AN ANALYSIS OF STUDENT OPINIONS ON DIVERSITY AT

THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWAREBy

Alexandra Davis

International Relations & Public Policy major

Supervised by

Dr. David Wilson

Department of Political Science and International Relations

ABSTRACT:In the spring of 2011, The Middle States Commission on Higher Education reported a

concerning lack of diversity on the University of Delaware’s (UD) Newark campus. The report suggested that despite several initiatives, vast improvements in the area of diversity were not being made as fast as the commission, administrators, and students might like. In the wake of this report the 2012 Blue Hen Poll, a scientific study of undergraduate student opinion at UD (N=1,312), sought to measure a wide range of opinions and beliefs about student diversity. Overall, the data paints a mixed picture of student opinions on diversity at UD. Students’ general perceptions of diversity are quite positive; however, the university receives only moderate grades on their diversity practices, a significant proportion of students perceive diversity as another form of Affirmative Action, and many students believe that focusing on diversity discriminates against students that are not racial minorities. The findings suggest the university and its leadership have some work to do to reach the expectations of the Middle States Commission, as well as the expectations laid forth in UD’s strategic plan.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2012 Undergraduate Research and Service Celebratory Symposium at the University of Delaware in Newark, DE. Please do not cite without the authors' or supervisors’ permission.

Please send paper and citation requests to asdavis@udel.edu.

2

INTRODUCTION

Diversity is something that has not always existed in the United States. Currently the

country is experiencing a post-civil rights era that is demanding institutions of higher education

mirror the population of the country. The University of Delaware (UD) has recently come under

criticism for its inability to successfully mirror the population of the United States in a diverse

student body, despite actions taken to improve the problem over several decades. In the spring of

2011, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education evaluated the University of Delaware

and presented to members of the campus community that, “UD is not diverse in either absolute

or relative terms” (Cohon 2011). They further reported, “the university trails its peers in every

measure of diversity in every constituency of the institution”.

Several studies have also demonstrated the importance of diversity in learning

environments of higher education including benefits such as higher satisfaction rates, enhanced

capability for creativity, and improved teamwork skills in the workplace. These advantages,

coupled with the concerns of the Middle States Commission, and increased pressure on the

university to diversify its student body raises the question, what do students think?

Understanding how students think about diversity is one of the first steps in implementing

policies to make the University of Delaware a more diverse institution and to allow students to

reap the benefits that diversity can offer. Also, due to the fact that UD students generally come

from states that are fairly diverse such as Delaware, New Jersey, and New York, there was an

interest in seeing what the student body thought about critical issues on the subject.

Unfortunately, there is very little data that exists in regards to student attitudes towards diversity

barring a few private surveys. In order to answer these questions concerning student

perspectives, data was gathered through the 2012 Blue Hen Poll (BHP), which allowed for the

3

analysis of UD student opinions on diversity. The goal was to first see if students understand the

scope of diversity discussed in the evaluation, and next if they value and support its promotion

on campus and in the classroom. The BHP also enabled us to dig deeper to uncover underlying

causes of these student attitudes.

The first objective of discovering whether or not the scope of diversity is accepted and

understood by students is important because the term is often perceived to be more targeted at

racial or ethnic groups and less encompassing of gender, socioeconomic status, disabilities, and

sexual orientation, for example. Prior to receiving the results of the poll, it was hypothesized that

UD students would be likely to ignore most elements of the term and focus on perceived

connections between diversity and Affirmative Action more than anything else and therefore

conjure associations between the two. In measuring how comfortable students believe campus

climate is for minority groups on campus such as older non-traditional students, veterans, and

racial-ethnic minority students, a prediction was made that most students would believe that each

group had a comfortable climate on campus but racial/ethnic minority students would report a

lower campus climate score for their group. In general, it was also expected that most UD

undergraduate students would be open to the idea of a diverse campus but that an overwhelming

majority would give UD a near failing grade for their analysis of the student body diversity. It

was predicted that students would also say that the university does a sub-par job of promoting

diversity.

THE ISSUE OF DIVERSITY

Diversity in Higher Education

Diversity is often a term tossed around in realms as disparate as access to housing, to the

corporate world. It is a word used to keep institutions, organizations, and even the government

4

accountable to certain standards, but because the term is so ambiguous and its value often

unknown, there is great controversy which comes with policies and regulations that promote it.

When it comes to higher education especially, there has been a long history of conflicting

perspectives on whether certain elements of diversity should be considered in admissions

processes. Independent of Affirmative Action, though, is the criticism of universities based on

the diversity of their student bodies and the analysis of diversity initiatives they have undertaken.

The first step in assessing these policies is holding them to a clear definition of diversity and

what “diverse” student populations are expected to look like.

Kenneth Koppelman defines diversity as the “presence of human beings with perceived

or actual differences based on a variety of human characteristics” (Koppelman 2011), and

considers group identification factors such as race and ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation,

socioeconomic status, religion, and disability. In his book, Multicultural Education for a Diverse

America, he specifically stresses the distinction between diversity and pluralism. While he

identifies diversity as simply the existence of varying groups of people within a population, he

explains that pluralism “describes a society in which diversity is accepted and supported”.

Pluralism is essential especially in higher education because these varying groups must interact

with a level of mutual respect in order for the institution to function. Recruiting this ideal diverse

group of individuals to an institution is only the first hurdle. Pluralism is the ultimate goal. While

some definitions focus on the variables that make up a diverse society, others, similar to

Koppelman’s pluralism perspective, stress that a key component of being “diverse” is succeeding

at inclusion.

In their article, Diversity and Higher Education, Patricia Gurin, Eric L. Dey, Sylvia

Hurtado and Gerald Gurin, also make the distinction between two different denotations of

5

diversity. The first they coin “structural diversity” because it deals strictly with numbers. They

point out that with a great deal of structural diversity, the probability of encountering diverse

groups is increased, but this does not ensure the groups will interact with one another and

communicate positively and effectively. Therefore, the authors present “formal interactional

diversity” to describe “both the frequency and the quality of intergroup interaction as keys to

meaningful diversity experiences during college.” (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, Gurin 2009). These

impacts are received in settings that a multicultural education cannot reach such as in the

residence halls and at campus events, for example.

Because so many have trouble defining diversity, it has also been a struggle identifying a

widely accepted standard of diverse student populations. This can make it difficulty to evaluate a

university in measuring progress. Mitchell Chang of UCLA, who specializes in diversity-related

initiatives on college campuses, even went as far as developing a mathematical formula to

measure diversity, which resembles that of standard deviation:

(A-m) 2 + (L-m) 2 + (B-m) 2 + (W-m) 2 4

Chang describes his formula as a way to “assess an institution’s ability to provide

opportunities for all students to interact with others from different racial groups” (Chang 1991),

which speaks to the previously mentioned “structural diversity”. Essentially, it juxtaposes

percentages of racial/ethnic student groups (Blacks, Latinos, Asian Americans and Whites) with

the mean of these groups among all institutions of higher education. The more variance across

the groups and the larger the standard deviation, the lower the diversity index of an institution.

Unfortunately, though, at the University of Delaware, diversity is not well defined and

there is not a diversity standard put in place. It is stated in the University of Delaware’s Path to

Prominence through Diversity, “bold action will be needed to foster diversity – in all its

6

dimensions’ – on our campus” (The Path to Prominence through Diversity 2009), but it is

unclear what this means for the campus because “fostering” diversity is difficult when there is

not an explicit standard of a diverse institution. UD’s Strategic Path to Prominence also states

that “we will embrace diversity as an integral and vital part of everyday life and a cornerstone

value of our University”, but the same problem of ambiguity remains. The document goes on to

state that the university has purposefully “used a broad definition of diversity to refer to diverse

intellectual perspectives and the different views and experiences that are generated from a

diverse population”. Regardless, the vagueness of the term makes it difficult to craft standards

and benchmarks for the University of Delaware.

Multicultural Education

In addition to providing a diverse and cultural college atmosphere to students, another

demand of universities today is to provide courses, sometimes mandatory, to explicitly educate

students about cultures of the world. James A. Banks of the University of Washington claims

that the key to succeeding at providing a truly multicultural education is to “reform schools,

colleges, and universities so that students from diverse racial, ethnic, and social-class group will

experience educational equality” (Banks 2001). A crucial part of that definition is reform.

Specialists in the field state that institutional adaptation is essential for this goal to be achieved.

Banks says one effective way of doing this is altering curriculum requirements by introducing

multicultural courses to educate students about other groups and to help them to realize other

cultures are just as valuable as their own.

Mitchell Chang conducted a study in 1999 in which the effects of twenty-five diversity

courses were examined. Students both enrolled in these courses and a control group who were

not enrolled, were tested by the Modern Racism Scale to measure their prejudice towards

7

African Americans. Chang found that students who were near completion of their diversity

course requirements made significantly more favorable judgments of African Americans as

opposed to those who were just beginning them (Chang 2001).

In Diversity and Higher Education, Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin (2009) came up with

a third definition of diversity that they deemed critical and labeled “classroom diversity”. This

final definition focuses more on the formal educational impacts of diversity as received in the

classroom by learning about different cultures and also interacting with diverse peers in the

classroom environment.

The ultimate goal of a multicultural education, and a frequent argument for diversity

promotion, is to prepare students for an extremely diverse corporate world and to prepare them to

excel in it. As Banks puts it, “provide students with the skills, attitudes, and knowledge they need

to function within their community culture and the mainstream culture, as well as within and

across other ethnic cultures.” An example he provides is Anglo-American students familiarizing

themselves with Black English and vice-versa (Banks 2001).

Essentiality of Diversity

Although there are many benefits of diverse student populations in higher education that

research has shed light on, the singular benefit that has demonstrated the most caliber is the

chance to absorb varied culture by interaction with members of other racial/ethnic groups,

countries, and backgrounds. The professional world is so diverse in a vast array of ways, that in

order to succeed in it, being able to excel working with diverse individuals is critical. As Neil L.

Rudenstine suggests in his article, Student Diversity and Higher Learning, experiencing varied

perspectives from other students’ experiences provides countless benefits. More so, living,

working, and relaxing with these people in a college setting is an extraordinary opportunity for

8

emersion. “A diverse educational environment challenges them to explore ideas and arguments

at a deeper level- to see issues from various sides, to rethink their own premises, and to achieve

the kind of understanding that comes only from testing their own hypotheses against those of

people with opposing views” (Rudenstine 2001). UD’s Diversity Task Force actually cites this as

one of the university’s core purposes in its Path to Prominence through Diversity report. They

express, “The fundamental mission of the University is intellectual production and the education

of new generations of citizens who must be prepared to live and work in an increasingly diverse

and global world” (The Path to Prominence through Diversity 2009). The report goes on to say,

“we know that having a more diverse campus is critical for preparing our students to enter the

workforce.”

In his opinion statement for the 1978 Regents of the Universtiy of California v. Bakke

case, Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell wrote, “It is not too much to say that the nation’s

future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to the ideas and mores of students as

diverse as this Nation of many peoples.” (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, Gurin 2009). This opinion has

provided grounds for promoting Affirmative Action across the nation, which speaks volumes to

how valuable a diverse educational experience has become to experts in many facets of the

professional world.

Using the diversity formula he derived, as referenced earlier, Mitchell Chang conducted a

study for assessing the impact of certain university variables on student outcomes four years in

the future. He controlled for “views and goals” of entering freshman throughout the duration of

the study and at the study’s conclusion measured the frequency with which students socialized

with those of different racial backgrounds and also the frequency of which they held discussions

concerning racial issues. Other controls of the institutions involved in the study included size,

9

location, type, religious affiliation, gender, and selectivity. Chang’s findings suggest that

regardless of students’ racial background, “socializing with someone of another racial group is

positively related to … retention, satisfaction with college, intellectual self-confidence, and

social self-confidence” (Chang 1990). He found that discussing racial issues has similar positive

effects. In conclusion, Chang states that critics of Affirmative Action policies in higher education

are just plain wrong. The study suggests that on campuses in which diversity has thrived, its

effects have provided significant educational, individual, and social benefits.

Chang also found that a diverse student body in higher education is also associated with

“stronger commitment to multiculturalism, a greater faculty emphasis on racial and gender issues

in their research and in the classroom, and more frequent student involvement in cultural

awareness workshops and ethnic studies courses” (Chang 1996). In turn, a study conducted by

Alexander Astin found that these six characteristics discovered by Chang are correlated with

“positive impacts on student retention, overall college satisfaction, college GPA, intellectual self-

confidence, and social self confidence” (Astin 1993). These five elements are extremely valuable

to the university experience and this type of data is exactly why the University of Delaware and

other institutions across the nation have made promoting diversity amongst their student body

such a monumental priority.

What does the University of Delaware Look Like?

After taking a look at student body demographics, it is unsurprising that the Middle

States Commission on Higher Education came to its conclusion about the University of

Delaware not being diverse “in either absolute or relative terms” (Cohon 2011). Over the past

five years, undergraduate enrollment at The University of Delaware has never been less than 77

percent White. As of 2011, with only 4.4 percent of the population identifying as African

10

American, there is a 73 percentage point gap between the two groups. When the raw numbers are

examined, the lack of diversity amongst the student body is even more evident. Of 16,262

undergraduate students, 966 are Hispanic, 716 are African American, and 620 Asian students are

enrolled. Not one of the minority groups on campus could even break 1,000. Although since

2007, the percentage of White students has dropped almost four percent, the gaps remain

staggering.

What is interesting though, is why UD is not more diverse considering demographics for

the state of Delaware and considering the fact that in 2011, 36 percent of UD students were

Delawareans. The U.S. Census Bureau reported that in 2011 only 65.1 percent of the population

identified as White (almost 15 percentage points lower than UD demographics) and Blacks and

Hispanics represented 21.9 percent and 8.4 percent respectively. The question then becomes,

where are all of Delaware’s minority students going and why are they not choosing to attend

UD? Are the university’s inclusivity policies just not making minorities feel welcome enough?

Or could it be possible that it is not the university’s policies that are the issue but how current

UD students feel about diversifying their campus? Recognition of these attitudes could be

keeping minority students away.

UD Policy Initiatives

The University of Delaware has had a nettlesome history with campus diversity over the

course of several decades. There have been many commissions, task forces, and councils put in

place to attempt to conquer this area in which the institution is sorely lacking. It is why UD’s

Path to Prominence states diversity as an essential element in raising the university’s

“prominence in the world”. President Patrick Harker’s administration began a series of initiatives

to achieve this goal. The first of which, in 2007, was the Diversity Task Force, which essentially

11

was in charge of “recommending” initiatives to promote diversity at UD. In 2009 Harker

initiated the Office of Equity and Inclusion, which operates in several functional areas including

Affirmative Action, campus diversity, LGTB issues, and women’s affairs. At this point, no

initiatives had really been taken to increase minority numbers at the institution. Based on the

suggestions of the Task Force, Harker convened the Diversity Action Council. The Council

conducted a Campus Climate Survey in 2010, which finally enabled the administration to

measure progress in diversity at UD. The Diversity Enrichment Leaders (DEL) program,

launched in 2010, was one of the university’s more targeted programs to recruit minority

students to campus. The program used currently enrolled undergraduate minority students at UD

to recruit potential minorities to attend the university. The targeted groups were students of

underrepresented backgrounds as well as international students. The introduction of the DEL

program was key because prior, there had been a clear lack of student voice in diversity

promotion policies at UD.

Referring back to UD’s Path to Prominence initiative there are a set of four goals

identified that are meant to promote both diversity and inclusion on campus, “building and

nurturing a welcoming campus climate; ensuring equity, inclusion, and representation;

promoting education and scholarship for a diverse world; and monitoring the future and assuring

accountability and institutional vitality” (The Path to Prominence Through Diversity 2009).

Following each goal are a series of recommendations to achieve them, some of which have very

focused procedures laid out. For example, developing deeper relationships with middle schools

in Delaware in order to encourage potential future minority students to identify with UD. Others

on the other hand, though, use extremely weak terminology that does not seem to foster change

in any way. For example, a few of the phrases used for the goal of building and nurturing a

12

welcoming campus climate, include “continue campus-wide conversations…”, and “be more

cognizant of…”. This could directly reflect on student opinions on whether or not they believe

that the University of Delaware actively promotes diversity or not, which the BHP will reveal.

Dr. David Wilson of the Department of Political Science and International Relations at

the University of Delaware and who has done extensive research on diversity at UD addresses

his perspective on the problem with racial-ethnic diversity on campus in five ways. First, he

states that part of the problem is self-interest, the fact that there are no real incentives for faculty

members to go out of their way to make diversity a number one priority. Next, a lack of real

leadership, primarily from the President, has revealed itself a problem. He also identifies

psychological factors, which may be involved in the lack of faculty engagement towards the goal

of diversity. Wilson explains these as “factors related to ‘thinking about’ issues of racial-ethnic

culture and subsequent resentment related to attention to race and ethnicity”. Lastly, a flat out

lack of a solution has magnified the previous four problems as another missing incentive

according to Wilson (Wilson 2009).

By looking at student sentiments toward diversity we will be able to start to examine

whether UD students are aware of these initiatives and if they are really making an impact within

the campus community. The 2009 Campus Climate Survey began to tap into these campus-wide

feelings. The survey revealed, of much praise to UD, that 70 percent of students felt that the

campus was welcoming. But, before enrolling at UD, 87 percent of students expected the campus

to be welcoming (Diversity & Equity Commission 2009). This 17 percent gap after enrollment

represents a significant change in sentiment of a large number of students based on their campus

experiences. It will be critical to the university to explore the causes of this shift in opinion and

the specific diversity oriented questions on the BHP will help to arrive there.

13

Initiatives Elsewhere

Examining Pennsylvania State University, and looking at state-wide demographics

alongside campus demographics, we see a very similar trend to the University of Delaware. Of

Penn State, University Park campus, 4.13% of students are African American, while 11.3% of

the Pennsylvania population is African American. The transition from state to campus

demographics among Whites and African Americans is very disproportional when the

differences in populations of the two groups are compared. The effect among Hispanics is not as

strong at Penn State, but again still a staggering question remains. Where are Pennsylvania’s

Black students going?

When it comes to diversity initiatives at Penn State it is interesting to first note that,

similar to UD, PSU does not have a clear definition of diversity either. The university’s

Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State (2010) states, “units may have broad and inclusive

definitions of diversity, these definitions are not always apparent in a similar broad array of

programming, curricula, and other initiatives…”. This can lead to the same feelings of ambiguity

toward the concept of diversity in the minds of students, faculty, and administration, as could be

taking place at UD. Many of the goals laid out in PSU’s Framework to Foster Diversity are very

similar to those of UD’s Path to Prominence. Among these are “developing a shared and

inclusive understanding of diversity, creating a welcoming campus climate, recruiting and

retaining a diverse student body, recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce, developing a

curriculum that fosters U.S. and international cultural competencies” (A Framework to Foster

Diversity at Penn State 2010). Some targeted areas for improvement to create a more diverse

student body are improving access to need based aid for minority students and to connect with

14

potential future students to develop their “academic, co-curricular, and societal skills for

success”.

Public Opinion

The most effective way to connect policy of any sort to its target population is through

the measurement, analysis, and application of public opinion. Public opinion has been

recognized for centuries as essential in order to achieve a truly democratic society in America,

which is why representation has remained a cornerstone in American government. Bardes and

Oldendick (2012) define public opinion as “the aggregate of the views of individual adults on

matters of the public interest”. They go on to say that they operate on the premise that “in a

democratic society, what the public wants is in some way translated in to public policy”.

Although the linkages between opinion and policy are not always concrete, studies have shown

that there is consistency between lawmakers and the votes of their constituency. In a study

conducted by Monroe (1979) results showed that approximately two-thirds of the time, policy

decisions were consistent with public preferences. The same though can be applied at a much

smaller level at universities across the nation and their policies whose constituents in this case,

are students. On the national level, public opinion polling has become so prevalent that nearly

every TV show, organization, candidate, and web site is nagging its audience to participate in

some type of survey. Presidential races are virtually being decided by public opinion polls, and

national corporations are paying agencies millions to receive feedback on their products. For

some reason, though, the wealth of perspectives and opinions held by students on campuses

across the nation are not being tapped into, which puts university initiatives at a huge

disadvantage.

15

Unfortunately, the higher educational hierarchy does not mirror that of American

government, and student opinions are not often taken into account to create policy. There is a

paucity of research on student attitudes toward their university setting and even less so on

student opinions on diversity at their institutions. Student opinion research was conducted at the

University of Colorado at Boulder to measure student attitudes toward mandatory fees in 1978

and the results proved extremely impactful. An interview of student government officials a few

months after the survey was completed revealed, “the results were used by a number of student

organizations to support requests for increased allocations…and spawned a number of smaller

surveys by student organizations wanting more detailed feedback from their constituents”

(Weichselbaum and McClelland 1978). The survey’s ripple effect eventually reached the

Colorado state legislature as well. Weischselbaum and McClelland go on to comment on the lack

of student opinion polling by saying, “A few (surprisingly few considering the availability of

survey resources on many campuses and the potential usefulness of the information to

administrators) other similar surveys of student opinion relevant for administrative and student

government decision making have been reported”. As mentioned earlier though, there is scant

data on student attitudes toward diversity on campuses across the nation. Considering the issue

of lack of diversity on campuses has become such a concern amongst organizations like the

Middle States Commission, student opinions on the subject are of great value to craft effective

diversity policy and student opinion data is at the fingertips of researchers at institutions of

higher education just waiting to be harvested.

Based the compilation of research that has been done since Brown vs. Board of

Education, it is clear that diversity in secondary education brings valuable and more importantly

significant measureable benefits. Creating a diverse environment for students though is what the

16

challenge has become. It is critical to note that diversity initiatives are meaningless without

student and faculty engagement to move toward the pluralistic society UD aims for, which is

why understanding student attitudes on the subject, is key. The BHP will get to the core of

University of Delaware students’ opinions on the state of diversity on campus, which can move

UD forward and make its diversity policies a lot more attainable.

DATA & METHODOLOGY

The data on student opinions at the University of Delaware was collected by surveying

full-time undergraduate students enrolled at the Newark campus via the 2012 Blue Hen Poll, a

public opinion survey designed and conducted by UD students. The BHP was web survey

distributed to students’ school email account. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning

provided a random sample of 5,000 students from our population. On March 15th, the survey

link was emailed to the random sample, and was removed from the field at midnight on April 8th.

During this three and a half week period, several reminder emails were sent out as well providing

the study with 1, 607 responses to the approximately 26 minute long survey. This provided the

study with a response rate of 32%, approximately double the average response rate of University

of Delaware surveys. The analysis of questionnaire responses only considered those respondents

who answered at least 70 percent of the poll to reduce the question-to-question inconsistency in

responses. This yielded a working sample of 1,312 respondents. In terms of accuracy, based on

the population and sample size, and a 95 percent confidence level, the margin of error for the

study is approximately 3 percentage points. The poll results were then coded, entered into

IMB’s SPSS statistics package, and analyzed in relation to several variables such as class,

minority status, and perceived climate for groups on campus.

A census was taken of racial/ethnic minority students while White and international

17

students were randomly sampled. Therefore, prior to the analysis the data was weighted so that

the demographics of respondents matched the true characteristics of the UD student body

population. Both a sampling weight and post-stratification weight were used. The sampling

weight was applied to adjust for the over-sampling of minority students, which was necessary to

obtain enough minority student responses to reduce the group’s margin of error. A post-

stratification weight was also necessary to assure that the demographics of BHP respondents

mirrored that of the UD population. The sampling and post-stratification weights were combined

to create a final weight for the data, which thus made our results representative. Some of the

measures used to analyze students’ opinions on diversity on campus were a student rating (A

through F) of diversity, the importance of diversity to one’s college experience, the degree to

which students came to UD because it was socially diverse, perceived climate levels for minority

groups on campus, and, finally, general student opinions regarding issues related to diversity at

UD. Exact question wording used on the BHP can be found in the Appendix section.

RESULTS

When respondents were asked how important diversity was in the context of their college

education (see Appendix for exact question wording) students overwhelmingly, at 72 percent,

thought that experiencing a diverse social environment was of higher importance to them while

fewer, 29 percent, said it was of minor importance or not at all important. This suggests that

students feel experiencing a diverse social setting is important, yet it does not speak to racial-

ethnic or cultural diversity per se.

[Insert Figure 1 About Here]

18

Students may consider diversity of such high importance because they value the

concept’s presence in an academic setting. When it comes to the quality of their education, a

majority of students also believe that a diverse student body does in fact enhance the quality of

their education and a near majority, 50 percent of respondents, agree that taking classes that

specifically emphasize multicultural diversity enhance their education as well. This suggests that

actions to increase awareness of multicultural courses are valued.

[Insert Figures 2 & 3 About Here]

It was also found that students seem to think that the university supports their desires of having a

diverse college experience, with the data revealing that a majority of students agree that UD

actively promotes diversity on campus.

[Insert Figure 4 About Here]

This indicates that students are noticing efforts UD is making in regards to selling the idea of a

more diverse campus to students and that they are noticing the diversity initiatives being

launched at UD. Moving further in the right direction, a majority of students also believe that the

campus as a whole is open and welcoming to the idea of becoming more diverse with 56 percent

of students either strongly agreeing or agreeing that their fellow students are open to a diverse

campus.

[Insert Figure 5 About Here]

19

Thus there is student support at the university that diversity has positive benefits and all of this

points to positive signs about diversity at UD, however, other data suggests we have a long way

to go in assimilating students to the idea of a diverse campus. There are still many

misconceptions about the concept especially how it relates to race/ethnicity.

Challenges

There are many types of diversity, as mentioned prior, such as socioeconomic status,

sexual orientation, religion, language, geographic origin, and disability status. Despite the

infinite components of the term, students at the University of Delaware seem to think about

diversity unilaterally, solely in terms of its racial dimension, confirming the hypothesis. When

asked if, “when UD talks about diversity they mainly mean Affirmative Action”, almost 67

percent of students either agreed (27.9 percent) with the statement or did not know how to

respond to it (38.8 percent).

[Insert Figure 6 About Here]

A surprising number of sound-off comments also referenced negative feelings towards

Affirmative Action policies. Several of the comments linked Affirmative Action with “reverse

racism” and a “law against Caucasians”. This is directly related to the diversity campaigns the

university runs and the elements of diversity they emphasize. Based on the data, students seem to

feel that racial diversity is UD’s priority when it comes to a diverse campus. Students also are

not informed about the multidimensional nature of Affirmative Action as a government order,

which contributes to these negative feelings. Further confirming students’ uneasiness towards the

20

subject, when asked if promoting diversity actually unfairly discriminated against students who

were not of minority status, more than one third of respondents strongly agreed or agreed.

Another 26 percent again did not know how to answer the question, which indicates a certain

level of confusion.

[Insert Figure 7 About Here]

To further investigate who specifically thought that promoting diversity was unfair, cross-tabs of

the variable for that question with the variable for race-ethnicity were used. A Pearson’s chi-

square test of significance revealed that there was a statistically significant relationship between

race and belief that promoting diversity was unfair.

[Insert Table 1 Here]

Table 1 reveals that those who were not classified as minorities on campus, that is Whites, were

more likely to say that promoting diversity was unfair towards them. Of those who strongly

agreed or agreed, 42 percent of respondents were White while only 10 percent were African

American. This may reflect upon non-minority students’ feelings of neglect on campus. Several

sound-off comments referenced a “disadvantaged” position non-minority students were put in

due to Affirmative Action policies and also that there were not enough programs for “White

middle-class” students at UD compared to opportunities for minorities.

21

Next, most students also give UD a mediocre grade for diversity of the student body.

There were not many ‘A’ grades given nor did students report many failing grades, but a

plurality of students simply dubbed the student body as average.

[Insert Figure 8 Here]

Lastly, results suggest students did not come to the University of Delaware because it was

diverse. Students were asked a series of questions about why they decided to attend UD, one of

which asked if UD offering “a diverse learning environment” was a factor in one’s decision to

attend UD. A plurality of students, at 45 percent, said that this was less accurate in describing

their decision to attend the university. Only 15 percent said in hindsight that this was more

accurate.

[Insert Figure 9 Here]

The university’s academic reputation, the financial aid package students received, and proximity

to home were the most critical factors in deciding to come to UD for students of all races. This

question reveals that students for the most part know what they are getting when they come to

UD. They know it is not a diverse environment but that was not a make or break factor in making

their decision.

Some of the most striking revelations of the Blue Hen Poll data are the variance in

responses by race for particular questions. The majority of White respondents seem to have a

very different perspective from Black, Hispanic, and Asian respondents on certain topics

22

concerning diversity. For example, when asked if a diverse student body improves the quality of

their education, not even half, at 48 percent of White respondents said that it improved the

quality of their education compared to 87 percent, 81 percent, and 65 percent of Blacks,

Hispanic, and Asian students respectively.

[Insert Figure 10 Here]

The staggering 39 percentage point gap in responses between White students and Black

students represents immensely conflicting points of view on diversity’s role in the university and

the degree to which each group values diversity. A similar phenomenon occurs when students

were asked if they believed multicultural classes enhanced the quality of their education, if they

think UD actively promotes diversity, if promoting diversity discriminates against non-minority

students, if when UD talks about diversity they mainly mean Affirmative Action, and when they

were asked about the importance of diversity to their college experience.

[Insert Table 1 Here]

Membership associations seem to play a subtle, but statistically significant role in

attitudes toward diversity. Students who were not members of fraternities or sororities were more

likely than Greek students to say that multicultural courses enhance the quality of their education

as well as those affiliated with a community service organization, affiliated with a professional

or academic honor society, or students who have served as resident assistants. Being a member

of NUCLEUS and being involved in a cultural or multicultural club or organization had the

strongest likelihood to say multicultural classes enhanced their education. Surprisingly, being a

Diversity Enrichment Leader (DEL) did not have a statistical significance in responses. Greek

23

students also were far more likely to disagree that a diverse student body improved their

education. For this question, student memberships in university organizations played a larger

roll. Participating in the DEL program did in fact have a statistically significant effect and caused

more of these students to agree that a diverse student body improved their education as well as

being in NUCLEUS, being affiliated with a sport or intramural group, a literary, arts, discussion

or study group, a professional or academic honor society, being a Blue Hen Ambassador, being a

resident assistant, and participating in a cultural or multicultural organization.

The data also revealed something interesting about student satisfaction with UD and the

grade they gave for student body diversity. Of the respondents who graded diversity at UD an

‘F’, 79.8 percent still reported that they were satisfied or very satisfied with the university.

Students who perceived UD diversity as an ‘A’ on the other hand, were more satisfied, at 92.9

percent. It is still important to note, though, that ‘F’ grade respondents are still unanimously

satisfied.

DISCUSSION

The revealing of these attitudes towards diversity at the University of Delaware is critical

because diversity goes beyond just demographics and numbers. Student attitudes get to the core

of the limitations of diversity on campus and shed light on why certain policies may be

ineffective. There are several concerning issues the data uncovered. When it comes to campus

climate, while 43.2 percent of White students thought that campus climate was of higher comfort

for minority students, a staggering 69.8 percent African American students responded by saying

climate was uncomfortable or very uncomfortable at UD. Taking this a step further, when

students were asked, “If you ever experienced an act of discrimination or prejudice on campus

would you know where to go to have the issue resolved?” a unanimity of students said they

24

would not know where to go to resolve the issue. In this case, students that have experiences that

lead them to say that climate for their group is uncomfortable have no outlet for resolution. This

could speak to the slightly lower retention rates for both African American and Hispanic students

at UD compared to Whites (a percentage point gap of 5 percent and 4.1 percent respectively

compared to White students).

The BHP also revealed that, unfortunately, minority students are significantly less

satisfied with the University of Delaware compared to White students. While 94.4 percent of

White students are either satisfied or very satisfied with UD, only about 87 percent of Black,

Hispanic, and Asian students are satisfied. Dissatisfaction can help underscore the depressed

retention rates for minority students and furthermore combat diversity goals the university has

for the Newark campus.

An important discovery of this study to take away and apply to diversity policy on the

Newark campus is awareness. A lack of awareness of what diversity is, the benefits of a diverse

campus, and the stark differences between promoting diversity and Affirmative Action policy are

at the root of misconceptions students seem to have with diversity. Incorrectly associating

negative feelings toward Affirmative Action and diversity could prove a huge resistance in

student attitudes in accepting a diverse campus, especially if they feel that promoting diversity

unfairly discriminates against certain groups.

Finally, it is insightful to highlight some of the raw numbers of respondents’ perspectives

by race. In the Appendix’s ‘Q1’ and also displayed in Figure 10, students were asked if a diverse

student body improved the quality of their education. The results showed that 22 percent of

White students ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ that diversity enhanced their education while

87, 81, and 65 percents of Black, Hispanic, and Asian students respectively reported that

25

diversity actually does enhance the quality of their education. Due to over 75 percent of the

approximately 16,000 UD students being white, this 22 percent of students who respond that

diversity does not enhance their education represent more students than all of the minority

categories for this question combined who say that diversity is enhancing their experience. This

sheds some light on the reality that minority students are living, working, and studying in an

environment in which these White perspectives dominate.

CONCLUSION

So the data paints a mixed picture about thoughts on diversity at the University of

Delaware. While on the surface, students’ perception of diversity here and the value they attach

to it may seem up to par, there are still some serious qualms students have with promoting

diversity and transitioning to a more diverse campus, especially amongst particular groups. If the

university is determined to get where it wants to go, and set itself apart from other institutions of

higher education, it must pursue alternate or more intensive ways of making the campus more

pluralistic.

North Carolina State University launched a series of diversity initiatives that has led it the

to be recognized as one of the nation’s Top Diversity Institutions and also named a Role Model

Institution by the non-profit organization Minority Access. Some things NC State has adopted to

achieve this high level of success is to incorporate a diversity and global knowledge requirement

into its general education program, create a Latino/Hispanic task force, and create an Indian

American Education Summit. The university focused not only on race in proliferating diversity

on their campus but also stressed the importance of better serving military veterans and building

a strong support system for GLBT students (Pond 2008). The University of California, San

Francisco also launched a university wide diversity initiative starting in 2007, which has earned

26

it a lot of praise and led it to be recognized by Forbes magazine as number 11 of America’s Top

20 Most Diverse Colleges. A critical part of their strategy has been recruiting and appointing

their first ever Vice Chancellor for Diversity, Outreach. Their game plan also included

implementing an academic demographic database system, reaching out to faculty and students

about concerns with campus climate, strengthening training programs to help staff effectively

support campus diversity, and establishing a coordinated outreach program (UCSF 2007). With

now 51 percent of the student population at UCSF being classified as minority status, it seems

like their recently implemented programs have been a major success.

In addition to taking these approaches into consideration, UD may think about a few

other techniques. For one, possibly devoting a few lessons to diversity in First Year Experience

seminars for freshman students to raise awareness about why diversity matters and what is being

done on campus. Also, going forward, getting more students involved in diversity promotion

policies and getting a more representative take on diversity policy is critical. Implementing more

programs like the Diversity Enrichment Leader program, which allows current and potential

students to connect in a way that administrators cannot, could have a huge impact. Also, if more

of their peers are involved in initiatives like this, students will be more aware of how the

university is promoting diversity on campus and may have more incentive to take part in efforts.

Moving forward, The University of Delaware might consider adopting some of these techniques

to ensure its journey on the path to prominence if it considers diversity to be a major hurdle in

achieving this goal.

27

APPENDIX

MEASURES(Code names in parenthesis)

Satisfaction with the University of Delaware

Q1: Taking everything into account, how satisfied are you with the University of Delaware? (UDSAT)(Very Dissatisfied, Dissatisfied, Satisfied, Very Satisfied)

Grade for Diversity

What grade would you give each of the following:(A, B, C, D, F, I Don’t Know)Q1. The diversity of the student body on campus (SBODY)

Expectations of UD

When it comes to your college experience at UD, how important are the following things to you?(Not important, Minor importance, Important, Critical)Q1. Experiencing a diverse social environment that mirrors the real world (COLLDIVRS)

Decision to Attend UD

Think back to your decision to attend UD. On a scale from 0 to 5 with 0 being not at all accurate and 5 being completely accurate, please indicate how accurately each of the following statements describe your decision to attend UD.Q1. UD offered a diverse learning environment (UDPKDIVRS)

Climate

Just based on your perceptions and experiences, how comfortable is the climate at UD of each of the groups? If you are unsure, please proved your best guess.Q1. Racial/ethnic minority persons at UD (CLIMRACE)

Diversity on campus

Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements: (Strongly Agree, Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree, I don’t know)Q1. A diverse student body improves the quality of my education (DIVSTDNTS)Q2. UD actively promotes diversity (DIVPROMO)Q3. Promoting diversity unfairly discriminates against students who are not racial-ethnic minorities (DIVDISCRIM)Q4. Taking classes that emphasize multicultural diversity do not enhance my educational experience (DIVCLASSES)Q5. When UD talks about diversity, they mainly mean Affirmative Action (DIVAFFACT)

28

Q6. My fellow students at UD are not very open to the idea of a diverse campus (DIVCAMPUS)

Resolving Problems at UD

Q1: If you experienced an act of discrimination or prejudice on campus would you know where to go to have the issue resolved? (DISCRIM)

TABLES & FIGURES

Not Important Minor Importance Important Critical

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

6%

23%

44%

27%

Figure 1: Importance of diversity to students when it comes to their college experience.

29

Improves Quality Neither Does Not Improve Quality0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

54%

27%

19%

Figure 2: Does a diverse student body improve the quality of my education?

Enhances My Educa-tion

Neither Does Not Enhance My Education

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

50%

21%

29%

Figure 3: Does taking classes that emphasize multicultural diversity enhance my education?

30

Strongly Agree_x000d_/Agree

Neither Strongly Disagree/

_x000d_Disagree

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

52%

29%

19%

Figure 4: Does UD actively promote diversity?

Strongly Agree/

_x000d_Agree

Neither Strongly Disagree/

_x000d_Disagree

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

56%

27%

17%

Figure 5: Are my fellow students at UD are open to a diverse campus?

31

Strongly Agree/

_x000d_Agree

Neither Strongly Disagree/

_x000d_Disagree

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

30%39%

31%

Figure 6: When UD talks about diversity, do they mainly mean Affirmative Action?

Strongly Agree/

_x000d_Agree

Neither Strongly Disagree/

_x000d_Disagree

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

37%

26%

37%

Figure 7: Does promoting diversity unfairly discriminate against students who are not racial-

ethnic minorities?

32

A_x000d_(Excellent) B C D F_x000d_(Failing)0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

15%

24%

33%

18%10%

Figure 8: What grade would you give diversity of the student body on campus?

Not at all Accurate Moderately Accurate Completely Accurate0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

45%

35%

15%

Figure 9: Did you come to UD because it offered a diverse learning environment?

33

Improves Quality Neither Does Not Improve Quality0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

48%

30%22%

87%

10%3%

81%

17%

2%

65%

24%

11%

White Black Hispanic Asian

Figure: 10: Does a diverse student body improve the quality of my education?

Strongly Disagree/

_x000d_Disagree

Neither0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

42%

27% 31%

10% 8%

82%

19% 20%

61%

22% 22%

56%

White Black Hispanic Asian

Figure 11: Does promoting diversity unfairly discriminate against students who are not racial-

ethnic minorities?

34

Table 1: Diversity Questions by Race

Source: 2012 Blue Hen Poll

35

WORKS CITED

Astin, Alexander W. "Diversity and Multiculturalism on Campus: How Are Students Affected?" Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 25.2 (1993): 44-49. Print.

Banks, James A. Cultural Diversity and Education: Foundations, Curriculum, and Teaching. 4th ed. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon, 2001. Print.

Bardes, Barbara A., and Robert W. Oldendick. Public Opinion: Measuring the American Mind. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2012. Print.

Chang, Mitchell James. Racial Diversity in Higher Education: Does a Racially Mixed Student Population Affect Educational Outcomes? N.p.: University of California, Los Angeles, 1996. Print.

Chang, Mitchell J. "The Positive Educational Effects of Racial Diversity on Campus."Diversity Challenged: Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action. Cambridge: Harvard Educational Review, MA. 175-186. Print.

Cohon, Jared L. Report to the Faculty, Administration, Trustees and Students of the University of Delaware. 6 Apr. 2011. Prepared by an Evaluation Team representing the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. Diversity & Equity Commission. Report to the President: Findings and Recommendations Based on the 2009 Campus Climate Survey. N.p.: University of Delaware, 2009. Print.

Gurin, Patricia, Eric L. Dey, Sylvia Hurtado, and Gerald Gurin. "Diversity and Higher Education: Theory and Impact on Educational Outcomes." Harvard Educational Review 72.3 (2009): 330-67.

Koppelman, Kent L., and R. Lee Goodhart. Understanding Human Differences Multicultural Education for a Diverse America. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, 2011. Print. Monroe,

Alan D. 1979. “Consistency between Public Preferences and National Policy Decisions.” American Politics Quarterly 7 (January): 3-20.

Office of the Vice Provost for Educational Equity. A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State. N.p.: Pennsylvania State University, 2010. Print.

Orfield, Gary, and Michal Kurlander, eds. Diversity Challenged Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Group, 2001. Print.

The Path to Prominence through Diversity: Diversity Task Force Final Report. N.p.: University of Delaware, 2009. Print.

36

Pond, Dave. "University Lauded for Diversity Initiatives." NCSU.edu. North Carolina State University, Oct. 2008. Web. 10 May 2012. <http://www.ncsu.edu/featured-stories/embracing-diversity/oct-2008/minority-access/>.

Rudenstine, Neil L. "Student Diversity and Higher Learning." Diversity Challenged: Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action. Cambridge: Harvard Educational Review, MA. 31-47. Print.

"UCSF Launches 10-Point Initiative to Promote Diversity." University of California, San Francisco. 28 Feb. 2007. Web. 10 May 2012. <http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2007/02/7447/ucsf-launches-10-point-initiative-promote-diversity>.

Weichselbaum, Hart F., and Gary H. McClelland. "Student Attitudes Towards Mandatory Fees." Research in Higher Education 8 (1978): 241-54. JSTOR. Web. 10 July 2012.

Wilson, David C. "Top of Mind" Notes on Diversity. N.p.: University of Delaware, 2009. Print.