Last semester, the Office of Equity and Diversity put
together a report about the obstacles facing Colgate if we want this
institution to become a genuinely inclusive place. As a member of the Faculty Diversity Council,
I had a chance to see this report and found it immensely useful in clarifying
issues often invisible or opaque to faculty due to our position in the
university structure. It helped me
understand why many good-intentioned efforts to promote diversity and inclusion
seem to have little effect on the institution as a whole. I have asked and obtained permission from the report’s authors, Lyn Rugg and Tamala Flack, to share this report here on the
AAUP website.
NOTE - The report is accessible under FURTHER INFORMATION at the right side of the page using the link Barriers to Institution-Wide Diversity and Inclusion
Although I hope you read the piece in full, let me mention
several issues that struck me.
·
Diversity initiatives are too narrowly
focused.
o
A number of diversity initiatives have begun, some
in response to last fall’s events and some predating them. However, the vast majority of these
initiatives have focused on supporting non-majority students, or helping faculty
support those students.
o
Very few are designed to improve conditions for
non-majority faculty (or staff). To quote the report, “Unfortunately, campus
climate for faculty and staff remained largely absent from these discussions.”
o
In order to achieve truly campus-wide diversity
and inclusion, initiatives must do much more.
For example, where are the initiatives to transform administrative
leadership, examine how institutional support is distributed, or analyze our
curriculum and pedagogy at a holistic level?
·
Colgate organizational structure is an
obstacle to diversity and inclusion efforts.
o
Colgate’s organizational structure is divided into
a number of semi-autonomous areas.
o
Each distinct area manages and controls its
diversity and inclusion efforts, and can opt in or out of initiatives without
any external accountability.
o
Each area may define diversity and inclusion and
come up with its own measures of success and competence.
o
There is limited or no linkage between different
areas’ diversity and inclusion efforts, leading to a lack of cohesion across
the institution as well as much wasted effort.
·
Outdated Concepts of Prejudice and
Discrimination
o
Too many people at Colgate, including those in
leadership positions, are operating with an outdated idea of the way racism,
sexism, homophobia, etc, operate today. They still believe that the problem is
bad people doing bad things, overtly and intentionally.
o
Too many of our laws and policies are designed
to deal only with overt and intentional acts of bias-motivated discrimination,
harassment, or hostility.
o
Yet all the research (including
the seminal research of former Colgate professor Jack Dovidio) shows that
that those types of overt and intentional actions are not the most prevalent
form of prejudice and discrimination today, though unfortunately they still
occur.
o
Instead, bias and discrimination are manifested
today in more subtle ways, when well-intentioned people (like myself) act on
internalized prejudices and stereotypes we do not even know we have. It happens when well-intentioned people (like
myself) support certain ways of doing things which benefit some groups over others
because they are the status quo or the “Colgate Way.”
o
Bias and discrimination happen not only when I
treat certain types of people poorly, but also when I insist that other types
of people could not possibly have engaged in discriminatory acts because
“he/she is a good person.”
o
These forms of bias and discrimination are
enormously damaging, but their effects emerge over time. They often happen without hostile intention by
the perpetrator, or with the intention hidden even from the perpetrator’s own self-awareness.
This makes these incidents very difficult to prosecute under the current
system.
Carolyn Hsu
The above post does not necessarily reflect the
opinion of the AAUP membership or that of its officers, nor does inclusion of
the post on this website constitute an endorsement by the Colgate chapter of
the AAUP.
2 comments:
We should be extremely wary of any attempt to modify the campus disciplinary system to take a defendant's alleged unconscious biases into account. How could unconscious bias be proved or measured for any specific individual without forcing them to take something like the Implicit Association Test, which would amount to self-incrimination?
There is something incredibly ironic that some of the Title VI violations Tamala Flack, Esq. of the Office of Equity and Diversity must be reviewing were filed against her own office and, specifically, her boss Lyn Rugg, in the lawsuit by the international student who she is accused of illegally imprisoning and subjecting to a biased investigation and EGP hearing. And just two posts below this one, a community member raises serious concerns about racial bias by the EGP, the OED's disciplinary arm.
Certainly we all can benefit from increased education and understanding about how to confront racial and other biases as outlined in this report, but the first step needs to be restoring trust and integrity in the processes we have put in place. The OED must clean its own house if it expects to set an example for the rest of us.
Post a Comment