Opinion
Diversity 101
Agree to Disagree
September 27, 2006 - 12:00am
In his monthly column last week, entitled “Student Diversity and the Campus Climate,” President Skorton wrote that when it comes to diversity, “perception is reality.” All too true, but for those of us who meander through campus each day, the reality we perceive contradicts Skorton’s optimistic take on campus life: there’s a whole lot of polarization, and not much diversity to speak of. Skorton’s article continues in a long tradition of misunderstanding diversity as a function of numbers and figures, rather than as an ideal of mutual understanding.
The tension between diversity-on-paper and diversity-as-an-ideal has deep roots in the American education system. In trying to bridge the achievement gap between whites and non-whites at the high school level, educators traditionally poured more and more money into failing schools. But, as the sociologist James Coleman demonstrated in 1966, higher per-pupil expenditures do little to equalize achievement rates: so-called input factors like additional resources or spending rarely outweigh family background factors of race or income. Coleman argued that one of the few ways for students to overcome disparate upbringings was to learn in diverse environments.
To that same end, the Supreme Court established affirmative action programs at the college level. But, as the Court held in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), “universities cannot establish quotas for members of certain racial or ethnic groups or put them on separate admissions tracks.” Coleman and Sandra Day O’Connor arrived at a similar conclusion: the racial achievement gap will not be bridged by increased funding, but by racial interaction within institutions.
Yet Cornell and other schools continue to discuss diversity as a function of numbers and figures. This is what diversity looks like on paper:
“The proportion of students who identify themselves as other than white has more than doubled from 20 percent in 1985 to 43 percent in 2005.” — President Skorton, in the Sept. 20 Daily Sun.
“In the September 24, 2003 edition of DiversityInc online magazine, the Ivy League universities’ web sites were graded for their demonstration of a commitment to diversity and Cornell’s web received a grade of “B” — the highest grade received by any of the Ivy League universities.” —“The Cornell Story,” a brochure created by Cornell’s Diversity and Inclusiveness department.
Isn’t it ironic that we pride ourselves on a grade that would send most overachieving Cornellians to their TA’s for makeup tests? If we’d stop taking comfort in statistics, and stop rejoicing in middling grades, we might question the numbers and figures behind our grandiose claims of diversity. Indeed, the majority of responses I received from underrepresented minorities after I last wrote about diversity suggested that we look a lot better on paper than we do in practice.
“I live in Balch because I chose not to apply to Ujamaa,” one freshman reader responded, “but I regret the decision because, being the only black person in my area, I feel like the odd one out and often, I get weird looks from other students. People do not live in Ujamaa because they hate white people, but because they need a central home. Because, even though Cornell boasts about how diverse it is, the air is very dirty between races.”
Adds another student, “I know some people find this hard to believe, but it is difficult for minority students who have grown up in a predominantly minority area to adjust to being surrounded by mostly white students and others, some of whom prejudge them as being unqualified to be at Cornell … In most cases, these students have not had the same opportunity as others. I think you would understand the frustration of these students if you were to attend a college that is mostly made up of minorities.”
These claims of isolation dramatically oppose the ideal of diversity, and they are exactly what the University should be seeking to undo. This problem hardly goes unnoticed in Day Hall. In Skorton’s own words: “Some individuals within our community doubt the seriousness of our intentions and question whether our actions and policies are conducive to fostering a more inclusive community. They wonder where we are in our quest for an ever more diverse student body.”
But that’s just the problem. Our focus — our “quest” — is always toward the future, and never mindful of the present. Just as increased funding wouldn’t help struggling high schools, and greater racial quotas couldn’t legally diversify whitewashed campuses, so too won’t higher minority admissions rates guarantee a graduating class with the skills needed to function in a diverse workplace. Last year’s racially motivated stabbing, and the administration’s ongoing support of segregated program houses and Greek organizations, demonstrate that upping the percentage of minorities on campus is not enough.
So, on a polarized campus, how do we locate diversity? One suggestion comes from student-elected trustee Doug Mitarotonda in his column yesterday, “Breaking Bread.” Mitarotonda supports a program from Colgate University, in which “student groups that cross traditional social boundaries” are provided funding to talk diversity over a jointly prepared meal.
“Breaking Bread” is a worthwhile pursuit, but it only draws on students who are already involved in organized groups. If I’ve learned anything about diversity here, it’s that people would rather opt out than dig in. We’re content with conformity, and averse to diversity. That’s why Cornell needs to force-feed us diversity, early and often.
I suggest that the University impose a mandatory weekly seminar for all its first-year students: Diversity 101. The classes should mirror the 35/65 split between non-whites and whites and the 50/50 gender split, and, with a professor well versed in open-mindedness, discuss issues of race, religion, sexuality and tolerance. We need to hammer out our differences and locate our similarities. In the absence of understanding, our cross-racial dialogues are hindered by the political correctness that’s been ingrained in our minds since grade school. We don’t know how to speak to each other, so we don’t speak at all.
The magic formula for diversity is nothing but a mirage. Our administration should work with what it already has, by appreciating the contents of our canteen, and irrigating our existing networks. Ironically, it is the pressure of progress that undoes genuine improvement. Superficial reforms are rewarded by the U.S. News & World Report rankings, while substantive changes, like Mitarotonda’s initiative, are yet to receive funding. As we’ve lost sight of the notion behind the numbers, it’s no surprise that diversity here is worn paper-thin.
Rob Fishman is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at rbf25@cornell.edu Agree to Disagree appears Wednesdays.
In his monthly column last week, entitled “Student Diversity and the Campus Climate,” President Skorton wrote that when it comes to diversity, “perception is reality.” All too true, but for those of us who meander through campus each day, the reality we perceive contradicts Skorton’s optimistic take on campus life: there’s a whole lot of polarization, and not much diversity to speak of. Skorton’s article continues in a long tradition of misunderstanding diversity as a function of numbers and figures, rather than as an ideal of mutual understanding.
The tension between diversity-on-paper and diversity-as-an-ideal has deep roots in the American education system. In trying to bridge the achievement gap between whites and non-whites at the high school level, educators traditionally poured more and more money into failing schools. But, as the sociologist James Coleman demonstrated in 1966, higher per-pupil expenditures do little to equalize achievement rates: so-called input factors like additional resources or spending rarely outweigh family background factors of race or income. Coleman argued that one of the few ways for students to overcome disparate upbringings was to learn in diverse environments.
To that same end, the Supreme Court established affirmative action programs at the college level. But, as the Court held in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), “universities cannot establish quotas for members of certain racial or ethnic groups or put them on separate admissions tracks.” Coleman and Sandra Day O’Connor arrived at a similar conclusion: the racial achievement gap will not be bridged by increased funding, but by racial interaction within institutions.
Yet Cornell and other schools continue to discuss diversity as a function of numbers and figures. This is what diversity looks like on paper:
“The proportion of students who identify themselves as other than white has more than doubled from 20 percent in 1985 to 43 percent in 2005.” — President Skorton, in the Sept. 20 Daily Sun.
“In the September 24, 2003 edition of DiversityInc online magazine, the Ivy League universities’ web sites were graded for their demonstration of a commitment to diversity and Cornell’s web received a grade of “B” — the highest grade received by any of the Ivy League universities.” —“The Cornell Story,” a brochure created by Cornell’s Diversity and Inclusiveness department.
Isn’t it ironic that we pride ourselves on a grade that would send most overachieving Cornellians to their TA’s for makeup tests? If we’d stop taking comfort in statistics, and stop rejoicing in middling grades, we might question the numbers and figures behind our grandiose claims of diversity. Indeed, the majority of responses I received from underrepresented minorities after I last wrote about diversity suggested that we look a lot better on paper than we do in practice.
“I live in Balch because I chose not to apply to Ujamaa,” one freshman reader responded, “but I regret the decision because, being the only black person in my area, I feel like the odd one out and often, I get weird looks from other students. People do not live in Ujamaa because they hate white people, but because they need a central home. Because, even though Cornell boasts about how diverse it is, the air is very dirty between races.”
Adds another student, “I know some people find this hard to believe, but it is difficult for minority students who have grown up in a predominantly minority area to adjust to being surrounded by mostly white students and others, some of whom prejudge them as being unqualified to be at Cornell … In most cases, these students have not had the same opportunity as others. I think you would understand the frustration of these students if you were to attend a college that is mostly made up of minorities.”
These claims of isolation dramatically oppose the ideal of diversity, and they are exactly what the University should be seeking to undo. This problem hardly goes unnoticed in Day Hall. In Skorton’s own words: “Some individuals within our community doubt the seriousness of our intentions and question whether our actions and policies are conducive to fostering a more inclusive community. They wonder where we are in our quest for an ever more diverse student body.”
But that’s just the problem. Our focus — our “quest” — is always toward the future, and never mindful of the present. Just as increased funding wouldn’t help struggling high schools, and greater racial quotas couldn’t legally diversify whitewashed campuses, so too won’t higher minority admissions rates guarantee a graduating class with the skills needed to function in a diverse workplace. Last year’s racially motivated stabbing, and the administration’s ongoing support of segregated program houses and Greek organizations, demonstrate that upping the percentage of minorities on campus is not enough.
So, on a polarized campus, how do we locate diversity? One suggestion comes from student-elected trustee Doug Mitarotonda in his column yesterday, “Breaking Bread.” Mitarotonda supports a program from Colgate University, in which “student groups that cross traditional social boundaries” are provided funding to talk diversity over a jointly prepared meal.
“Breaking Bread” is a worthwhile pursuit, but it only draws on students who are already involved in organized groups. If I’ve learned anything about diversity here, it’s that people would rather opt out than dig in. We’re content with conformity, and averse to diversity. That’s why Cornell needs to force-feed us diversity, early and often.
I suggest that the University impose a mandatory weekly seminar for all its first-year students: Diversity 101. The classes should mirror the 35/65 split between non-whites and whites and the 50/50 gender split, and, with a professor well versed in open-mindedness, discuss issues of race, religion, sexuality and tolerance. We need to hammer out our differences and locate our similarities. In the absence of understanding, our cross-racial dialogues are hindered by the political correctness that’s been ingrained in our minds since grade school. We don’t know how to speak to each other, so we don’t speak at all.
The magic formula for diversity is nothing but a mirage. Our administration should work with what it already has, by appreciating the contents of our canteen, and irrigating our existing networks. Ironically, it is the pressure of progress that undoes genuine improvement. Superficial reforms are rewarded by the U.S. News & World Report rankings, while substantive changes, like Mitarotonda’s initiative, are yet to receive funding. As we’ve lost sight of the notion behind the numbers, it’s no surprise that diversity here is worn paper-thin.
Rob Fishman is a junior in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at rbf25@cornell.edu Agree to Disagree appears Wednesdays.
Mandatory Diversity Seminars
Because Cornell should force students to interact with one another. I'm glad I graduated when I did.
Good piece
Yes, diversity and understanding are things that need to be actively built and not just looked at as evaluation goals or statistics. Every student must put themselves out of their comfort zone every-so-often because these are usually the moments when people learn the most. This means people of color, too. But, as one testimony in your piece show, people of color are already often outside their comfort zones at cornell (this is a historical issue, in many ways). Whites need to understand this aspect of the equation, just as people of color need to understand that there are whites out there who truly want to reach out and interact, but may not know how or feel awkward. Awkward social scenarios are something common in the university anyway, which may be exacerbated by the "fear" of difference. Yes, the burden often falls on people of color to be the active diversifiers, but we must work together. Everyone needs to be involved.
Instead of dismantling Ujamaa or Latino/a Living Center, why not hold the diversity 101 classes in there, why not have a 1 credit course where people go to these places for seminars, incorporating it into the curriculum. I think discussions and interactions in such environments help break down barriers. They must also be undertaken with respect for these spaces. In terms of the greek system, I'm not quite sure what can be done.
I think Mitarotonda's idea as well as your diversity 101 idea are a good start to this discussion. But, people must understand that before they go drink free beer in collegetown during orientation week, they need to take seriously programs that may make the environment at cornell better for them and those around them for the next 4 years of their lives.
This is a very serious issue, and people need to take seriously the commitment to truly shaping the campus and society they want to live in. This is not an easy or short-term task, and it will not magically happen on its own. Social change is rarely at the snap of your fingers.
Oh Please
"I suggest that the University impose a mandatory weekly seminar for all its first-year students: Diversity 101. The classes should mirror the 35/65 split between non-whites and whites and the 50/50 gender split, and, with a professor well versed in open-mindedness, discuss issues of race, religion, sexuality and tolerance."
That is the worst idea I have ever heard of. I can see it now..."Sorry, Kim, we already have our Asian girl for the 10:10 section. But try the Wednesday night seminar--I heard they are in need of some minority females." Mandatory diversity training (especially in proportions that "mirror" the 35/65 split) is even worse than voluntary segregation because it treats all students as children incapable of interacting with their peers as they "should." I have said this before but the University has done its part by providing a diverse learning environment with students from all backgrounds. Once on campus those students have the opportunity to freely interact in the same classes, the same cafaterias, the same libraries, and same organizations. When, oh when will we stop looking for some Mommy University Figure (MUF) to configure our social experiences and start taking responsibility as young adults in this diverse and vibrant environment we are lucky enough to call home?
I'm not even going to begin to approach the question of who decides which faculty are "well versed in open-mindedness, discuss issues of race, religion, sexuality and tolerance." Maybe Michael Moore would take a consulting engagement?
I Do This For My Culture....
Mr Thomas, you will never fully understand the experiences of African-American's. Your choice of words and frame of argument demonstrates that your grasp of the African-American experience is minimal. The fact that you label program houses as "segregated" living spaces shows that you have no historical understanding of Blacks or other underrepresented minorities. Segregation is a discriminatory policy or practice that forcibly separates those of different races, ethnic groups, or religions. I would like to highlight the terms "force" and "discriminatory". Ujamaa residents, McLLU residents, Akwe:kon residents, are not forced to live in these spaces nor are these residents discriminated against. Those that choose to live in these spaces, do so for very important reasons that you do not understand. As an African-American, I choose to go to Ujamaa to learn more about my culture and history. As an African-American, I choose to go to Ujamaa to fellowship with people that understand or genuinely try to understand the struggle of African-Amercans; my academic success is furthered because of this social support. I am also an African-American resident advisor and choose to reside in McLLU for similar reasons. In McLLU or Ujamaa, I simply, do not have to fear my historical or cultural differences. Until you fully understand the African-American experience and the psychology of Blacks, you would never understand the significance of Ujamaa and McLLU.
-Holla at me.
Who Is Mr. Thomas?
So wait, are you saying you're African-American?
Response to readers
Ernie:
First, who is Mr. Thomas? If your response was to my column, I appreciate your criticisms, but i would respond with the following;
As someone who is not African American, you are correct in pointing out that I will "never fully understand" the African American experience. But, that's really just the point. It's a sad reality that minorities here must "fear" for their culture. In a University that espouses "open hearts and open minds," shouldn't anyone feel safe -- regardless of skin color?
I think many of us would like to learn a little bit more about our peers' "experiences" -- both in a historical sense, and in the day to day.
I'm not sure that your comments respond to the ideas in the column or the excellent suggestions from Mr. De Costa.
As for the word "segregated," I'm well aware of its implications, but I would argue that self-segregation can often be as harmful to a community as imposed segregation. In either case, segregation results in fear, alienation and often hostility. The argument is often made that a program house devoted to "White" ideals would be derided as racist (or, more to the point, segregationist). I understand that as the majority, whites might not need a program house, since the regular dormitories are essentially serving this function. I would point out, though, that if more minorities opted to live regular dorms, they would not be quite so homogenous.
I think if you gave the rest of the Cornell community a chance, you might find people who are eager to embrace your culture, rather than belittle it. The tragedy of program houses (and Greek houses, for that matter), is that they never provide a window for interaction.
I do want to be clear: I blame the University more than any of its students, but I do hold students of all backgrounds responsible for not making enough of an effort to branch out and meet people unlike them.
To Bruce, I don't think it's enough for the University to simply admit a racially mixed class. If the student body is as fractured as many believe it to be, it is incumbent upon Cornell to take active steps toward integration and discourse.
Rob Fishman
Mr. Fishman, for some reason
Mr. Fishman, for some reason I was thinking of Rob Thomas when I was writing my response. My apologies.
Nevertheless, Ujamaa is open to the Cornell community and I know Asian-Americans, White-Americans, Latin-Americans, etc. that live in Ujamaa. Even the residents that hail from different areas of the African Diaspora possess a broad range of cultures, nationalities, and beliefs. All in all, Ujamaa is a very diverse community. Additionally, though I don't live in Ujamaa I can tell you that it is very easy to enter and I am sure that the White-Americans that also go to Ujamaa will tell you the same thing. Additionally, Ujamaa host programs outside of it's dorm including the popular community centers. You and I see Ujamaa residents every day; in our classes, the dinning halls, our religious services, etc.
The Multicultural Living Learning Unit is a Multicultural Living Learning Unit. There are Republicans, Democrats, African-Americans, Afro-Caribbeans, Asian-Americans, White-Americans, etc. We have a monthly program called the Cultural Immersion. Our past Cultural Immersion was a Jewish Cultural Immersion. We've had a discussion on spirituality and sexuality last year that brought people out from the woodwork. I know people that travel as far as collegetown, west campus, and Rochester that visit McLLU. These spaces are open to anyone that is willing to go.
In my opinion, all your arguments are weak. If your not active in McLLU or Ujamaa and do not fully understand their function, you have no right to criticize! I would be glad to give you a tour by the way.
Holla at me,
-Ernz