Strategies for Institutional Transformation

Tensions Between the Culture of Higher Education and Diversity Initiatives: Strategies for Institutional Transformation For presentation at the

“Diversity from the Broadest Perspective” Session

Society for Applied Anthropology Annual Meeting Vancouver, Canada March 31, 2016

Teresita E. Aguilar, Ph.D., Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs New Mexico Highlands University (Las Vegas, New Mexico) [email protected]

This paper illustrates challenges and contradictions between the culture of higher education and the implementation of diversity initiatives on university campuses. National demographic shifts and significant gaps in student success provide a basis for serious concern in higher education, particularly for public institutions. Responses to this concern are often diversity initiatives which are frequently marginalized, isolated, or targeted to those who least need them. A general overview of the culture of higher education is presented, followed by examples of traditional diversity initiatives. Recommendations are offered which recognize sources of tension and potential resources, using a case study at an HSI.

The student population in the United States is increasingly diverse in ethnic, racial and national backgrounds, and in religious and language backgrounds. This trend has been steadily increasing in the K-12 system, and is consequently more prominent at the postsecondary level. This diversity among students, however, is not mirrored by the backgrounds of teachers, educators and leaders in either system. Unless there is greater commitment to appreciate the backgrounds and values of these more diverse student populations, and more culturally relevant and meaningful interventions to effectively improve the educational attainment of our more diverse students, we will likely continue to see an increased gap in student retention and success in postsecondary and higher education. To illustrate the racial and ethnic discrepancy between students and faculty, I include recent data from the U.S. Department of Education. Of all full-time faculty in degree-granting postsecondary institutions in fall, 2013, 79 percent were White (43 percent were White males and 35 percent were White females), 6 percent were Black, 5 percent were Hispanic, and 10 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander. Making up less than 1 percent were full-time faculty who were American Indian/Alaska Native. Among full-time professors, 84 percent were White (58 percent were White males and 26 percent were White females), 4 percent were Black, 3 percent were Hispanic, 9 percent were Asian/Pacific Islander, and less than 1 percent were

1

professors who were American Indian/Alaska Native (U.S. Department of Education, NCES 2015-144). As stated previously, the percentage of American college students who are Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, and American Indian/Alaska Native has been increasing. From 1976 to 2012, the percentage of Hispanic students rose from 4 percent to 15 percent, the percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander students rose from 2 percent to 6 percent, the percentage of Black students rose from 10 percent to 15 percent, and the percentage of American Indian/Alaska Native students rose from 0.7 to 0.9 percent. During the same period, the percentage of White students fell from 84 percent to 60 percent (U.S. Department of Education, NCES 2015-011). Despite the increase in enrollment in postsecondary and higher education institutions, the attainment of the first bachelor’s degree, by students’ race and ethnicity are not good. The Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study (U.S. Department of Education, NCES 2012-046) reported the percentages of Black (51 percent) and Hispanic (52 percent) full-time students at 4-year institutions who attained bachelor’s degrees were lower than the percentages of White students (73 percent) and Asian students (76 percent) who attained a bachelor’s degree. To what should we attribute these differences? To the institutions? To the students? Research on campus climate or environment suggests the need to recognize and acknowledge specific negative experiences shared by students of color, and the impact this has on student achievement (Hurtado, 1994; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen & Allen, 1999; Rendon, Lee, Castillo & Tobolowsky, 2007; Gloria & Robinson-Kurpius, 2001). This includes consideration for symbols and ceremonies that may communicate an unwelcoming environment for students of color and potentially hinder their performances in college (Gonzalez, 2002). Similarly, the validation of students’ cultures also seems to matter, especially to marginalized or underrepresented students. For example, Walker and Schultz (2001) found being away from family and the lack of community in the institution negatively impacted Hispanic student retention and success. In response, they suggested the need to acknowledge these cultural values as a means to support Hispanic students. Another study revealed that participants with higher ethnic identity perceived the university environment more negatively, especially when the students’ cultural heritage diverged from the university’s core beliefs (Castillo, Conoley, Choi-Pearson, Archuleta, Phoummarath, & VanLandingham, 2006), or did not appear to be validated. At the same time that we are witnessing this educational attainment gap for students from historically excluded racial and ethnic backgrounds, we are also observing aggressive and targeted efforts in the corporate and public sectors to diversify their personnel. For example, Goldman Sachs recently hosted a one-day Diversity Partners Symposium in Salt Lake City for students who identified as Black, Latino, or Native American, and were interested in learning more about the financial services industry. They were offering summer internship opportunities, and their program included an overview of the firm’s history and culture,

2

career workshops, and professional networking opportunities. Their slogan captured the ultimate purpose of their program: “It takes different perspectives to keep innovating.” (Goldman Sachs, 2013). There are also expanded funding efforts at the state and national levels to support a more diverse pool of future scientists, as reflected by STEM or STEAM funded programs and initiatives from middle schools to universities, to national research laboratories. Historically, the fields of multicultural education, ethnic studies, intercultural studies, bilingual and biliterate studies, and cross-cultural communication have attempted to contribute to more a meaningful integration of diverse cultures and cultural perspectives in teaching and learning in the USA. Yet we continue to experience patterns of failed educational programs and initiatives in postsecondary and higher education, including those intended to improve the educational attainment of “students of color” or students from diverse cultural backgrounds. I suggest we need to consider a broader analysis of the potential causes or sources of the educational gaps that are of such great concern. I believe it is much more complicated, and that piecemeal methods of interventions are limited in their ability to make a significant impact on educational outcomes and success. A more comprehensive and strategic approach, using a cultural framework, is perhaps the key, with the goal of transforming institutions rather than the students attending. In presenting my case, I begin with an intentionally broad and generic description of the “culture of higher education” which will be helpful in establishing the context of my argument. I follow with a snapshot of diversity initiatives in higher education institutions intended to create positive educational experiences and outcomes for the more demographically diverse student populations. I offer a cultural framework that suggests institutional transformation is what is needed, particularly if the ultimate goals for the institution include improved student engagement and success. The Culture of Higher Education There are over 4,000 institutions of higher education in the U.S. that range from private (for-profit) to public; from technical training to liberal arts colleges to research universities; and from two-year associates to doctoral preparing institutions. While each type of institution has its own “cultural ways,” I suggest there are common cultural values and fairly consistent practices among most postsecondary institutions in the U.S. For the sake of this paper, I will limit this discussion to more traditional public and private institutions that offer bachelors and graduate degrees. To frame the “culture of higher education,” I briefly describe the infrastructure, external influences, practices, values and traditions, and common language as reflections of the culture of higher education. Infrastructure. In reviewing numerous organizational charts of colleges and universities, there is incredible consistency in the structure: a president/chancellor; a provost or executive/senior vice president; additional vice-presidents; deans and directors. The

3

academic side is divided by schools, colleges, department and divisions—with faculty assigned to a primary unit, though dual appointments across units is possible. Full-time faculties are ranked by titles and status, and are called to serve in leadership roles through committees and councils to ensure faculty engagement in shared governance. Instruction is also provided by adjunct, visiting and contingent faculties, as well as graduate teaching assistants and other instructors. Support staffs reside in all areas of the institution, with hierarchical affiliations based on titles, ranks, roles and responsibilities. There is often a structural division between “academic” and “student” services or affairs. Of course, there are the personnel in residence life, campus life, athletics, human resources, facilities, and technology support that are essential areas of service and structure. Critical are those individuals pursuing some academic credential who are given and retain the label of “student” until attaining this credential. Students may also carry other labels or identifiers as a result of their majors, extracurricular activities, involvement in athletics, participation as peer mentors, teaching assistants, resident assistants, etc. They also carry a rank status or classification based upon credit hours completed (at the undergraduate level) or level of study (e.g., graduate or doctoral student). External influences. Each institution has a formal governing board (regents, trustees, etc.) to whom the president/chancellor reports. Many institutions have a Foundation charged with generating additional funds through corporate and individual donors, friends and alumni. For public institutions, there are numerous elected officials that have political or vested interests in the institution. For private institutions, there are typically other agencies, organizations or prominent individuals that serve to influence (or monitor) the status of the institutions. Further, external accrediting bodies serve to require, endorse and assess expected practices within each institution. Media, and in particular, social media, are additional sources of influence on the institutional image and reputation, either intentionally or indirectly. Institutional Practices. The most common “practices” among institutions of higher education are the following: admissions processes (to both the institution, and sometimes to specific programs of study); orientations for students, staff and faculties; grading and assessments of learning; provision of student support, engagement or enrichment programs; academic program development and reviews; professional personnel development and support; community service and outreach (especially for public institutions); and fundraising to support students’ scholarships and special initiatives. The decision-making processes often require input from numerous levels of offices and personnel (noted in the infrastructure), often by way of committee reviews and recommendations through formal approval by the governing boards, on matters related to policy.

4

Values and Traditions. It is likely universal that institutions acknowledge academic freedom, freedom of speech, a code of ethics, and academic integrity as fundamental institutional values. Other common though less expressed values are independence or individualism and institutional loyalty. Beyond that, individual institutions identify and promote their Core Values, which very likely include something about student success and academic excellence. A growing number of institutions note “diversity” and “inclusion” as core institutional values. How are these values manifested? Is diversity a goal, a reality, or a concept? As institutional core values, there should be a clear connection between the values and institutional practices, policies, decisions and actions. Institutional traditions contribute to the reputations and expectations of the institution. Convocation and commencement exercises are often the bookends to the academic traditions from admissions to graduation. Other traditions have included initiation ceremonies such as inductions into honor societies and recognition events that celebrate teaching, research and service. Some institutions have longstanding traditions tied to athletic programs; others may be known as “party schools.” In essence, institutional traditions serve to reinforce institutional community and identity. Common Language and Terminology. There are numerous terms and phrases that are both common and unique to higher education. Common terms are majors, minors, electives, and degree plans. Consider credit hours, semester load, time-to-degree, advisors, mentors, syllabi, and supplemental instruction. But don’t forget prerequisites and course substitutions. Say nothing of demystifying one’s financial aid packaging, and navigating grade appeals, withdrawals, incompletes, schedule conflicts, class cancellations and academic probation. We must not forget the deadlines, entrance exams and possible exit exams. Take a deeper look into the phrase “Tuition and fees,” and you quickly realize these posted numbers, in no way, reflect the “bottom line” costs to attend university. Once you imagine to have calculated the costs by the number of courses or credit hours desired, add the specific course fees, textbook and software costs, and living expenses. Now, go back to your financial aid packaging to see where you stand on “net cost” per term or academic year. Then, take a look at the plethora of options for courses which range from face-to-face to online courses, with hybrids in between. There are internships, practica, field-based courses and study abroad. There are traditional semesters, summer terms, and mini-mesters. Don’t forget independent studies, directed studies, and capstone courses. The course menu also often includes remedial, developmental and honors options. And the sooner one learns the terminology and concepts, the greater the likelihood for successful navigation of the system. Summary of Cultural Aspects in Higher Education. As we reflect on the “culture of higher education” by way of looking into some of the most common structures, practices,

5

values, and language, perhaps it becomes more obvious that this culture is in stark contrast to the educational system and structures that many, if not most students experience in their high schools (and most certainly for students engaged in home-schooling). Having worked in more than five institutions of higher education, I can attest to the cultural similarities among these institutions, while acknowledging that each has its own identity or nuances which make it unique or distinct. I would have to say that entering these institutions as a faculty member, and later as an administrator, required a new level of enculturation that was quite different from my student experiences. If learning to navigate the university is challenging from a faculty or staff perspective, imagine what it looks like to a student! For students who are the first in their families to attend postsecondary and higher education institutions, they are clearly at a distinct disadvantage in simply trying to navigate and interpret this new or foreign cultural context called higher education. What else do we know about the university culture, climate or environment, with respect to diversity? Lacy (1978) and Tinto (1994) have suggested that persistence increased when universities made an effort to help students integrate into the college social and academic settings via socializing agents and interpersonal relationships. This latter suggestion is certainly more proactive than placing all the responsibility on the students’ ability to navigate the system. Among the themes noted in the culture of higher education are the following: hierarchical and divided structures; external interest and monitoring groups; common practices, values, and traditions; and a common set of terms and concepts unique to higher education. The enculturation process, depending on the reason and point of entry, is shaped by the knowledge, skills and experiences one brings to this cultural context. For students entering as the first-in-their-family, they are often without cultural interpreters. For students whose cultural values differ substantially from the institutional values, or from those held by the majority of personnel within the institution, there is the possibility for cultural dissonance or tensions. When the understanding or appreciation of the culture of higher education is limited, this can interfere with or impede student engagement, sense of belonging, or success. In this next section, I offer the following descriptions and summaries of some of the more commonly proposed diversity initiatives intended to cause positive results in the educational attainment of students of color or culturally diverse students in higher education. Diversity Initiatives in Higher Education In a previous presentation entitled “The Good, the Bad, and the Best of Intentions” (Aguilar, 2013), I presented a summary of initiatives under two major headings: Curriculum and Personnel, giving examples of programs and initiatives designed to “promote, support or address diversity.” As suggested by that previous presentation’s title, I also noted some of the unanticipated shortcomings for many of these interventions and concepts. For both of these categories, I offer brief descriptions of the selected initiatives that I have either experienced,

6

observed, or engaged in, including their intent, and a brief critique of limitations and potentially negative issues or consequences that may result from these initiatives. Diversity within the Curriculum There are several models for introducing or embedding cultural diversity within the curriculum in institutions of higher education. The following are meant to highlight examples, rather than to imply that this is a comprehensive menu. Ethnic/Gender Studies. There was a strong movement in the 1970’s that contributed to the growth of courses in ethnic and gender studies. To say that ethnic and gender studies curricula have been marginalized within higher education is perhaps an understatement. Quite often these courses were developed in response to student demands and designed to teach what had been omitted from formal education. Equally as often, the majority of students enrolled in these courses were taking them to learn more about self or one’s own background. These courses were also most often offered as electives, though as more courses were generated, some programs were able to offer minors, with a more contemporary trend of offering more majors in these areas of study. Required Diversity Courses. At least two decades after the ethnic studies movement, there were broader efforts to include at least one “diversity course” requirement in the general education or core curriculum at the undergraduate level. Many of the proponents who contributed to this movement were concerned with the lack of understanding and appreciation of the diverse social experiences and divisions within the U.S.A. Depending on how this requirement was defined, however, it was not uncommon to see a broad range of alternative courses that were accepted to fulfill this one course requirement which did not address the sociopolitical issues behind this movement. Examples of acceptable “diversity courses” included international or global topics or themes, such as International Business, Spanish Literature, or Latin American History. In some sense, these courses were more acceptable and less “political” than the proposed diversity (within the U.S.) courses. In some fields of study, particularly pre-professional programs, external accrediting bodies suggested that students needed to take coursework to enhance their cultural competence or their ability to work with persons from cultures different than their own. The area of multicultural education within teacher education is a prime example of a field that recognized the cultural, racial and ethnic disconnect between the student population in the schools and the individuals going into teacher education programs who were preparing to teach in those schools. One response to this concern was to require teacher education programs to offer specific courses in diversity or multicultural education in the program of study with the intent to prepare future teachers to more effectively teach diverse students.

7

Integrated/Embedded Content. Another curricular model is the proposal to integrate diversity content into two or more required or core courses within the major coursework. An example is within the Social Work program at my home institution. Given the geographical location and the populations served, the School defined its mission, in part, to prepare all social work students to work with indigenous and native populations. How does the appropriate and relevant content get embedded into the curriculum? Recognizing that this requires both cultural content and expertise, it was essential to bring in that expertise and to begin to engage in a thorough curricular assessment to ensure the mission could be achievable, rather than simply aspirational. One of the essential learning outcomes proposed by the Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U, 2016) pertains to “intercultural knowledge and competence” and the goal is to measure how students acquire these skills during their program of study. The assumption, then, is that the knowledge base and skills are developed through an integrative process embedded across the curriculum, rather than something acquired through a single course. Immersion/Field Courses. I have had the opportunity to design and implement domestic and international immersion experiences and coursework to study diversity. Putting oneself into a new and unfamiliar cultural context can be incredibly enlightening and rewarding. These experiences I led were offered in Mexico and Cuba and included formal presentations, site visits, local guest lecturers and field-based assignments. In all cases, these immersion experiences required critical reflection. I have found that immersion experiences without meaningful reflection and interpretation can serve to reinforce negative stereotypes and assumptions, and can be more detrimental than no experience at all Team-teaching with “Cultural Experts.” What makes an individual a cultural expert? Is it lived experience? Is it formal study? Is it a combination? Essentially, this depends on what is intended to be taught and learned. The strategy here is to bring outside authentic sources and resources into the classroom that bring critical experience and knowledge to enhance learning about diverse others. Curriculum Initiatives Summary. With most of the curricular strategies, the idea is that courses can be designed and taught in a manner that will influence students’ understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity. The evolution of curricular strategies appear to have shifted from students learning more about their own backgrounds or experiences (in an almost marginalized context) to students learning more about the diverse backgrounds of others within the society, at large, regardless of one’s own background. Over the course of my career, I have participated in some rather lively conversations and critiques concerning who can and should teach courses with diversity content. Having taught multicultural education (MCE) at a predominantly white institution for 9 years, and

8

been a “card-carrying member” of the National Association for Multicultural Education all of those years, I can say that the race of the faculty member did not determine who the best MCE faculties were. I suspect the same can be said for professors of anthropology, biology, sociology, or British literature. In my experience, I have to surmise that there are enlightened and unenlightened folks out there teaching about diversity. Nonetheless, there has been a growing appreciation for the need to have more culturally competent and knowledgeable individuals within our increasingly diverse nation and within a more global context. Addressing diversity as both content and experience are common strategies within the curriculum. In essence, as diversity is given more attention within the curriculum in higher education, diversity is also being publicly validated. Personnel Initiatives to Address Diversity The personnel approach to diversity initiatives suggest that targeted recruitment, specialized training, and focused professional development are viable or desirable strategies to address diversity. I have personally experienced all of the strategies described in this section. Diversity or Targeted Hiring Programs. More than 25 years ago, I was actively recruited to a faculty position at a research institution that was seeking to increase the number of faculty of color among the tenured faculty. The program solicited nominations from academic departments who identified Hispanic scholars in their disciplines who would be invited to interview for newly created positions. The department would get a “free line” which would be filled by a “diversity” hire. There was a formal interview process and offers were extended to a cohort of 18 Hispanic scholars for new faculty positions across colleges, schools and departments. Within 3 years, two-thirds of this cohort left the institution—including myself. Though faculty in the host departments nominated us, individual faculty were not pleased with the compensation package we each received (reduced teaching load, summer stipends, and 1 or 2 graduate assistants). Many of us experienced a negative to hostile work environment among our departmental peers. Reflecting on the design and implementation of this initiative, I suggest that this one falls under the category of “best of intentions.” The commitment and efforts to hire a more diverse faculty is quite possible and desirable. The strategies used must be fair and open. Recruiting a diverse pool of applicants is essential, though there are many misconceptions of why or how this can be done. Preparing the Search Committees. With the rich history of Affirmative Action programs and policies, we have come full circle in seeking to define or acknowledge legitimate efforts and commitments that will result in a more diverse faculty. In my 30 years in higher education, I have witnessed an incredible number of both subtle and intentional barriers and constraints that have contributed to the continued underrepresentation of faculty of color in higher education. I recall serving on a faculty search committee (many years ago) and there was a

9

discussion about the need to hire more diverse faculty. Immediately, one of the members cautioned, “Yes, but they MUST be qualified.” The assumption being that most applicants of color would not likely even meet the minimum qualifications. Another publically unspoken notion shared and experienced among faculty of color is the racist perception that we “need to do twice as much to be considered half as good” as our racial and ethnic counterparts. How do we get beyond these barriers and constraints? There will continue to be a significant gap between an increasingly diverse student demographic and that of the faculty, unless we are more proactive and successful in recruiting and retaining a more diverse faculty. Today, we are hearing from students of color who are questioning why there are so few faculty of color, particularly among the ranks of full-time, tenured professors. The same concern and pattern exists in Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), though that is certainly not the perception external to these institutions. One of the options to address this matter most directly is to start with the search committees. How are committees selected and prepared for the search? Are the position announcements written in a way to suggest that the institutions genuinely seek and welcome diversity among its faculty? Where has, or will, the position be advertised to increase the likelihood of a more diverse pool of applicants? If diversity is truly valued and appreciated as an asset, particularly in light of what this brings to the students, the disciplines and fields of study, and the institutional climate or culture, then a much more proactive approach to personnel searches is essential. The solution is not quota-driven, nor should it be. There are proactive strategies that would increase the likelihood of a more diverse faculty that begin with the position announcement. Examples of minimal or preferred qualifications to attract more diverse personnel might include: being bilingual (especially if this skill can be used in teaching, outreach and program development); having a minimum number of years of effective teaching or professional experience with underrepresented students or clientele; or having meaningful cultural immersion experiences in a professional or voluntary setting. Any applicant, regardless of race or ethnicity, may have acquired these skills or experiences. Consequently, it cannot be argued that these are discriminatory or exclusive criteria. Cultural Competence through Faculty/Staff Development. I have had the opportunity and challenge in both delivering and participating in cultural competence professional development programs. When these types of programs are required, I can assure you they will be met with resistance. When they are optional, it is often an experience of “singing to the choir.” Nonetheless, I can share some of the most effective strategies (Aguilar, 2014)for promoting or developing cultural competence: domestic or international immersion experiences with critical reflection; small and diverse reading groups of various genres by authors of color, most effective when the author(s) participated or contributed virtually to the reading group; panel sessions comprised of students from diverse backgrounds, reflecting on their personal challenges and experiences (positive and negative) as a student; role playing sessions demonstrating ways in which persons from diverse backgrounds perceive or

10

interpret their experiences differently than others; and workshops in which participants are invited to review or critique materials to assess the cultural relevance, inclusion or accuracy. There are an increasing number of specialized conferences, webinars and workshops designed to develop or expand the cultural competence of faculty and staff in higher education. In most cases, the emphases in developing or expanding one’s cultural competence are on learning to see beyond one’s traditional, focused, or limited lens; and in attempting to understand and appreciate the realities and experiences of people quite different from ourselves. Again, the primary basis for the focus on cultural competence is due to the lack of racial and ethnic diversity among the faculty and staff. This is not meant to assume or stereotype who is or is not culturally competent on the basis of their own race or ethnic background. Campus or National Leadership Development Programs. I am a strong proponent of the notion that “leadership sets the tone” for the organization, agency or institution. With respect to diversity in higher education, the role and responsiveness of higher education leadership is being openly discussed and in some cases challenged on a national level. The racial unrest and growing demands from students of color recently may serve to remind some of us of the cries and violence more than 50 years ago, when students of color were being admitted to postsecondary and higher education institutions after historically being denied admission. The circumstances are different today, but the pleas for inclusion and validation continue. Leadership development programs in higher education approach diversity initiatives in at least three ways. First, is to include diversity topics and resources in the training programs. Second, is to actively recruit participants historically excluded from leadership opportunities (e.g. women and people of color). Third, is to create senior leadership positions in higher education institutions, such as Vice-Presidents (e.g. for Diversity and Inclusion, Equity, etc.) and to have them take the lead in addressing diversity issues, concerns and opportunities within the institution. Unless the leadership development training programs offer candid and open dialogues to both understand some of the more serious challenges with diversity, and invite participants to consider viable, inclusive and respectful solutions, merely covering the topics will not prepare these prospective leaders for difficult situations. Similarly, recruiting people of color to leadership roles and assuming they are inherently prepared to address diversity issues and topics on a broad level is a different type of potential risk or shortcoming. On the other hand, narrowing the scope of presumed knowledge and expertise of people of color to only (or mostly) diversity topics, constricts their potential influence in leadership roles. Not simple. Not easy. And certainly not obvious. Summary of Curricular and Personnel Diversity Initiatives in Higher Education. Efforts to address the cultural gap between an increasingly diverse student population and the culture of higher education were presented under the two broad headings of curriculum and

11

personnel. In spite of various programs and initiatives to bridge this gap, we continue to experience patterns of limited or failed educational success and attainment by “students of color” or students from diverse cultural backgrounds. The problem is that if we continue along this pathway, it may lead to a national crisis. Our demographic trends will continue as they are. The educational attainment among this growing demographic should be a grave national concern. Not to discredit some gains made by the various initiatives described previously, my premise here is that we need to consider a broader analysis of these efforts, noting the benefits and barriers which may ultimately lead to greater success. It is, without question, complicated and challenging. But, I believe that we can learn from these previous efforts and initiatives and consider taking a much more comprehensive approach in closing the cultural gap in order to realize greater student success. Recommendations for Institutional Transformation: A Proposed Cultural Framework As I shared in the introduction, I suggested that a more comprehensive and strategic approach is needed to have a positive impact on student success—particularly for the changing demographics of our student populations. Using a cultural framework, I am promoting the goal of transforming institutions rather than the students. There are two central questions that drive this goal of institutional transformation: 1. How is the culture of higher education different from the cultures of the students? 2. What aspects or elements within the institutions can be changed to be more conducive to student success for students from diverse and underrepresented backgrounds? These questions were only partially addressed in the previous sections, but one implication is that there is a cultural gap between higher education and the culture(s) of the increasingly diverse student populations. Considering the work of developmental psychologists Urie Brofenbrenner and Pamela Morris (2007), both the students’ home cultures and the culture of higher education reflect microsystems, which he previously defined as follows: A microsystem is a pattern of activities, social roles, and interpersonal relations experienced by the developing person in a given face-to-face setting with particular physical, social, and symbolic features that invite, permit, or inhibit, engagement in sustained, progressively more complex interactions with, and activity in, the immediate environment. (Brofenbrenner, 1994, p. 1645). In each microsystem, there are rules, values, and roles known (after being learned, of course) and understood among those functioning within each system. The “developing person” noted in this text would be the university student. In his bioecological model of human

12

development, Brofenbrenner (Brofenbrenner & Morris, 2007) also proposed a critical defining property of the model which he referred to as proximal processes, which essentially capture the quality and power of interactions that contribute to one’s development, whether those interactions occur with people or other aspects within the environment. While I am not suggesting that I am using the bioecological model as a framework for institutional transformation, I do wish to acknowledge and reinforce that the people and environment comprising institutions of higher education play critical roles in the development of our students. Setting the Foundation for Institutional Reforms There are two recent institutional initiatives that are instrumental in setting the foundation for institutional reforms with respect to diversity: creation of a diversity council and endorsement of “Diversity” as an institutional core value in the new strategic plan. At the end of the spring semester of 2014, I established the Provost’s Diversity Council which was comprised of faculty and staff. In an early planning document, a subcommittee of the Council offered this text as both background and vision for the potential contributions of this Council: NMHU recognizes that all people -- with a variety of lived experiences, self-identities, ideas, and ideologies --- bring with them unique sets of knowledge that influence their lives and learning. NMHU also recognizes that inequity and injustice is perpetuated by institutional policies, practices, and structures which have the potential to hinder the success of many students, faculty, staff, and community. Creating an inclusive community that emphasizes diversity and appreciation of otherness is not only the right thing to do, it is critical to the success of our community. Therefore, at NMHU, everyone is welcomed and treated with dignity and respect, and every person’s story is honored. As a designated Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) and an aspiring Native-American Serving NonTribal Institution (NASNTI), NMHU must dedicate significant efforts to creating a cohesive and transitional approach to institutional change that fosters inclusion and respect.1

More recently, the Board of Regents approved HU Vision 2020, a five year strategic planning framework. One of the four Core Values proposed by the 23-member Strategic Planning Steering Committee was Diversity. This core value was described as follows: As an Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) and an aspiring Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institution (NASNTI), we welcome national, international, and indigenous students, and consider diversity as our strength. We acknowledge and embrace the cultural values, experiences and multiple identities within our community through inclusion and fairness.

Again, these two recent initiative provide what I believe to be an essential foundation upon which to proceed with more focused, coordinated, and strategically designed diversity 1

Draft report of subcommittee, April 10, 2015.

13

initiatives which can contribute to a more comprehensive institutional transformation. Strategies for Institutional Transformation In this proposal for a more systemic institutional transformation, I have identified nine areas upon which to build and expand cultural competence, embracing our institutional Core Values (Diversity), while maintaining a clear focus on the ultimate goals of student engagement, retention and success (see Fig. 1). We also build upon the foundation and vision of the Diversity Council to contribute to critical discussions and resources to guide the implementation of various initiatives and strategies. Following the listing below, each of the nine elements are briefly described A. 1. 2. 3.

The People – Cultural Competence/Commitment to Inclusion and Diversity: Student Development Staff Development Faculty Development

B. 4. 5. 6.

Institutional Programs and Activities: Research and Scholarly Activity Academic Programs Special Events

C. 7. 8. 9.

External Constituencies: Fundraising Initiatives Professional Development for External Constituents Community and Stakeholder Partnerships

A. Cultural Competence among Personnel and Students The development of cultural competence among students, staff and faculty can be approached through both traditional and non-traditional means. To address the development of cultural competence of students, the university currently provides multiple ways in which this can occur: in the classroom, in research opportunities, in leadership roles, in internships and in student employment settings. When cultural competence is intentionally integrated into these types of activities, there is increased opportunity to reinforce the goal of cultural competence development and enrichment. Cultural competence for staff and faculty must include cultural content, contexts and meaningful experiences. Learning about the diversity with a focus on the culture of Northern New Mexico and the surrounding region is one area that would be particularly beneficial to NMHU. Gaining the competence to interact from a more informed and experienced position will enhance the quality of exchanges held both in the classroom and in student support services.

14

I recently received an email from one of our new first-year Assistant Professors in which she shared some of her observations and expanded appreciation of our student population. With her permission, I’ve included her commentary and reflections on how much she has learned over the course of her first year of teaching at NMHU, an HSI located in rural Northern New Mexico. For me, her reflections capture the importance of expanding her appreciation of our students’ culture and her willingness to learn. Since my arrival here, I've been thinking a lot about the conflict between the experience our students bring and the more "traditional" expectations of college students. For example, last semester, I had a student who ran his family's cattle ranch while completing his coursework. He brought to my classroom practicality, initiative, a fantastic work ethic, and a desire to maintain allegiance to his roots while working to advance his education. He drove two and a half hours, each way, to attend my class. He missed only one class: to attend an educational seminar led by the forestry department. In so many ways, our students are "non-traditional." But in so many ways, they encompass the values any university would look for (and likely not find) in its more traditional students. That, to me, is a benefit of our university: Our students have life experience, and as such, they exhibit humility, assertion, and appreciation. These, to me, are the values that universities should seek, rather than a traditional upbringing or education. And Highlands' ability to embrace these values is what makes it a good fit for our students. I'll step off my soapbox now, but--long story short--the students and their life experiences have taught me just as much as I've taught them, especially as a newcomer to New Mexico and its culture. My students have embraced my ignorance by explaining with pride their backgrounds and histories. Not once have I been condescended to or felt like an "outsider." Rather, my students realize my interest and indulge me with their stories, histories, and cultural knowledge. At times, I feel the classroom is theirs to lead, and not mine. And that is fine by me; for the best part of being a teacher is not disseminating knowledge, but continuing to gain it. (First-year Tenure-track Assistant Professor, e-mail commentary, 2016) B. Institutional Programs and Activities Three areas under institutional programs and activities identified for strategic institutional transformation are: Research and Scholarly Activity; academic programs, and special events. Most of these are existing programs and activities in which we currently engage. This effort calls for working with offices and areas such as the Office of Grants and Contracts, Special collections/archives, academic programs with a focus on cultural expertise or study, and through special events such as institutes, and performances centered on diverse cultures. C. External Constituencies The three areas identified with respect to bridging external constituencies and the NMHU commitment to diversity include fundraising, external professional development, and community partnerships. The focus of fundraising is preparing materials or messages for

15

prospective donors who seek to understand how NMHU is approaching institutional and student transformation through cultural competence. The external professional development initiatives are focused on cultural competence development for community practitioners, clinicians, and other professionals. Using our internal expertise, we are positioned to provide these experiences through our office of continued learning, granting CEUs and special certifications. We are aware of many community stakeholders who are interested in the students who complete their programs at NMHU. We serve many agencies through our students in practica and internship experiences. To the extent that our students are better prepared in cultural competence, we are better positioned to being further recognized by our external constituencies in a very positive light. Summary, Vision and Next Steps As we move forward in designing specific unit plans and actions in the university strategic planning process, and consider the Core Value and commitment to diversity, we are clearly in a unique position to engage in meaningful institutional transformation. Members of the Diversity Council are positioned to provide leadership and resources in these broader efforts leading to institutional transformation. Students will play a critical role in this transformation as well, as we invite them to bring their cultural experiences, values and traditions to the university. It is an ambitious vision, and the consequences are promising.

16

Staff Student

Faculty

Development*

Development*

Development* Cultural knowledge And skills

Cultural knowledge And skills

Research and Scholarly Activity

Highlands University Diversity and Cultural Initiatives Cultural & Community and

Language Studies

Stakeholder Partnerships

Professional

Funded

Special Events

Development:

Initiatives

on Campus

HU Speakers Bureau NMHU Diversity Council_2015_DRAFT

17

References Aguilar, T. E. (2104, September). Cultural Perspectives on Education in the 21st Century: Considerations for Culture in Teacher Preparation and the Development of Intercultural Competence. A Keynote Presentation at the “23rd National Congress on Educational Scienceswith International Participation” Organized by the Faculty of Education, Kocaeli University. İzmit, Turkey. Aguilar, T.E. (2013, April). Engagement and Inclusion in Higher Education: The Good, the Bad, and the Best of Intentions. An Invited Presentation to faculty, staff and students, University of MissouriColumbia, Columbia, Missouri. Aguilar, T. E., & Pohan, C. A. (1996). Using a constructivist approach to challenge preservice teachers' thinking about diversity in education. In F. Rios (Ed.), Teacher Thinking in Cultural Contexts, 260281. New York: SUNY Press (Social Context of Education Series). Association of American Colleges & Universities. (2016). www.AACU.org/value Brofenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. In T. Husen and T.N. Postlethwaite (Eds). International encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., Vol 3, pp. 1643-1647). Oxford, England, Pergamon Press/Elsevier Science. Brofenbrenner, U. & Morris, P.A. (2007). The Bioecological Model of Human Development. Handbook of Child Psychology. 1: 14, 793-828. Castillo, L.L., Conoley, C., Choi-Pearson, C., Archuleta, D., Phoummarath, M., & VanLandingham, A. (2006). University environment as a mediator of Latino ethnic identity and persistence attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 267-271. Fath. L. (2016, March). E-mail correspondence to T.E. Aguilar regarding topic of paper being presented at SFAA Annual Meeting in Vancouver. Initial reflections as a first-year tenure track professor new to northern New Mexico. New Mexico Highlands University. Gloria, A. M., & Robinson-Kurpius, S. E. (2001). “Influences of self-beliefs, social support, and comfort in the university environment on the academic persistence issues for American Indian undergraduates.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 88-102. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (2013). Recruitment ad in conference program. HACU Annual conference. Gonzalez, K. (2002). Campus culture and the experiences of Chicano students in a predominantly white university. Urban Education, 37, 193-219. Hurtado, S. (1994). The institutional climate for talented Latino students. Research in Higher Education, 35 (21-41. Hurtado, S., Milem, J.F., Clayton-Pedersen, A.R., & Allen, W.R. (1999). Enacting diverse learning environments: Improving the campus climate for racial/ethnic diversity. ASHE/ERIC Higher Education Reports Series.

18

Lacy, W. (1978). Interpersonal relationships as mediators of structural effects: College students’ socialization in a traditional and an experimental university environment. Sociology of Education, 51, 201-211. National Survey of Student Engagement. (2011). National Survey of Student Engagement 2011: The College Student Report. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Rendon, L., Lee, W., Castillo, E. & Tobolowsky (2007). Shattering barriers. Affirming diversity in higher education. Education Policy and Practice Perspectives. No. 3. Tinto, V. (1994). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Tinto, V. (1998). Colleges as communities: Taking research on student persistence seriously. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 167–177. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study. Statistical Analysis Report. (NCES 2012-046). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 (NCES 2015-011). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). The Condition of Education 2015 (NCES 2015-144), Characteristics of Postsecondary Faculty. Walker, D.A. & Schultz, A.M. (2001). Reaching for diversity: Recruiting and retaining MexicanAmerican students. College Student Retention Research. Theory & Practice, 2 (4), 313-325.

Additional Suggested Readings Arana, R., Castañeda-Sound, C., Blanchard, S. & Aguilar, T. (2011). “Indicators of Persistence for Hispanic Undergraduate Achievement: Toward an Ecological Model.” Journal of Hispanic Higher Education. 10 (3):237-251. Brown, K.M. (2006). Leadership for social justice and equity: Evaluating a transformative framework and androgogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(5), 700-745. Harper, S.R. & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 120, 7-24. Kalbach, L. & Aguilar, T.E. (2000). Strategies for incorporating 'racism' into a multicultural education foundations course. Multicultural Perspectives, 2(3), 15-20. Ortiz, A.M. & Santos, S. J. (2009). Ethnicity in College: Advancing Theory and Improving Diversity Practices on Campus. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Venezia, A. & Kirst, M. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education systems and policies undermine the chances for student persistence and success in college. Educational Policy, 19, 283307.

19