DEVELOPING AN INSTITUTIONAL EQUITY

PLANJANELLE M. CHIASERA, PHD

CHIASERA@UAB.EDU

2015-2016 ACE FELLOW

CLEMSON UNIVERSITY, HOST INSTITUTION

THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM, HOME INSTITUTION

DEFINITION OF TERMS

• Diversity: • Individual differences (e.g. personality, language, learning styles and life experiences) and

• Group-social differences (e.g. race, ethnicity, class, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, sexual identity, country of origin and ability status, as well as cultural, political, religious or other affiliations)

• Inclusion: The active, intentional and ongoing engagement with diversity

• Equity: The creation of opportunities for historically underrepresented populations to have equal access to, and participation in, educational programs

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

• US Higher Education• Purview of the elite• 1869 Charles Eliot (pedagogy shift)• 1800’s Women’s Colleges• 1800’s African-American• Ashmun Institute• Wilberforce University

HISTORICAL CONTEXT• 1800’s: 1862 Morrill Land-Grant Act

• Land-Grant College Act; Major Boost to US Higher Education• Congressman Justin Smith Morrill and Abraham Lincoln on July 2,

1862• Grants provided 30,000 acres of public land in each state

• Classical studies – Applied Studies• 69 colleges funded through these grants

• The Land-Grant has improved the lives of millions of Americans• 1890: Agricultural College Act of 1890

• Aimed at Confederate States• Show that race was not an admissions criterion, or • Designate a separate land-grant institution for persons of color• 17 Historically Black Colleges and Universities in Confederate

States

“the endowment, support, and maintenance of at least one college where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies, and including military tactics, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts . . . to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life.”

HISTORICAL CONTEXT• Morrill Act: utilitarian model of higher education

• 1920’s: US Higher Education truly democratized

• Elite to mass public education

• 1960’s

• New students to campus

• Breakdown of barrier between higher education and political issues

• Socially concerned students

• Challenged Higher Education to Broaden its Mission

• Addressing America’s Complex Social Problems

• Race and Minority Status Issues

DIVERSITY DIVIDE• 1960’s: Civil Rights Movement

• 20 years: Higher education did not address deeper implication of race on campus

• 1975: Title IX regulations effective as law

• No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits of , or be subjected to discrimination under any education program/activity receiving federal financial assistance

• 1980’s: Race became a major issue• Intergroup relations

• Curriculum

• Professors

• Allocation of resources

Diversity Divide: Disjuncture between a rhetoric of inclusion and actual practice

TODAY• There is a growing disconnect between higher education and diversity

• Cultural lag: changes in our American environment

• Leading to serious issues on campuses across the country

CLEMSON UNIVERSITY

https://youtu.be/tl1cSgbnZTo

NATION-WIDE SIT IN

DEMANDS

DEMANDS

CALL TO ACTION• Recommendations for creating an inclusive environment

• Know who your community is and will be

• Commit to frank, hard dialogues

• Invest in culturally competent practices

• Set and monitor equity-minded goals and align campus resources to forward the goals

• Develop and pursue a clear vision and goal for achieving learning necessary to careers and citizenship

• Expect and prepare students to produce signature work

• Provide support to help students develop guided plans for completion

• Identify HIP suited for your institution

• Ensure essential LO and HIP and incorporated across the curriculum

• Make student achievement for all visible and valued

INFRASTRUCTURE• Varies greatly

• Centralized: Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) and office (Equity and Inclusion)• CDO is a senior level position with direct reporting to the President

• Centralized vision/mission, metrics, outcomes, budget

• CON: Diversity efforts campus-wide rest on the shoulder of the CDO

• Decentralized: Efforts driven from within the units• Unit champions with a diversity advisory board

• Often there is not a direct line report to the President

• CON: Little oversight, lack of shared vision, and lack of accountability

STRATEGIC PLAN/METRICS/OUTCOMESClemson• Commitment to Diversity Statement

• Academic enhancement

• Grounded in the land grant mission

• Critical to help produce future leaders

• Alignment with the University Strategic Plan and clearly articulated within the vision and mission of the university

• Comprehensive and Actionable Strategic Plan

Framework: Developed from internal groups/committees, external consultants, models across the U.S.

PROCESS FOR IMPLEMENTATION• Framework developed from internal sources, external consultants, other models (Clemson plan)

• Hired a CDO (VP with direct report to the President)

• Communication of the framework

• Faculty senate

• Students senate

• UG student government

• Graduate student government

• Workgroup assignments and charges (n = 6)

• Refine overarching goal, draft tactics, timelines, and metrics for each objective

• 3-5 objectives (focused)

• Plan focused on next 3-5 years

• Draft document due to CDO October 2016

PROCESS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

• Mid-Term (Jan 2017)• Strategic plan framework and workgroup presentations across campus

• Begin implementation of workgroup recommendations

• Long-Term • Biannual reporting of progress on strategic priorities

• Further plan development beyond 3-5 years

WALL STREET JOURNAL ARTICLE: MAY 2016

QUESTIONS