as this appears confrontational. Ifstanding, keep your hands at your side.

• Be yourself. Don’t assume a per-sona—you’ll come across as artificial oruptight. Use personal pronouns and don’tuse the passive voice.

Excerpted from FinAid! the smart guide toFinancial Aid. Copyright © 1994–2000by FinAid Page, LLC. All rights reserved.

MATERIALS FOR THE MEDIA

VIRGINIAState Attorney General Jerry W. Kilgore wants theVirginia state legislature to pass a law barring illegal immigrants from attending public col-leges in Virginia. Officials at Northern Virginia Community College, an institution locatedjust outside of Washington, D.C., that serves 38,000 students, say that Kilgore’s proposalconflicts with the university’s mission to serve the local community. Kilgore’s office statesthat it is concerned with illegal immigrants taking the admission spots of legal state resi-dents as well as a possible terror threat by allowing illegal immigrants to receive highereducation in the States. But Max L. Bassett, vice president for academic and student ser-vices counters, “As long as we are within the law, we’re not really considering closing ourdoors to people who need us.” Ultimately, Northern Virginia Community College compliedwith Kilgore’s request to charge illegal immigrants the out-of-state tuition rate rather than thein-state tuition rate, even though many of the students have lived in the community for years.

“Virginia Weighs Banning Illegal iImmigrants from State Colleges,” by Jamilah Evelyn,Chronicle of Higher Education, January 10, 2003

edia Watch

NORTH CAROLINAAccording to a report published by The Journal ofBlacks in Higher Education, University of NorthCarolina, Chapel Hill and Duke University earn high marks on inte-grating black students and faculty. The study ranked the application andadmittance rate for black students at twenty-five of the nation’s highest ranked universi-ties and liberal arts colleges. In the university category, University of North Carolinaranked number one in the percentage of black freshman students attending with 12.5percent, while Duke University ranked number three in the report with 10.4 percent ofthe freshman class composed of African-American students.

The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, “The Progress of Black Student Enrollmentsat the Nation’s Highest-Ranked Colleges and Universities,” www.jbhe.com/, November15, 2002

SOUTH CAROLINAJanuary 28, 2003 marked forty years of racial integration atClemson University in South Carolina. When Clemson admitted blackstudents in 1963, it became South Carolina’s first public institution tointegrate. But today Clemson continues to struggle in its efforts to build adiverse student body. At the University of South Carolina black students make up 16 per-cent of the student body, while at Clemson, African-American students comprise between6 and 8 percent of the student body. Approximately 30 percent of South Carolina’s pop-ulation is black. While Clemson has several minority recruitment and outreach activities,some criticize the institution’s failure to devote more resources to building a diverse cam-pus population.

“Clemson struggles to diversify students,” by Jeff Stensland, The Myrtle Beach Sun-News, January 28, 2003

With the exception of historically blackinstitutions and tribal colleges, intra-insti-tutional stratification based on race andethnicity is a reality within most highereducation institutions, regardless ofwhether they are predominantly white,open-access, or classified as HispanicServing Institutions. However, the speci-ficities of this intra-institutional stratifica-tion are largely invisible because equity ineducational outcomes does not constitutea metric of institutional performance thatis continuously tracked.

For example, institutions do not moni-tor whether minority students are earningGPA’s that will enable them to go on tograduate school. The tracking of somemeasures of institutional performance is ataken-for-granted routine, e.g., the aver-age SAT scores of each freshman class. Ifan institution’s leadership were to beasked what percentage of African-American or Latino students graduatewith a 3.5 GPA, most would need to runthe numbers before being able to answer.Institutions are not in the habit of track-ing whether the educational outcomes forAfrican-American and Latino students,such as GPA, are improving or declining.As an institutional researcher pointed outto us, “When people ask me for data,they do not ask me about the high GPAminority students.”

In this article we describe the DiversityScorecard project, a process of developingawareness of inequities in educational

outcomes that we developed in partner-ship with fourteen urban colleges inSouthern California and with the supportof The James Irvine Foundation.

Diversity Scorecard Project

The Diversity Scorecard was developed asa response to the fact that the “diversityagenda” has been primarily about accessto predominantly white institutions. Yetin California, as in many other states,urban colleges, private and public, two-and four-year, have served as the mainentry point into higher education for stu-dents of color. For institutions likeCalifornia State University at LosAngeles, Whittier College, and LosAngeles City College—all institutionsthat are part of our project—the chal-lenge is not how to become more diverse.The challenge for these colleges is how totranslate diversity in the student bodyinto equity in educational outcomes.

The core principle of the DiversityScorecard is that evidence (i.e., factualdata) about the state of equity in educa-tional outcomes for African Americansand Latinos can have a powerful effect onincreasing the recognition by facultymembers, administrators, counselors, andothers about the existence of inequities aswell as their motivation to resolve them.That is, in order to bring about institu-tional change, individuals have to see, ontheir own, as clearly as possible, the mag-nitude of inequities, rather than having

researchers, like us, tell them that theyexist.

To start the project, we invited thepresidents of the fourteen colleges1 toappoint a team of individuals to workwith us on the development of their insti-tution’s scorecard. The task of each teamwas to examine data disaggregated by raceand ethnicity that would reflect educa-tional outcomes in four general areas:access, retention, excellence, and institu-tional receptivity.

Each team decided what types of datathey would examine, and, based on theiranalyses, each team identified unequaloutcomes for particular groups of stu-dents. The next step was to create theactual scorecard, which entailed select-ing goals, measures, and benchmarkswhere unequal outcomes had beenuncovered in each of the four generalareas. The last step was presenting thecompleted scorecard in a report to thepresident.

Campus Reactions

Initially, some of the participants wereskeptical about the project. However, aftertwo years, the majority of participants feelthat the process has been fruitful. One par-ticipant shared:

At first I was very skeptical about thisproject. However I have found theapproaches to data very useful. This pushto look at data is spilling over to otherareas such as curricular issues. Doing this

R E S E A R C HVolume 7, No. 1, 2 314 eDIV sityr

The Accountability Side of DiversityBy Estela Mara Bensimon, Donald Polkinghorne, Georgia Bauman, University of Southern California

EVEN THOUGH INDIVIDUALS ARE L IKELY TO AGREE THAT EQUITY IS A DESIRABLE VALUE, EQUITY IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS

SPOKEN ABOUT IN RELATION TO EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS. INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION MOST

OFTEN DO NOT PRODUCE ANNUAL REPORTS ON MEASURES OF EQUITY NOR DO THEY HAVE EQUITY-ORIENTED BENCHMARKS.

AN INSTITUTION’S SUCCESS (OR FAILURE) IN REDUCING EDUCATIONAL INEQUITIES THAT SEVERELY RESTRICT OPPORTUNITY

AND UPWARD MOBILITY FOR STUDENTS OF COLOR IS NOT USED AS A MEASURE OF INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS . NOR ARE

INSTITUTIONS RANKED OR GRADED ON THE BASIS OF EQUITY IN EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES.


project I’ve found many ways of thinkingabout data.Breaking data down by race and ethnic-

ity has provided many “aha” moments.Upon seeing remediation rates disaggre-gated by race and ethnicity a member ofone institution said:

This is the first time that I’m aware ofthat anyone is looking at this problem byethnicity and to this level of detail. [Nowthat it has been disaggregated] we canlook more deeply and systematically atremediation rather than just the splitbetween English and math. This is centralon everyone’s mind. We can really raiseconversation around this.

Scorecard Measures

Thus, through simply disaggregatingexisting data on basic indicators of studentoutcomes, our partner institutions havebeen able to locate very specifically themost critical gaps in the academic perfor-mance of African American and Latinostudents. The combined effort of theinstitutions resulted in the developmentof fifty-eight fine-grained measures (available at www.usc.edu/dept/education/CUE/projects/ds/diversityscorecard

.html). The following provides one exam-ple from each of the four perspectives.

• Access Perspective

Example: The percentage of AfricanAmericans and Latino students who suc-ceed in “gateway” courses. Gatewaycourses are those courses that serve aspoints of entry for particular majors (e.g.,particular math courses serve as pre-requi-sites for engineering and business majors).

• Retention Perspective

Example: The percentage of target groupstudents who complete courses in whichthey enroll within a term.

• Excellence

Example: The average grade point averageof Latino and African-American students,by college/major at the point of gradua-tion.

Institutional Receptivity Perspective

Example: The percentage of African-American, Latino, and Asian-Americanfaculty in each college/department com-pared with the percentage of studentsfrom these ethnic/racial groups in each

college/department (i.e., the percentage ofAfrican-American faculty in the Collegeof Arts and Sciences compared to the per-centage of African-American students inthat college).

We believe that the disaggregation ofdata on educational outcomes by race andethnicity and the determination of equitystandards are evidence-based practices thatwill make individuals more conscious ofthe state of educational outcomes for his-torically underserved students and willenable them to act purposefully.

Our partners suspected that there wereproblems, but many relied heavily onanecdotal data, both to describe the prob-lem and, in some cases, to justify why it ispractically unsolvable. With very fewexceptions, most institutions in the proj-ect lacked a disciplined and evidence-based approach to understanding educa-tional outcomes and the dimensions andthe extent of the equity gap.

We are continuing our work with thefourteen Diversity Scorecard institutionsand have two overarching goals. First, wehope to raise awareness at each institutionmore broadly around the issues identifiedon each team’s scorecard in order bringabout change. Second, we will work toinstitutionalize the use of data disaggre-gated by race and ethnicity so it becomesa routine practice and disparities in out-comes by race and ethnicity become morereadily recognized. Of course, we alsohope that our partners will continue toanalyze and discuss institutional data in away that will continue to bring aboutnew awareness. �

1 The fourteen Diversity Scorecard project

institutions include: California State University

Los Angeles, California State University-

Dominguez Hills, California State University-

Fullerton, Los Angeles City College, Los Angeles

Valley College, Cerritos College, Santa Monica

College, Riverside Community College, Whittier

College, University of Redlands, University of La

Verne, Occidental College, Loyola Marymount

University, and Mount St. Mary’s College.

Center for Urban Educatio nDiversity Scorecard ProjectUSC Rossier School of EducationWPH 702Los Angeles, CA 90089-0031(213) 740-5202(213) 740-3889 (fax)www.usc.edu/dept/education/CUE

THE DIVERSITYSCORECARD

FRAMEWORK

ACCESSMeasure:

Baseline ImprovementTarget

Equity


EquityEquity in

EducationalOutcomes

EXCELLENCEMeasure:


Equity

RETENTIONMeasure:


Equity

INSTITUTIONAL RECEPTIVITYMeasure:

LEGENDMeasure: An indicator that illustratesareas of equity or inequity of educationaloutcomes among ethnic/racial groups ofstudents.

Baseline: The historical or current statusof the measure.

Improvement Target: A periodic markerof the progress made toward equity.

Equity: The point at which equity wouldbe achieved for a given measure.

C U R R I C U L A R T R A N S F O R M A T I O NVolume 7, No. 1, 2 316 eDIV sityr

Prejudice Across America: A Nationwide Trek To Learn to See with the Other’s EyesBy James Waller, Lindaman Chair and professor of psychology, Whitworth College

Excerpted, in part, from Prejudice Across America (Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi, 2000).

WE LIVE IN A TIME OF THE MOST DRAMATIC CHANGE IN THE RACIAL BACKGROUND AND CULTURAL ORIENTATION OF OUR

POPULATION THAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED IN OUR HISTORY. THE CHANGING FACE OF AMERICA IS A REALITY . THE ISSUE IS

NOT IF OR WHEN THE FACE OF AMERICAN WILL CHANGE. THAT CHANGE IS A GIVEN AND IT IS HAPPENING NOW. RATHER,

THE ISSUE IS HOW WE WILL RESPOND TO THE CHANGING FACE OF AMERICA.

How do we embrace diversity in themidst of learning to live as a community?As a college teacher in a field (social psy-chology) that directly engages this crucialsocial challenge, I have the obligation toassist my students, most of whom comefrom white, middle-class backgrounds, tosee with the other’s eyes. How could I,even for a short time, immerse studentsin a learning experience that would com-pel them to see with the other’s eyes?

In the fall of 1995, I began to plan amonth-long cross-country study tour,“Prejudice Across America,” focusing onthe history of prejudice and discrimina-tion in America. Study tours are, obvi-ously, nothing new in higher education.A tour on this specific topic, however,that would run literally from coast tocoast, was unique. It would be an extraor-dinary opportunity to move studentsfrom the sheltered environment of highereducation and to engage them, howevertemporarily, in the experiences of racial,ethnic, and religious minorities inAmerica. I hoped that they would bedrawn closer to the daily realities faced byvictims of hatred and would more fullyrealize the persistence of prejudice acrossAmerica.

The Journey

In January 1996, sixteen students and Imet in San Francisco and traveled by railto Los Angeles, Denver, Chicago,Memphis, New Orleans, Atlanta, andWashington D.C. At each stop along the

way, we heard first-hand from membersof various minority groups regardingtheir history, culture, celebrations, andpersonal experiences as victims of preju-dice and discrimination. I lectured verylittle on the tour. The direct testimoniesof the people with whom we interactedwere the key texts of the course.

The students, rapt with attention,finally were able to augment their “class-room” understanding with the authenticface-to-face legacy of prejudice and dis-crimination. They saw that while the faceof hatred may change from generation togeneration, the inheritance remains thesame—forbidden opportunities, unful-filled dreams, inner guilt, tension andfear, societal strife, and diminished pro-ductivity. Yes, these encounters only gaveus a gauzy approximation. However, theydid move us closer to seeing with theother’s eyes than anything else I had everdone, or seen done, in higher education.

The study tour, repeated (with modifi-cations) biennially is a month-long tripthat basks in the vitality of eight greatAmerican cities—their history, identity,food, unique challenges, and accomplish-ments. It also, though, is a journey. Ajourney to confront issues of race inAmerica. A journey to face our stereotypi-cal thoughts, prejudicial attitudes, anddiscriminatory behaviors. A journey ofintrospection and self-discovery in theurban reality of an America where diver-sity is not simply a buzzword; it is a wayof life.

The Preparations

All of the examinations and assignmentsfor the tour are frontloaded into a fallpreparation course. Students not only arebetter prepared for the trip but also arethen able to focus on the human experi-ences of the journey. They can speak withpeople in the here-and-now rather thanpassively recording events, quotes, andperspectives from museum placards.Following the tour, the only remainingrequirement is the submission of a type-written copy of their daily journal fromthe tour.

For the fall preparation course, we meetone hour per week and, consistent withcollege policy, students receive one aca-demic credit. For the tour itself, theyreceive three academic credits (equivalentto a standard, non-laboratory semester-length course that meets three hours perweek). I warn them ahead of time that theworkload in no way corresponds to theacademic credits received.

The fall preparation course typicallyincludes four primary readings. The maintext, serving as the common thread aroundwhich the course is woven is RonaldTakaki’s (1993) A Different Mirror: AHistory of Multicultural America. Sincemuch of the tour focuses on the CivilRights Movement, students also readHarvard Sitkoff’s (1993) The Struggle forBlack Equality: 1954-1992. The tour alsofocuses on one specific religious preju-dice—anti-Semitism. So, in anticipationof our visits to the Wiesenthal Museum of


Tolerance in Los Angeles and the U.S.Holocaust Memorial Museum in D. C.,the students read Elie Wiesel’s (1960)Night. Finally, the students read my book,Face to Face: The Changing State of RacismAcross America (1998). In addition to thebackground information students pick upon the psychology of racism, having themread the book provides a starting pointfrom which, if I manage it well, somefruitful discussion can emerge.

Developing Needed Skills

In addition to the four required texts, stu-dents keep up with a potpourri of print orelectronic articles I forward and severalout-of-class film assignments. I also requirestudents to conduct background researchon each of the eight cities on the itinerary.This research includes finding one novelor film that would be a good introductionto the city, two “must do” things in thecity (other than those on our itinerary),one unique place to eat (unique as in“reflective of area cuisine” not as in “HardRock Café”), one relevant Web site, and abrief synopsis of the typical Januaryweather for the city. Finally, students arerequired to complete two out-of-class essayexaminations drawing from course notesand readings.

The fall preparation course unfoldsaround four objectives. The first objectiveis building human relations skills. I encour-age the students to reclaim the lost skill oflistening. Listening requires a submersionof the self and immersion in the other. Ialso tell the students that our commitmentto listen is a commitment to disagree inways that continue a conversation. Whenwe commit to these skills, we open upavenues of understanding and discovery.

The second objective is increasing self-awareness of our own prejudicial attitudesand discriminatory behaviors as well as ofour personal histories. Unless we are bru-tally honest with ourselves, most of us pro-tect our self-esteem by excluding our per-sonal stereotypes, prejudices, and

discriminatory behaviors from consciousself-awareness. It is only when we actuallyengage in personal contact with membersof different racial groups that we becomeaware of our deepest biases.

The third objective is building anawareness of diversity. We systematicallyexplore, in the traditional old-school prac-tice of text analysis and discussion, the cul-ture, language, history, contributions, andsufferings of American Indians, AsianAmericans, Blacks, Hispanics, and Jews inthis country.

The first three course objectives are thefoundational building blocks for our finalobjective —personal interaction with diver-sity. I emphasize that the application ofour knowledge in the context of personal,face-to-face interaction with diversity is thekeynote of the tour. It is why we are travel-ing cross-country rather than staying inthis classroom and interacting with our-selves. I further emphasize that this inter-action will not, at times, be comfortable.In the long run, however, it will become, ifwe allow it, the first step on our journey tosee with the other’s eyes.

The Tour

The tour focuses on the experiences of fivespecific minorities in America—Blacks,Asian Americans, Hispanics, Jews, andAmerican Indians. I realize that this omitsseveral significant racial, ethnic, and reli-gious groups that have been victims of prej-udice in our country. It also neglects thecompelling social issue of sexism. However,I operate on the conviction that if we learnthe principles behind prejudice directed atthese five specific groups—and learn themwell—we can apply many of the same prin-ciples to prejudice directed against othergroups. I choose to sacrifice breadth fordepth in hopes that depth actually providesus with a better ability to broadly apply ourlearning.

In the most recent iteration of the tour,the eight cities we visited were Los Angeles,San Francisco, Chicago, Memphis, New

Orleans, Birmingham, Atlanta, andWashington D.C. For the Los Angeles toSan Francisco and San Francisco toChicago legs of the tour, we fly. FromChicago on, however, we ride the rails ofAmtrak.

Once we are there, our travel in eachcity is restricted to public transit. In addi-tion to the obvious cost benefits, ridingpublic transit immerses us in a significantpart of the daily life experience of urbanAmerica—especially the daily life experi-ence of those living at or below the povertyline. It adds a depth to the increasing real-ization of the comfort of privilege in whichmy students live, work, and play.

Lodging in each city is either in low-budget hotels or, preferably, in interna-tional youth hostels. The hostels arefriendly, accessible, inner-city places—mostwere apartments or hotels in a formerlife—that cater to traveling student groups.Each night of the tour includes a required,and often wide-ranging, debriefing wherewe process our reactions to the day’s con-versations and events.

The itinerary of the tour evolves fromyear to year, particularly as I continue todevelop a pool of community contacts ineach city that can give us—or at least leadus to people who can give us—moreauthentic, “behind-the-scenes” profiles ofcities and communities that we visit. It isthese people—at the nexus between diver-sity and community in America—thatform the heart of the tour.

Many of these people speak with us asrepresentatives of their particular organiza-tions—the Mexican American LegalDefense and Education Fund (LosAngeles), the Tenderloin NeighborhoodDevelopment Corporation (SanFrancisco), the Faith Tabernacle BaptistChurch (Chicago), and the NationalCongress of American Indians(Washington, D.C.). In addition, I com-plement these face-to-face interactions withvisits to museums and exhibits that aredirectly tied to the objective of the tour.

continued on page 23

R E S E A R C HVolume 7, No. 1, 2 318 eDIV sityr

Percent Plans: How Successful Are They?

IN ITS BRIEFS TO THE SUPREME COURT IN THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION LAWSUITS (GRATZ V .

BOLLINGER; GRUTTER V . BOLLINGER ) , THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION ARGUED THAT DIVERSITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION WAS

A LAUDABLE GOAL, BUT SHOULD BE ACHIEVED VIA RACE-NEUTRAL MEANS. THE ADMINISTRATION POINTED TO “RACE-NEU-

TRAL” PERCENT PLANS THAT SEVERAL STATES HAVE ADOPTED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO RACE-CONSCIOUS ADMISSIONS.

PRESIDENT BUSH MAINTAINS THAT THE PERCENT PLANS IMPLEMENTED IN TEXAS , FLORIDA, AND CALIFORNIA HAVE BEEN

SUCCESSFUL AT DIVERSIFYING COLLEGE CAMPUSES WITHOUT CONSIDERING RACE AS A FACTOR IN ADMISSIONS. THE QUES-

TION REMAINS : HOW SUCCESSFUL ARE THESE PROGRAMS? AND DO THEY YIELD THE SAME OR S IMILAR RESULTS AS RACE-CON-

SCIOUS ADMISSIONS POLICIES ?

Three reports issued recently concludethat percentage plans are largely unsuc-cessful and do not yield diverse student

bodies comparable to the diversityachieved using race-conscious admissions.The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

issued Beyond Percentage Plans: TheChallenge of Equal Opportunity in HigherEducation in January, a staff report updat-ing the Commission’s earlier assessmentof percent plans in California, Florida,and Texas.

The Harvard Civil Rights Project, acollaborative of lawyers and educatorsdedicated to civil rights research, pro-duced two reports in February. Onereport, Appearance and Reality in theSunshine State: The Talented 20 Programin Florida examined the history, imple-mentation, and effects of Florida’s percentprogram. A second report, Percent Plansin College Admissions: A ComparativeAnalysis of Three States’ Experiences,assessed the impact of percent plan poli-cies on maintaining racial/ethnic diversityin California, Florida, and Texas.

Florida’s Talented 20 Program

In November 1999, Governor Jeb Bushsigned an executive order eliminating affir-mative action in admissions decisions. Inplace of affirmative action, he institutedthe Talented 20 Program. The Talented20 Program guarantees admission to oneof Florida’s 11 public institutions to thetop 20 percent of public high school grad-uates. To gain admission, students mustbe in the top 20 percent of their class,complete 19 required credit hours, and

Facts about Percent Plans

• Percent plans alone do not improvediversity by reaching underrepresentedgroups and do not serve as effectivealternatives to affirmative action.

• Percent plans do not address private col-leges and do not apply to graduate andprofessional schools.

• Percent plans rely on race-sensitive out-reach programs.

Florida’s Talented 20

• The Talented 20 plan has led to theadmission of very few students to thestate university system who would nothave been admitted under pre-existing,race-neutral standards.

• The Talented 20 plan provided no guar-antee of admission to the two mosthighly selective campuses in the system,the University of Florida (UF) and FloridaState University (FSU).

• The Talented 20 includes far moreWhite and Asian students than Blacksand Hispanics, the two groups mostunderrepresented at UF and FSU.

• The marginal success of the plan relieson race-attentive recruitment, retention,and financial aid policies.

Texas’ Ten Percent

• Texas A&M University has not achievedthe levels of diverse students that it hadbefore affirmative action was eliminated.The ten percent plan is clearly unsuccess-ful as a viable option to affirmativeaction at this university.

• University of Texas, Austin still strugglesto admit Black students and utilizesextensive outreach and recruitment pro-grams to maintain campus diversity.

California’s Four Percent Plan

• The Four Percent plan does not guaran-tee admission to the two most selectivecampuses in the UC system, Berkeleyand Los Angeles. Proportionally, fewerBlack and Latinos are enrolled at theflagship institutions now than in 1995before Proposition 209 went into effect.

• Proportionally fewer minorities apply orare enrolled now than in 1995 whenaffirmative action was eliminated.


submit an SAT or ACT score. This pro-gram does not guarantee admission to thestudent’s public institution of choice. Inaddition, no provisions in the programwere made for graduate and professionaladmissions.

Harvard researchers interviewed andvisited several Florida state agencies anduniversity campuses. Their study con-cludes that the Talented 20 Program is notan effective alternative to race-consciousadmissions and is not race-neutral. In fact,the program relies on race-attentive mea-sures, such as financial aid and outreachprograms, to enjoy minimal success.

University of California’s

Four Percent Plan

In 1996, California voters passedProposition 209 that eliminated affirma-tive action in public education, employ-ment, and contracting. Governor GrayDavis implemented the Four Percent planin 1999. The Four Percent plan guaran-teed admission to at least one institutionin the University of California’s eight-campus system to high school graduates inthe top 4 percent of their high school. Theprogram does not guarantee admission tothe university of a student’s choice.

Shortly after the ban, institutions beganto institute outreach programs to increasethe eligibility rates of students fromschools that had significant educationaldisadvantages and schools that producedfew college-bound students. Despite sig-nificant spending on campus outreachefforts that often targeted racially segre-gated high schools, campus diversity didnot increase. Sharp declines in the propor-tions of African American, Hispanics, andNative Americans admitted and enrolledinto the UC System were evident.

New admissions policies have slightlyincreased applications and admissions from minorities, but fewer African-American, Hispanic, and Native Americanapplicants are admitted to the most selec-

tive campuses—Berkeley, Los Angeles, andSan Diego. In addition, proportionallyfewer minorities even bother to apply nowas compared to 1995 when the ban tookeffect.

State of Texas

The Texas legislature instituted “the tenpercent plan” (HB 588) after the FifthCircuit decision Hopwood v. State ofTexas effectively eliminated affirmativeaction in admissions in the state. HB588 guaranteed high school graduates in

the top ten percent of their classes admis-sion to a Texas public college or univer-sity of their choice. Eligible studentsunder the 10 percent plan can chooseadmission to the state’s two flagshipinstitutions—University of Texas, Austinor Texas A&M University—or any ofthe other Texas public institutions. Theten percent plan does not apply to gradu-ate students.

Although the number of undergraduateminorities applying to the University ofTexas-Austin has continued to increase

since 1996, the percentage of those admit-ted has declined, as has the number ofthose who actually enroll. Both studiesreport that extensive outreach and recruit-ment programs are used to bolster theenrollment of underrepresented groups.Texas A&M University has not yetreached the pre-Hopwood proportionalpercentages of African Americans andHispanics, despite the use of the ten per-cent plan. This is particularly salient giventhe fact that the population of African-American and Hispanic fifteen- to nine-teen-year-olds continues to increase.

Conclusion

In addition to concluding that percentplans do not sufficiently improve racialdiversity by reaching underrepresentedminorities, the three studies illustrate twomain points about percent plans. The firstpoint is that the plans are mechanicallydistinctive, with different pools of eligiblestudents and different guarantees ofadmission. Whereas, public and privatehigh school students in Texas andCalifornia are eligible for participation inthe percent plans, only Florida public highschools students are eligible for theTalented 20 plan. While Texas guaranteesadmission to the two premier flagshipinstitutions in the state (the only schoolswhere selective admissions are used),Florida and California plans only guaran-tee admission to the state university sys-tems as a whole, not necessarily the flag-ship institutions.

Secondly, percentage plans alone areinsufficient. Moreover, they are aided byother “racially attentive” supplementalrecruitment, admissions, and financial aidprograms that are by no means race-neu-tral. These additional programs boostminority representation, but they do notsubstantially increase their numbers. Thus,racially sensitive efforts are still being usedto increase diversity, but they are less effec-tive than affirmative action policies. �

New admissions policies

have slightly increased

applications and admissions

from minorities, but fewer

African-American, Hispanic,

and Native American

applicants are admitted to

the most selective campuses—

Berkeley, Los Angeles,

and San Diego.

R E S O U R C E SVolume 7, No. 1, 2 320 eDIV sityr

MULTIMEDIAGroundbreaking Three-Part Series

Presented by ITVS Challenges

Genetic Basis of Race; Reveals How the

Myth Took Hold and Retains Its Power

This is the firstfilm series toscrutinize thevery idea ofrace throughthe distinct lenses of science, history, andour social institutions. Race—The Power ofan Illusion, aired nationally on PBS on threeconsecutive Thursday nights at 10 p.m.—April 24, May 1 and May 8, 2003. Episode1: “The Difference Between Us,” surveyedthe scientific findings—including genet-ics—that suggest that the concept of racehas no biological basis. Episode 2: “TheStory We Tell,” provides the historical con-text for race in North America, includingwhen and how the idea got started and whyit took such a hold over our minds. Episode3: “The House We Live In,” spotlights howour social institutions “make” race by pro-viding different groups vastly different lifechances even today, forty years after theCivil Rights Act.

Black History Radio Documentary:

Between Civil War and Civil Rights

This production is a series of one-hourradio documentaries exploring the historyof race relations between black and whiteAmericans from Emancipation to thebeginning of the Civil Rights Movement inthe 1950s. Discussion guides and curriculaare included. Narrators include James EarlJones and Studs Terkel. For more informa-tion, contact Creative Change Productions,1772 Hayes St., San Francisco, CA 94117-1218, (415) 614-2125, [email protected].

BOOKSAffirmative Action in Antidiscrimination

Law and Policy: An Overview and

Synthesis

By Samuel Leiter and William M. LeiterAffirmative action has been and continues

to be the flashpoint of America’s civil rightsagenda. Yet while the affirmative action lit-erature is voluminous, no comprehensiveaccount of its major legal and public policydimension exists. Samuel and William M.Leiter examine the origin and growth ofaffirmative action, its impact on Americansociety, its current state, and its future anti-discrimination role, if any. Informed byseveral different disciplines—law, history,economics, sociology, political science,urban studies, and criminology—the textcombines the relevant legal materials withanalysis and commentary from a variety ofexperts. This even-handed presentation ofthe subject of affirmative action is sure to bea valuable aid to those seeking to under-stand the issue’s many complexities. Toorder online, see www.sunypress.edu.

Holding Up the Mirror: Working

Interdependently for Just and Inclusive

Communities

By Maggie PotapchukTug-of-wars overstyle and strategyhave often con-strained the rela-tionship betweengroups in the race relations and racial jus-tice movement. Some have been labeled astoo confrontational, while others have beenaccused of working too much within thepower structure. Holding Up the Mirror:Working Interdependently for Just andInclusive Communities, published by theJoint Center for Political and EconomicStudies, shows that mutual acceptance ofseemingly competing tactics can make themovement stronger and more effective.Authored by Maggie Potapchuk, seniorprogram associate with the Joint Center’sNetwork of Alliances Bridging Race andEthnicity (NABRE) program, Holding Upthe Mirror provides greater insight into ninedistinct approaches being used by local andnational organizations across the country. Italso recommends ways for creating collabo-rative strategies to address community

issues. To order, contact the Joint Center’sOffice of Communications and Marketingat 202-789-3500. $15.00.

Study Circle Resources Center Publishes

New Guide on U.S. Policy Toward Iraq

Around the globe, leaders and everydaypeople are concerned about U.S. policytoward Iraq. In the United States, many ofus are thinking and talking about this issue.What should we do or not do? Should ourcountry work with the United Nations andthe rest of the world, or should we makedecisions on our own? How should our sta-tus as the world’s only “superpower” affectour decision-making? SCRC now has a dis-cussion guide titled U.S. Policy TowardIraq: What Should We Do? that will helpyou talk about this issue in a single, two-hour session. Download a free copy of theguide from www.studycircles.org.

CONFERENCEConference on Anti-Bias Education:

Practice, Research, and Theory

June 6-8, 2003Hilton Hotel, Evanston, Illinois The goal of the conference was to mold thefuture of anti-bias, multicultural, and socialjustice education by bringing togetherpractitioners and researchers to share state-of-the-art knowledge, strategies, theories,models, research results, and applicationsin our fragmented field. The conferenceprovided intergroup relations researcherswith information on best practices in anti-bias education and expand the theoreticaland research knowledge of educationalpractitioners.

The two keynote speakers were Dr.James A. Banks, who is the director of theCenter for Multicultural Education at theUniversity of Washington and MargotStern Strom, who is the executive directorand president of the Facing History andOurselves National Foundation. The con-ference sponsors are The American JewishCommittee (Chicago) and the Society forthe Psychological Study of Social Issues.

R E S E A R C H Volume 7, No. 1, 221eDIV sityr

Campus Life for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender People

AS HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS HAVE BECOME MORE AWARE OF THE DISCRIMINATION ENDURED BY MANY GAY, LESBIAN,

BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER (GLBT) MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMUNITIES, MANY INSTITUTIONS HAVE IMPLEMENTED STRUC-

TURAL AND POLICY CHANGES. SOME INSTITUTIONS HAVE ESTABLISHED GLBT RESOURCE CENTERS AND GLBT STUDIES PRO-

GRAMS. MANY HAVE REVISED OR CREATED GLBT-INCLUSIVE ADMINISTRATIVE PLANS, SUCH AS DOMESTIC PARTNER BENEFITS

AND NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICIES. HOW DO STUDENTS, FACULTY, AND STAFF FEEL ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES ON CAMPUS?

DR. SUE RANKIN, SENIOR DIVERSITY PLANNING ANALYST AT PENN STATE UNIVERSITY, CONDUCTED A NATIONAL CAMPUS CLI-

MATE STUDY TO ASCERTAIN IF SUCH INITIATIVES HAVE CHANGED THE INSTITUTIONAL CLIMATE FOR GLBT INDIVIDUALS.

Research for the study began in Octoberof 2000. Thirty institutions were invitedto participate in the study. Twenty insti-tutions agreed, while fourteen ultimatelycompleted the project. A survey wasdesigned to elicit information fromrespondents about their personal campusexperiences as a member of the GLBTcommunity, their perception of the cli-mate for GLBT members of the academiccommunity, and their perceptions ofinstitutional actions, including adminis-trative policies and academic initiativesregarding GLBT issues and concerns oncampus. Respondents were also givenadditional space on the survey to providepersonal commentary.

The survey focused on three themes.The themes included (1) lived oppressiveexperiences, (2) perceptions of GLBToppression on campus by respondents,and (3) institutional actions includingadministrative policies and academic ini-tiatives regarding GLBT issues and con-cerns on campus.

More than 1,600 surveys were returnedrepresenting: 1,000 students, 150 facultyand 467 staff/administrators, 326 peopleof color, 66 people with disabilities, 572gay people, 458 lesbian people, 334bisexual people, 68 transgender people,848 women, 720 men, and 825 “clos-eted” people.

Lived Oppressive Experiences

More than one-third (36 percent) ofGLBT undergraduate students reportedexperiencing harassment within the pastyear. In addition, 79 percent of thoseharassed identified students as the sourceof harassment. The most common formof harassment was derogatory remarks(89 percent). Disturbingly, twenty per-cent feared for their physical safetybecause of their sexual orientation/genderidentity, and 51 percent concealed theirsexual orientation/gender identity toavoid intimidation.

Perceptions of GLBT Oppression

on Campus

Forty-three percent of the respondentsrated the overall campus climate as homo-phobic. In order to avoid discrimination,36 percent of respondents reported thatthey would likely conceal their sexual ori-entation/gender identity. Further, 10 per-cent of respondents would avoid areas ofcampus where GLBT persons congregatefor fear of being labeled.

Institutional Actions

Respondents held fairly mixed beliefs oninstitutional commitment to GLBT issues.Forty-one percent of the respondentsstated that their college/university was notaddressing issues related to sexual orienta-tion/gender identity. Forty-three percent

of the participants felt that the curriculumdid not represent the contributions ofGLBT people. But on the whole respon-dents attested to a more supportive climatein their immediate work space or class-room. Sixty-four percent agreed that theirwork site or their classrooms acceptedthem as GLBT persons.

Recommendations

The fourteen participating institutionsagreed to take part in the study so thatthey could identify challenges and prob-lems confronting their campus communi-ties. The results will be used to identifyspecific strategies for addressing the prob-lems that confront each campus individu-ally. Generally, broad recommendationswere made to provide a starting point forcampus leaders. Among key suggestions toimprove the campus environment forGLBT students were: recruit and retainGLBT individuals, demonstrate institu-tional commitment to GLBT issues/con-cerns, integrate GLBT issues/concerns intothe curriculum and pedagogy, and createsafe spaces for dialogue and interaction. �

Reference:

Rankin, Susan. 2003. Campus climate forgay, lesbian, and transgender people: Anational perspective. New York: ThePolicy Institute of the National Gay andLesbian Task Force.

S T U D E N T E X P E R I E N C EVolume 7, No. 1, 2 322 eDIV sityr

The E Pluribus Unum Project:Engaging Diversity and Nurturing Commitment, Collaboration,and Service in an Interfaith Learning CommunityBy Jim Keen, college professor, Antioch College

Excerpted, in part, from The E Pluribus Unum Project, The Washington Institute for Jewish Leadership and Values (2000)

IN THREE SHORT YEARS , THE E PLURIBUS UNUM (EPU) PROJECT, HAS ESTABLISHED A BOLD AND EFFECTIVE DESIGN FOR FOS-

TERING INTERRELIGIOUS COLLABORATION PROMOTING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND THE COMMON GOOD. FOR THREE WEEKS , THE

EPU PROJECT GATHERED S IXTY HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES , DIVIDED EQUALLY AMONG CATHOLICS , JEWS, AND PROTESTANTS,

FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING HOW THEIR RESPECTIVE RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS MIGHT INSPIRE COMMUNITY SERVICE,

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT, AND COMMITMENT TO THE COMMON GOOD.

The learning environment designed tocarry out this vision was multidimensional,featuring formal study of religion with par-ticular emphasis on teachings related to theenvironment, poverty, and human rights,as well as training in reflective listening,group governance, collaborative socialproblem solving, and exploration of spiri-tuality through the arts and communityservice. Participants engaged in interfaithreflection and dialogue teams calledcovenant groups which supplementedinformal conversation and reflection on thetopics of the conference.

These aspects of the conference wereintegrated in a powerful group experienceguided by the challenge the conference putsto its participants at the outset: to spendthree weeks building a community amongthemselves that recognizes, appreciates,elaborates, and engages their diversity. Thisrepresented a powerful, and some might sayutopian challenge, but one that participantshave risen each year to meet with energyand grace in spite of occasional misunder-standings, tough moments, and very realconflicts that often arose as people movedbeyond the niceties of the surface encounterto the harder work of engaging each otheracross thresholds of significant difference.

The EPU Program

The program succeeds by inviting religiouseducators from each of the traditions to

adopt a method of bringing traditional reli-gious wisdom into conversation with con-temporary issues through the integration offour strands of learning: academic (religious

social teachings), spiritual arts, service andadvocacy, and building community.

The academic program consists of faith-alike classes in which participants join oth-ers from their own faith tradition in anexploration of how their tradition addressesissues of human rights, poverty, and theenvironment, as well as how it relates tothe other faith traditions, particularly withregard to interreligious collaboration forthe common good. Faith-alike classes areled three days a week by the faculty mem-ber of that tradition. The three facultyrotate so that each week each faith-alikeclass has one session taught by one of thefaculty from the other two faith traditions.

Thus the participants receive a substantialintroduction to the other two faith tradi-tions and how those traditions address theissues they are exploring within their owntradition.

In a second component of the program,the spiritual arts, participants explore thearts as a vehicle for social and politicalexpression and as a nexus of individual spir-ituality and community sharing. Each par-ticipant spends three weeks exploring oneof the following art forms: dance, drama,vocal music, storytelling, and visual arts.

A third programmatic strand is volunteerservice. Almost all EPU participants wereinvolved in community service prior toEPU and participated in new forms of ser-vice during the conference.

A final program area, community life,can be fruitfully divided into several morecomponents: worship, community meet-ings, and covenant groups. In addition topilgrimages which involved most partici-pants attending one or more of a variety ofworship services in the DC area each week-end, two to three communal worship ser-vices were held each week. Community lifeplenaries provided opportunities for partici-pants and staff to address directly the chal-lenge to create community. Communitydiscussions clarified the purposes of theprogram and community reflection pro-vided time for processing and assessingwhat was being learned.

Participants explore the arts

as a vehicle for social and

political expression and as a

nexus of individual spirituality

and community sharing.


Covenant groups function as the key-stone in EPU’s design as an integrativelearning environment. Convenant groupsmediate the intersection of formal andinformal learning by promoting conversa-tions focused on the questions, “Who am I?What is my experience in the world? Whatam I currently learning? And what does thismean for me?” There is an emphasis onreflection and dialogue which aims at theconstruction of more “connected” levels ofmeaning and at the development of astronger sense of voice which integrates stu-dents’ affective experience with their grow-ing intellectual understanding of what theyare studying.

Student Outcomes: Religious Identity

and Crossing Thresholds of Difference

By devoting a significant amount of primeprogram time to formal instruction andexploration in faith-alike groups, the EPUdesign provides a context conducive to themaintenance and development of self iden-tification with, and loyalty to, one’s ownfaith tradition. Faith-alike groups functionas confirmational contexts in each of whicha talented teacher representing that tradi-tion provides instruction and clarificationwhile inviting participant’s deep questionsand concerns. Participants report that the

interreligious nature of the learning envi-ronment as a whole stimulates their reflec-tion and exploration of their own traditionsas they seek firmer ground on which tostand as interreligious collaborators.

In my conversations with participants, Ifound that EPU had fostered for them asubstantial and constructive engagementwith diversity that they connected directlywith the pursuit of the common good. Asone student put it:

I feel like it has a lot to do with expandinghow many people you include in your circleand when you get to talk to people of otherfaiths. I personally felt like you begin torealize that even though you have differentpractices of worship and different rituals,and different names for things, you all havean abiding faith. I feel like that brings peo-ple closer together. And when you expandyour definition of people you have some-thing in common with, then you feel muchmore committed to the common good.

Lessons from EPU

That EPU succeeds so well at fosteringinterreligious dialogue and connecting it tothe common good, makes it, to my mind,an exemplary program from which otherswho share similar visions can learn severalimportant lessons.

First, EPU demonstrates that it is possi-ble to structure learning environments inwhich participants are likely to haveenlarging encounters with difference. Thefaith-alike, covenant group counterpointpicked up the energy from the informalinteractions in the dorm and elsewhere,yielding an approach that neither over-directed interreligious dialogue nor left itto chance.

Second, the covenant group design isone that could potentially be incorporatedinto any learning environment in whichparticipants are strongly invested in theirlearning and share a real interest in dia-logue and reflection. The covenant groupintegrates the program by mediating in areflective dialogical manner between theformal and informal dimensions of a learn-ing environment.

Third, by placing covenant groups in aframework that also incorporates faith-alikeexploration of one’s own religious traditionand introduction to the religious traditionsof others, EPU supports a practice of inter-religious dialogue in which participants cancome to grips with irreducible difference,and therefore, find a more authentic senseof common ground and the basis for inter-religious solidarity in a pluralist approach tothe common good. �

Outcomes

Quite unexpectedly, the tours have cap-tured an incredible amount of interest. Wehave drawn national media attention fromCNN, new wire services, and The Chronicleof Higher Education. The White Houseselected the tour as one of the national“Promising Practices to Promote RacialReconciliation” and even extended a gra-cious invitation to our 1998 tour to sit inon a briefing with the President’s Initiativeon Race. I have published a book, PrejudiceAcross America (2000), chronicling the1998 study tour. Something about the tour,

and our experiences on it, has resonatedwith a diverse range of people, both as newsand as pedagogy.

The tour is not a perfect experience. Westill need to spend more time interactingwith community leaders and activists andless time reading museum placards. The fallpreparation course should be more focused.Upon returning to campus, we should finda better way of finding some closure to theintensity of our experiences during January.

Despite all of this, however, each of thestudy tours has been an explosion of per-sonal self-discovery for me. Similarly, I am

struck by the meaning that the students takefrom the tour. Our experiences typicallyraise more questions than answers. Thesequestions, however, compel us to continueour conversation and ultimately may lead usto answers that will help make a fragmentedsociety whole. In their final journal entry, Iask the students to share what the tourmeant to them and what it will mean totheir futures. Their responses reflect thediversity of who they are, who they want tobe, and who they are becoming. They alsoreflect just the beginning of their journeys—both personal and professional. �

Prejudice Across America: continued from page 17

D I G E S T

D erI IV S TY

1818 R Street NW

Washington DC 20009

T: 202/387-3760

F: 202/265-9532

About AAC&UAAC&U is the leading national association devoted to

advancing and strengthening liberal learning for all stu-dents, regardless of academic specialization or intendedcareer. Since its founding in 1915, AAC&U’s membershiphas grown to more than 850 accredited public and privatecolleges and universities of every type and size.

AAC&U functions as a catalyst and facilitator, forginglinks among presidents, administrators, and faculty memberswho are engaged in institutional and curricular planning.Its mission is to reinforce the collective commitment to lib-eral education at both the national and local levels and tohelp individual institutions keep the quality of studentlearning at the core of their work as they evolve to meet neweconomic and social challenges.

From AAC&U Board Statement on liberal learning

AAC&U believes that by its nature...liberal learning isglobal and pluralistic. It embraces the diversity of ideasand experiences that characterize the social, natural, andintellectual world. To acknowledge such diversity in all itsforms is both an intellectual commitment and a socialresponsibility, for nothing less will equip us to understandour world and to pursue fruitful lives.

US PostagePAID

NonprofitOrganization

Permit No. 8410Washington, DC

An Important Message About Diversity DigestDiversity Digest is offered in two different formats. We are now requestingthat you designate which you would prefer to receive. Please note: If we donot hear from you, this will be the last print issue of Diversity Digest youreceive, unless you are an AAC&U designated representative or associate.

Online Version of Diversity Digest The online version of Diversity Digest is available in both HTML and PDFformats at www.diversityweb.org/digest. These electronic formats make iteasy to link to programs, materials, and resources discussed in DiversityDigest or to print specific articles that interest you. If you choose to accessDiversity Digest on the Web, an e-mail will be sent to you whenever a newissue is posted.

Print Version of Diversity DigestIf you would like to continue to receive the print edition of Diversity Digest, you will need to contact us to continue your free subscription.

Designate Which You Prefer to ReceivePlease let us know if 1) you prefer access to the online version and want toreceive an e-mail notifying you each time a new issue is posted on the Web; or 2) if you want to receive the print version. Send your preference to [email protected] or call Lori Webster at 202-387-3760. Please be sureto provide your name, title, complete mailing address, phone number, ande-mail address, regardless of which format you choose. If you have questions,please e-mail us at [email protected].

Date post:	15-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES … · tional change in higher education and...

Documents