The trend these past two years of diversity events has been Islam and Middle East related. The second focus is improving graduation rates among black males with diversity initiatives.
Both are important and valuable topics that I have no issues with. Similarly I have zero issues with the idea of these diversity initiatives, the issue arises within the actual proceedings of the events. In the specifics.
I believe we can work on improving our diversity initiatives and that we will be better for it.
Everything sounds great when it’s left as intangible and abstract. However, the money and the hands that exchange it are quite real. Currently, there’s a very, visibly lost ‘something’ in the translation.
For example, anyone who has attended any event with the word “dialogue” in it has begun to take note that the dialogue is often one-sided.
Many events don’t have much of a question and answer portion. This can cause it just to be a perspective presentation. If we just want to pay a bunch of people to send our student body one specific message, don’t disguise it as a dialogue or a roundtable.
On the rare occasion that there is something resembling a discussion or Q&A session, instructors have been known to hog the microphone. Students may get discouraged or uninterested if they can’t get a word in, edgewise.
We expect our educators to be facilitators in our learning experiences, but we also expect them to be our advocates. Being involved in campus events is wonderful and your students appreciate it, but dominating or reducing opportunities for student activity is offputting.
Give us something uncomfortable. Give us something challenging. We can handle that.
Those have been the most successful events on our campus, at least.
We’re here to develop our own thoughts, not parrot the institution’s. We can embody that notion more by increasing relevancy and transparency with events.
There’s definitely a qualification restriction going on for diversity events.
The result is a filtered, diluted and repetitive message that doesn’t really broaden our minds if we can’t then discuss or otherwise participate in what is actually causing our synapses to fire.
The more of these “dialogues” that don’t actually encourage “dialogue” happen, the more ostracized and criticized the initiatives as a whole will become.
That can’t happen. If students start to believe the college’s events are disingenuous, then they will hold the institution in a similar regard.
Another area for improvement lies within the array of topics.
Does diversity to Sinclair mean just black and muslim? Certainly not, nor do I believe that is the intent behind the events. However, there have been events where the idea of diversity simply excluded non-racial minorities.
I hope we do not return to events like those in the past where diversity exists as a private club for closed minds. I believe part of the diversity events purpose is to provide meaningful experiences for the student body. Refusing to welcome majority population students seems to distance that goal.
Diversity encompasses more than just skin tone–focusing on one social stratifier isn’t going to bring much unity.
However, when all the events are specifically black or muslim centered, the optics don’t appear diverse. We have many national subject matters that are heated and relate to our student body, we can do a better job exploring that diversity.
Perhaps one of the most fascinating missteps is the profound ability of college administrations to believe the students won’t see past it while claiming they’re the best and brightest of the region.
If you look down on your students and community, they will find someone else to look up to.
Their money and influence will follow.
I don’t want to see large sums of money creating division. The discussion doesn’t have to be comfortable, but I believe it can be productive.
If you attend an event and have suggestions or feedback, voice it. We can’t expect to see improvement if we do not let them know what isn’t working.
Barton Kleen
Executive Editor