Op-Ed
Breaking Bread
Email: 
Share: 
Near the end of last semester, I wrote a column named “Talking Points,” where I discussed my thoughts on creating a graduation requirement for undergraduates that focused on life skills rather than academic ones. In short, I argued for the creation of small discussion groups to be formed that would give students the “opportunity and tools to learn how to think and communicate about difficult, sensitive topics in a diverse community.” Since I spent most of the summer here in Ithaca, I had the chance to meet with a few Cornell administrators to discuss this concept before classes started this fall. My first meeting was with Provost Biddy Martin and Vice President for Student and Academic Services Susan Murphy. While interested in the concept, they did not think a graduation requirement was feasible and recommended that I speak with Vice Provost for Social Sciences David Harris to consider ways of implementing this concept through an alternative mechanism.
Since January 2005, Vice Provost Harris has been serving as the project coordinator of a working group that, through funding from the Teagle Foundation, has been examining racial and ethnic disparities in college completion and achievement. In a coordinated effort between Cornell University, Colgate University, Hamilton College, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, and Wells College, two faculty or staff and two undergraduates from each institution have been charged “to produce a report that will help administrators assess their current diversity programs, and select alternatives.” Per Vice Provost Harris’s advice, I have waited until the final Teagle report was published before moving the discussion forward on creating any new programs here at Cornell. While the final version of the report will not be out for another week (and available for viewing at www.teaglefoundation.org/learning/publications.aspx), I would like to thank Vice Provost Harris for sending me a draft of the final report for the purposes of this column.
Though, in part because the report is still a draft, the Cornell administration has not decided what combination of programs would work best for us, there is one currently in place at Colgate, called “Breaking Bread,” which I found particularly interesting and worthwhile to consider implementing here. The main objective of “Breaking Bread” is to facilitate interactions between student groups that cross traditional social boundaries by providing resources for them to host a joint dinner and future programming. In order to receive funding, the two groups must submit a proposal describing each group’s membership, why they wish to work together, and ideas for at least two collaborative projects that will be discussed at dinner and hopefully lead to continued future relationships. Once a proposal is accepted, the students are responsible for creating a menu, purchasing the ingredients, cooking and serving the meal and cleaning the dishes. After the dinner is over, each group is required to submit a description of the evening and their plans for future collaboration. And, if the groups do not end up holding a joint event, then they must reimburse the university the money they spent on dinner.
What I like most about the program is how it encourages groups with differing perspectives to come together in a non-threatening and non-confrontational atmosphere. I have always felt that Cornell does a good job bringing a diverse student body to campus, but it seems like once people get here they find a niche group or two and do not venture too far outside them. Student groups, program houses, and the Greek system are a few examples of how the university encourages students to separate. While I continue to see the value in finding groups of people with whom you easily agree with, whether it is based in religion, ethnicity, academics or politics, I also think it is just as important to befriend people with views different from your own.
One change I would stipulate to the “Breaking Bread” program as stated by Colgate is that, when the two groups propose their dinner, they also need to propose at least two relevant discussion topics that are of joint interest to both groups. Furthermore, to continue with our trend of increased faculty-student interactions, each group should invite a faculty member or two to dinner to help facilitate the dinner discussions. I add this discussion provision because, while the university does a good job of providing venues for students to hear speakers present their thoughts, not enough opportunities are available for students to engage in these sorts of conversations themselves. For instance, while students who listened to the well-spoken and civilized discourse between Robert Kagan and Cornell Professors at President Skorton’s inaugural academic symposium certainly learned quite a bit, there is just as much merit in having to defend one’s position personally. Futhermore, I completely agree with the extension of “Breaking Bread” that Colgate implemented, called “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” in which the “Breaking Bread” participants are individuals selected from a list of interested students, rather than members of two student groups.
To make this program a reality, it needs a location and money. I recently spoke with the Director of the Tatkon Center, Carol Grumbach, and she is very enthusiastic about running a program like this in that space on North Campus. Unfortunately, however, the Tatkon Center currently does not have cooking facilities, so there is still work to be done. For funding, Vice Provost Harris, Vice President Murphy, Provost Martin or President Skorton will have to find the money in their budgets to make the program a reality. Once the program has been created, the university needs to follow the Teagle report’s advice and periodically evaluate “Breaking Bread”’s success. Programs that sound like a good idea now need to be assessed in the future to make sure they are still relevant. In the case of “Breaking Bread,” both qualitative and quantitative metrics need to be formulated to articulate the program’s effectiveness of meetings its goals and objectives.
While a program such as Breaking Bread alone will not solve all issues of diversity on our campus, it certainly has potential to increase dialogue and spur innovative programming that all students can enjoy.
Doug Mitarotonda is a student-elected trustee. He can be contacted at dcm14@cornell.edu. Trustee Viewpoint appears alternate Tuesdays.