Reflection of Darkness

We wear the mask that grins and lies,

It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes,–

This debt we pay to human guile;

With torn and bleeding hearts we smile,

And mouth with myriad subtleties.



Why should the world be overwise,

In counting all our tears and sighs?

Nay, let them only see us, while

We wear the mask.



We smile, but, O great Christ, our cries

To thee from tortured souls arise.

We sing, but oh the clay is vile

Beneath our feet, and long the mile;

But let the world dream otherwise,

We wear the mask!

- Paul Laurence Dunbar, We Wear the Mask

My manifesto on darkness is an attempt to talk about race in America through a theatrical piece. Since reading Toni Morrison’s book, Playing in the Dark, I have tried to see the occasions where discussions or portrayals of my race were “playing in the dark” in my own life. A perfect example is why I and others are considered Black or African-American. This misnomer makes the assumption that any ethnicity other than a European-American is not an American. This is inaccurate because I am American, born and raised in the U.S. Morrison (1992) states, “As a metaphor for transacting the whole process of Americanization, while burying its particular racial ingredients, this Africanist presence may be something the United States cannot do without. Deep within the word ‘American’ is its association with race… American means white, and Africanist people struggle to make the term applicable to themselves with ethnicity and hyphen after hyphen after hyphen… The American nation negotiated both its disdain and its envy in the same way Dunbar did: through a self-reflexive contemplation of fabricated, mythological Africanism.” This reflection is my musing over being a minority in the overall population but the majority of illiterate, impoverished, and imprisoned populations in America.

In the words of W.E.B Du Bois (1904), “Why did God make me an outcast and a stranger in mine own house” (p. 3). Yes, we just elected our first black President but what is the likelihood that we will ever elect one again? This is what is considered the dark comedy of this milestone in history. We can celebrate but are quickly somber by the reality that most political, civil, and social relations will elude race.

One of my favorite quotes from a professor of my undergrad history classes was, “We are a great nation in spite of our history and not despite…” As a country we are wrought with misunderstanding, fear, frustration, and confusion. These feelings often rear their ugly heads concerning difference, and what is more different than “white” and “black” Americans? As Du Bois states about our complex history, “The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color-line — the relation of the darker to the lighter races of men in Asia and Africa, in America and the islands of the sea. It was a phase of this problem that caused the Civil War” (Du Bois, p. 13, 1904). Therefore, how do I negotiate the dark and the light.

If I could write a play, the first scene would be:
Narrator at center stage
the lights evade the narrator
until finally the narrator speaks

“Call me by my color dark for that is what I am…The dark compared to light.
I will let you describe me
to dream up exaggerations like blackface
and keep silent as you are engrossed, enchanted, enthralled, intrigued, and entertained by my darkness.”

Remember that darkness is quiet, an ever silent presence; but, a presence nonetheless. For example, Du Bois in his book, The Souls of Black Folks, states, “To the real question, How does it feel to be a problem? I answer seldom a word.” (Du Bois, p. 2, 1904). In America, race matters and diversity counts. Before Morrison’s study, race in literature was often not questioned nor explored; but rather hidden like a dark stain on the white dining room linens. Many black characters in literature are racialized and/or stereotyped; yet, race is unlikely to be a major theme in the plot. Race is rather used to highlight the differences between the minor Africanist characters who are portrayed as poor, silly, criminal, ignorant, and/or superstitious; in contrast to the major White American characters who are portrayed as well-to-do, smart, brave, beautiful, and forthright. In other words, the color/race of the the character means something to the author that is transferred to the reader. Morrison points out that most literature uses race as caricatures which is misinformed, ignorant, and/or exaggerated entertainment.

Although race was first conceived as this country was developing, the race concept and racism are some of the oldest social theories upheld in America from the 17th century to the present. At the same time our founding fathers agreed on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; they also agreed to participate in the Transatlantic Slave Trade and adopted the policy that a slave is only ⅗ of a person in the U.S. Scientists in the 18th century said race was genetic and manifested through genotype and phenotype characteristics such as skin color, behavior, and intelligence. There was a Negroid, Mongoloid, and Caucasoid, American Indian, and Malayan race. They tried to explain difference with science and Darwinism; as a result, miscegenation laws were enforced so that the races were separated because they were considered different. Current historians, anthropologists, and sociologist scholars understand that race is a social concept to maintain hierarchy and stratification in America.

The American dichotomy is the concept of slavery and freedom. While, African-Americans have been freed from chattel slavery a little more than 140 years, freedom still evades most due to lack of education, poverty, and imprisonment.

Scene Two:
A voice comes from the dark.
“I may not understand,
but I know why I was silenced
in order to be free, the founders felt that
they had to enslave
you, have your freedom
now let my people go.”

Light center stage on narrator
“I will no longer be silent or in the shadows
1954, 1968, 1972, 2005, 2009 will come.”

When I first read Morrison’s Playing in the Dark, I first concentrated on her overall message. Yet, it wasn’t until I really started to delve in and understand the text that Morrison began to explain her thoughts on race. For instance, she states, “The need to establish difference stemmed not only from the Old World but from a difference in the New. What was distinctive in the New was, first of all, its claim to freedom and, second, the presence of the unfree within the heart of democratic experiment – the critical absence of democracy, its echo, shadow, and silent force in the political and intellectual activity of some not-Americans. The distinguishing features of the not-Americans were their slave status, their social status – and their color. It was not simply that this slave population had a distinctive color; it was that this color “meant” something (Morrison, 1992).” She eloquently explains her research and literary critic to unearth the underlying messages of race by American literary giants in order to better understand the connections with attitudes and policies concerning race (formal and informal) in America. For instance, Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, had a central black character yet his voice and perspective was told through Huck Finn’s interpretation and stereotypes.

Through her research, she found that there is still a shadow among the dark. Especially, when the experiment of democracy is still being conducted and attacked everyday by private interests—that is how she was able to write Recitatif. She showed that the characters, plot, and journey have no significance if they do not have attributes whether they are black or white. These colors mean something in everyday America.

Race is an example of the highest forms of human rationalization. We make differences when there is similarity. We make similarities when there is difference. What is “White” when it constitutes such different cultures, religions, and traditions spanning North America, Europe, Middle East, Latin America, North and South Africa, Australia, Asia, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands. What is “Black” when it constitutes such differences as well spanning the Caribbean, Central America, Latin America, Africa, South America, Europe, North America, Australia, and Middle East. Morrison (1992) states, “Images of blackness can be evil and protective, rebellious and forgiving, fearful and desirable—all of the self-contradictory features of the self.” Race gives us a finite understanding of ourselves as opposed to the uncertainty of infinite possibilities. The Africanist character is a surrogate and enabler for tangible and finite characteristics such as desire and fear. In other words, Race/color is a physical attribute but also a social and mental characteristic.

Scene Three:
Center stage with bright lights on narrator.
“We would rather be compared to each other
in order to define our finiteness
in opposition to otherness
rather than embrace the infinite
Lawd, have mercy on us
for trying to define our own souls

Lights turn different colors depending on the narrators command
“It’s black, red, yellow, brown, white…
it’s grey
a complicated mixture of light and dark.”

DuBois states beautifully, “It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity.” As an African American there is a dual nature to your identity. You are dark in the midst of light; you are enslaved in some sense but free in others; you have African roots but American born and bred.

So after reflecting on this issue, I can better understand who I am as an African and an American. It’s a balancing act not to be overwhelmed or be torn apart from this inner battle. I like both sides to my human nature. I know what it means to be multicultural. Yet, I can not let either side have control of my entire being. I am a fluidic identity of both African American as opposed to a static definition of either.

Scene 4:
narrator at center stage
Dances in and out of the spotlight
To represent moving in and out
Of Black and American identities
music and dance
Ragtime
Jazz
R&B
Hip Hop
music and dance

Then the narrator is flooded with lights
Blinded and surprised
Then dark
Narrator speaks from out of the dark
Narrator: “Call me by my color dark for that is what I am…
to you, and you, and you, and you, and you.”
light spotlights wherever the narrator points

P.S. It’s important to be cognizant of discussions or portrayals of multicultural issues “playing in the dark” in our own lives.

References

Dunbar, P.L. (1993). The Collected Poetry of Paul Laurence Dunbar. Joanne M. Braxton, ed. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

DuBois, W.E.B (1904). The Souls of Black Folks. A.C. McClurg & Co. Publishing: Chicago, IL. pgs. 1-265.

Morrison, T. (1992). Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination. Vintage Books: New York City, NY. pgs. 1-91.

Morrison, T. (1992). Recitatif. Vintage Books: New York City, NY. pgs. 1-91.

Freedom!… You gotta give for what you take!

“The best things in life are free”
- Janet Jackson

“Freedom! You gotta give for what you take”
- George Michael

So this blog is all about everything free!

If you’re anything like me, you have days where you’re trying to do something and anything for free.

However, freedom is not free. It comes at a cost.

Some examples include: the barriers for women to attend higher education in some cultures/countries, the ban of gay/lesbian couples to marry in most U.S. states, the limitations for disabled individuals to adopt children, the insecure and unsafe measures of deportation for immigrants, the lack of religous tolerance and freedom for public worship of religious traditions, and also the heavy cost of treament and health insurance for poor families.

People often pay for freedom over many years or lifetimes. People often pay in blood, sweat, and tears. A few even pay with their lives. It includes days and nights of adversity, hardship, and grueling work without praise, admiration, and/or rewards. In one way or another, everyone sacrifices for the cost of freedom.

Since we have celebrated the 4th of July U.S. Independence Day and the 2012 London Summer Olympics, I thought I would reflect on freedom and its impact on me as an African American.

Chris Rock tweeted an extreme statement that he viewed the 4th of July as European American’s Independence Day. I strongly disagree due to the civil rights struggles and sacrifices that have enabled me to enjoy civil rights, liberties, and freedoms as an African American. With every abolition speech, stop on the underground railroad, Buffalo soldier, Historically Black College, reformation policy, lynching, bombing/fire, assasination, fire hose blast, police dog attack, arrest/incarceration, raid, broken color barrier, sit-in, march, vote, worker strike, boycott, act of civil disobedience, elected official, court case, and desegregation policy, my freedom was bought and paid for by my ancestors, elders, and their allies.

I’m so proud to be American because of this special tradition… freedom. This is ironic for a Black person to say (trust me I really had to think hard about saying this!). Yet, no where in the world do I have as much freedom as a minority. I’m not saying that I have total freedom as an African American with policies such as racial profiling and inequalities such as racial achievement gaps; but comparatively, I have lots of freedom as a progressive young heterosexual able-bodied single African American women protestant in America than anywhere in the world! Go America!

Then I read a quote from President Barack Obama where he stated, “We need to out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the rest of the world,” he said. “We have to make America the best place on earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit and reform our government. That’s how our people will prosper.”

My answer is we do. We out-freedom everybody.

We need to keep these traditions such as democratic education so that people understand and appreciate the great sacrifices that people have made for our freedom. Democracy is a grandiose ideal in America that has taken many years of reformation to improve. We need to understand that, as Americans, we have always been contradictory and conflicting in our views of freedom and access. Our democractic government ensures that we can pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Yet, for whom?

Early in American history, democracy and freedom did not include various groups such as Blacks, Native Americans, ethnic groups, women, disabled, immigrants, Catholics, Jews, or the poor. These groups did not experience full American citizenship, if at all. However, From the work of diverse minority groups, individuals, and allies, more and more people are able to experience the ideals of freedom and democracy in their everyday lives.

Through democracy, we have the freedom to be creative, critical, and innovative without fear. I could denounce the American flag without worrying about any government repercussions. I can praise Jesus, Allah, Yahweh, Buddha, Brahma, money, the moon goddess, Mother Nature, the Sun, etc. and I will not be condemned or ostracized in society.

As a progressive person, it’s a double-edged sword to seek further equality because in America we equate equal rights to infringing on others’ freedoms. However, if everyone can’t experience democracy, then no one can truly be free. Freedom will always come at a cost for someone. In this world, we have enough resources and freedom to share with the world; therefore, we must work towards life, liberty, and happiness for all. In theory, we wouldn’t need social programs, if people had full freedom and resources to provide for themselves. For example, I have told people that I hope my job and research in ethnic minority recruitment would no longer need to exist. Someday, underrepresented minority groups would no longer need to be considered a special population. Then, minorities will be fully integrated in mainstream society and equal opportunities.

As a people, we have to care for freedom and for people. Therefore, I will continue to be assertive for freedom for all. In true American tradition… Give me freedom (liberty) for all or give me death!

P.S. Everyone has degrees of freedom in their lives. So, why and how are you thankful for the freedoms that you enjoy? What can you do to ensure your freedom and the freedom of others?

College Access in 2012: Get hyped but not too hyped!

There are many issues concerning higher education including college access. One major question, is how to open access to all. For example, a major headline in higher education today is that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Fisher vs. University of Texas case. Now while this case should be of concern. We shouldn’t get caught up in all of the hype.

For most college campuses, college access is a major topic among students and the greater public; while, it is the lived experience of most college administrators and faculty. Overall, it is a heated topic with many supporters and opponents to affirmative action. The media is having a field day with all of the attention on gritty issues like race-conscious admission policies and diversity. For many people it’s all about getting your opinion heard in the midst all of the hype.

Yet, this is not hype for the many students of Black, Native American, and/or Latino race/ethnicity. This is reality.

As a former Ethnic Minority recruiter, I encountered different instances concerning affirmative action. On one end of the spectrum I’ve had heated accusations from parents about their student’s denied admission letter and then on the other hand I’ve had huge hugs from some parents about their student’s admittance and enrollment at the school.

It is a very passionate conversation but it seems to always center on race. There are other forms of affirmative action such as gender, nationality, legacy, etc.; yet, race is the one that gets all of the hype and attention. What seems to be at work is the psychological term- racial dissonance – where students/people of different races get along until an uncomfortable event or situation occurs, such as competition for college admission. Then, equity and equality can no longer be maintained due to capitalistic motives and criteria such as merit, educational advantages, and wealth are the focus. College admission has nor will be entirely fair. Yet, like many decisions, it takes a holistic view/approach to the individual student’s potential contribution to the university in the form of alumni prestige and giving.

Why do big companies such as Google, Pfizer, Microsoft, etc. have departments for diversity and inclusion outreach? This is an important quality and skill in the workforce to work with different people, practices, and thought. So, diversity and opportunity are important in many areas of society including education and career experiences.

As Scott Jaschik, reporting for Inside Higher Ed, commented on the Fisher case, “In theory, the Supreme Court could rule only on the question of whether universities with admissions plans like that of Texas (a relatively small number) are permitted to also consider race in admissions.” So essentially it’s going to look at the constitutionality of the percent plans to consider race in admission. Yet, he also continues with a warning, “But a reopening of the question of the use of race in admissions decisions could involve broader questions about whether any consideration of race and ethnicity in admissions is appropriate.” This is a possibility since so many people are so hyped to want to talk about affirmative action. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/02/21/supreme-court-takes-affirmative-action-case#ixzz1n8Coa02d

In my opinion, the conversation should be about race relations concerning education since this is the ultimate cause for policies such as affirmative action. It is unequal and unfair but no one wants to offer solutions except to end affirmative action. As higher education professionals, we have to do our research on race in education… not just race in affirmative action. So, as college officials and personnel, we have to be aware of the facts of the Texas case and use the arguments of the Michigan case to show the importance of racial diversity in college. As we know it is important for the future of our students.

PlainSpeak: Be aware of the issues but don’t get caught up in all of the hype.

The Great Debate IV: Affirmative Action, Diversity, and Ethics

So in response to recent comments by the 2012 Republican candidates (especially Rick Santorum), I want to post this explanation of affirmative action, diversity, and ethics. As opposed to Santorum’s view,* diversity matters.

Affirmative action policies must be on a case-by-case basis to promote all types of diversity. Diversity is also encouraged in education and the workplace since it should be held as a common goal and shared value in higher education. Universities should provide documentation of its efforts to promote diversity in the campus community and not just its race-conscious admission policy. Craig Johnson (2008) explains in his book, Meeting the Ethical Challenges of Leadership, that culture is, “Language, rituals, stories, buildings, beliefs, assumptions, power structures forms culture. Cultures are comprehensive, incorporating both the visible and the invisible as it is the total way of life of a people, composed of their learned and shared behavior patterns, values, norms, and material objects.” (pg. 120). It is created among the people, learned through traditions, incorporates shared values and customs, and stems from a dynamic, fluidic definition. Therefore, we want to be aware of each group’s and culture’s differences and unique experiences.

The policies of affirmative action are constantly questioned because of our democratic process to question the fairness and justice of our policies. From an ethical standpoint affirmative action may seem like a justifiable way to address the inequalities in higher education. All too often, “The traditional one-sided view of promoting diversity through college admissions focuses on equal access to educational opportunities for minority students. This approach suggests a zero-sum gain such that for every minority student accepted for admission, there is a lost opportunity for an equally, or even more qualified, non-minority student. Arguments in favor of diversity from this perspective tend to rely on ethical considerations of equality and social justice. However, social psychological research suggests that the benefits of a diverse student body are realized not by just the minority population, but by all students” (Carnegie Mellon University Diversity Advisory Council, 2000). Rawls’ (1957) justice of fairness ethical standards holds two principles that can be applied to affirmative action policies: “1) The principle of equal liberty where each person has an equal right to the same basic liberties that are compatible with similar liberties for all. 2) Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: a) They are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. a) They are to provide the greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society” (Johnson, 2008, p.144). In other words, everyone has equal rights regardless of background, race, socio-economic status, gender, sexual orientation. Yet, the principles also address the fact that inequalities exists so leaders must make sure that everyone has access to opportunities. A good example is rewarding schools that are academically rigorous while also diverse or a holistic review of applicants in the admission process. Johnson (2008) explains that “priority should be given to meeting the needs of the poor, immigrants, minorities, and other marginalized groups” (pgs. 144).

Since this ethical standard emphasizes the importance of equal liberty, equal opportunity, and the difference principle, it nurtures individuality so that talent can be developed but not at the expense of the good of the greater community. It is democratic in nature so that everyone is treated fairly. This is important since minority students have many talents and seek opportunities to pursue their goals. At the same time, higher education must be aware of its responsibilities to help all students in the same way. Educational leaders have a responsibility to guarantee basic rights to everyone including equal access. This might mean that special efforts are needed in order so that all populations are aware of the benefits and opportunities available. As Johnson explains that diversity is important because from an ethical standpoint it is the right thing to do and promotes justice. As many have stated, diversity can be a significantly challenging task. Many institutions create obstacles to diversity by maintaining practices that do not include values from other cultures. Educators must make sure that institutional discrimination does not hinder justice and diversity.

As moral agent and leader in the community, universities must uphold justice and fairness in their admission policies and also encourage others to have ethical standards concerning diversity. Affirmative action is a double-edged sword with pros and cons that must be weighed in admissions. Therefore, affirmative action must be analyzed by ethical standards such as Rawls’ (1957) Justice as Fairness theory. Burns’ (1978) definition of transformational leadership states, “Transformational leaders focus on terminal values such as liberty, equality, and justice. These values mobilize and energize followers, create an agenda for action, and appeal to larger audiences” (pg. 168). Transformational leaders are needed because they have higher ethical standards and performance since they show higher levels of moral reasoning. According to Gudykunst and Kim (2003) intercultural adaptation theory, leaders need to be mindful, open, have integrity, inclusion. Ethical leadership must take into account the potential, far-ranging consequences of every choice especially concerning diverse populations.

Nonetheless, ethical relativism is not the end result. There are shared commonalities with all people such as the Golden rule, ‘Treat others as you would want to be treated.” Sharon Welch (1990) in her book, A Feminist Ethic of Risk, gives recommendations for the type of multicultural campus community that State University should try to achieve. She argues that communicative ethics is, “to see the fundamental flaws in shared systems of values and behaviors requires difference, a thorough engagement with other communities, with other systems of knowing and acting” (pg. 15). The goal is community, solidarity, accountability, respect, to interact critically and honestly, and critical engagement. In other words, “we work with, not for, others” (pg. 127).

Welch (1990) discusses the ethics of risk to embrace difference as a part of policy-making. We can agree on shared values but we often differ on how to implement these new initiatives such as flexible race-conscious admission policies. This is the desired result. We want to encourage different thinking and recommendations in order to come closer to a more informed and better affirmative action policies. She states, “The goal of communicative ethics is not merely consensus but mutual critique leading to more adequate understandings of what is just and how particular forms of justice may be achieved. When such critique occurs we may well find that more than our definitions of what is just are challenged; the prerequisites of acting justly may be challenged as well.” (Welch, 1990, pg. 129). This is the beauty of the American government and court system; where, although free European American males have dominated for centuries, oppressed and marginalized groups such as racial minorities can have a say in affirmative action policy-making. Therefore, we need to make sure that all students are allowed access and opportunities in higher education.

As Welch (1990) continues to discuss that there needs to be an ethic of risk or radical reform where students can rethink what we know about knowledge, culture, and associations among people. Then political and social contestation, negotiation, and resistance make the ever-shifting boundaries and alliances of youth identity formation (Swanson et al., 2002; Vandiver & Cross, 2001; Vandiver et al, 2002; Welch, 1990, pg. 5). It means students will be encouraged to think in an interdisciplinary way about people, behaviors, and perceptions and linking them in the way we live. Welch (1990) states, “Listening and grieving, loving and raging, moral discernment occurs as we act and think together, accepting accountability for our people’s violations of the integrity of others, moving from grief at ‘all that has been lost’ to committed action, rebuilding, healing, and celebrating communities of resistance and solidarity” (pg. 151). Diversity is important because, personally, it has made my character, my education, and my community better.

In response to those worried about preferential treatment for minorities universities should implement institutional diversity plans. Welch (1990) states, “our stories, as whites and as elites, still need to be told, but from a new, chastened perspective” (pg. 139) Welch uses the women’s movement as an example of the difficulties in coming together. She looks at African American feminist literature and is able to engage an alternative viewpoint that would have been missing if she had not made an attempt to include it in the canon of American feminist literature. No longer can offices, boards or departments be unconsciously homogeneous. They must be consciously heterogeneous so that all viewpoints can be included in dialogue. Meetings will be longer since everyone must be heard and it will be much more challenging to reach decisions. However, solutions such as better affirmative action policies will be richer, complex, and much more applicable to diverse contexts. Welch (1990) states, “We can transcend the blinders of our own social location, not through becoming objective, but by recognizing the differences by which we ourselves are constituted and I would add to Foucalt, by actively seeking to be partially constituted by work with different groups. Thus the condition of overcoming ideology is difference, a mutually challenging and mutually transformative pluralism” (pg. 151). We cannot move beyond the status quo without acknowledging the differences among stakeholders. In other words, we cannot move beyond theory to practice without using multiculturalism as a resource. From this viewpoint, we have a tangible argument for diversity because it gives stakeholders a product (whether it’s policy, education, law, technology, medicine, research, business, social sciences, humanities, visual arts, performing arts, etc.) that can reach farther markets and make much more impact than just the majority population. For example, “individuals with different backgrounds and experiences will view the world differently and more importantly there is not one single model of expectations and methods” (Diversity Advisory Council, 2000). Therefore, we will have tools to address social injustices with diversity.

From reading previous studies that promote social integration and/or cultural competence, research incorporating both concepts is important. African American students like other minorities are a unique and multi-dimensional group that we cannot only offer one possible solution. A matrix plan must be able to address multiple factors, more importantly, multicultural competence and social integration. Several key elements such as the student’s identity or “self,” family, school, community, and government must be involved to build a strong foundation. Because of the multidimensional problems confronting African American students, the dynamic participation of all factors is important and necessary (Obiakor & Beachum, 2005; Nasim, Roberts, Harrell, Young, 2005).

There are many benefits to diversity on college campuses such as interdisciplinary thinking. McCarthy et al. (2003) observes that our society lacks the desire to collaborate or lack empathy. A possible reason is the dominant view that culture or identity are singular, static and/or rigid definitions of one’s cultural origin and/or background. However, collaboration and dialogue that highlights the roles of diversity, multiplicity, hybridity and multiculturalism can develop the necessary innovative technological advancements and interdisciplinary social policies for our society (Apple, 1993; Franklin & Moss, 2000; McCarthy et al., 2003; Omi & Winant, 1989; Phinney, 2008; Swanson et al., 2002; Vandiver et al., 2002). It can help spur an interdisciplinary approach to practice, research, policymaking, and the arts. Ideal dialogue would allow students to work in groups offering diverse perspectives, complex critical thinking and perspective-taking, and more student-to-student interaction (Engberg & Mayhew, 2007; Good, 2000; Hurtado, 2001; Jones & Abes, 2004; McCarthy et al., 2003; Tierney & Jun, 2001). There must be a safe space to confront issues of diversity and promote cross-cultural communication and negotiation to resolve conflicts. Essentially, it would be the best way to provide every student with the opportunity to gain skills and dispositions that are needed in today’s diverse democracy and global market.

Colleges/Universities highest goals will be well-served by raising the consciousness of the entire university community about the benefits of creating a more diverse educational experience. As President Cohon of Carnegie Mellon University said in his Statement on Diversity in October, 1999, ‘We must understand that, unlike many of our past successes in interdisciplinary problem-solving, this challenge will not be solved with dispassionate analysis alone. Meeting this challenge will require each of us to recognize our own biases and limitations, to see the University through the eyes of others, and to create an environment of mutual respect. If each of us is willing to do this, universities will be a better place—and it will be a leader’ ” (Ambrose et al., 2004). We must have common goals, core values, and code of ethics to develop multicultural competence.

An African American student’s race and culture are risk and protective factors (like other social categories); therefore, campus communities must be involved in addressing issues of college involvement and engagement; but, also administrators could address student composition, institutional characteristics, institutional resources, and institutional processes such as affirmative action that might directly and indirectly affect African American students college experiences while also promoting multicultural competence. (Fisher, 2007; Russell W. Rumberger and Scott L. Thomas, 2000; Roscigno & Ainsworth-Darnell, 1999).

*”Diversity creates conflict. If we celebrate diversity, we create conflict,” Santorum told an audience in Ottumwa, Iowa.

The Great Debate III: The Michigan cases, Minority “Critical Mass”, and Student Body Diversity

Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger cases
The most recent defining cases in race-conscious admission policies are Grutter vs. Bollinger and Gratz vs. Bollinger. In Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003), University of Michigan’s admission policy violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because its ranking system gave an automatic point increase to all racial minorities rather than making individual determinations. Chief Justice Rehnquist, writing for the Court, ruled the University’s point system’s “predetermined point allocations” that awarded 20 points to underrepresented minorities “ensures that the diversity contributions of applicants cannot be individually assessed” and was therefore unconstitutional.

In Grutter v. Bollinger, the court ruled that the University of Michigan Law School had a compelling interest in promoting class diversity and that its “plus” system did not amount to a quota system that would have been unconstitutional under Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. Therefore, the University of Michigan Law School admissions program that gave special consideration for being a certain racial minority did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court endorses Justice Powell’s opinion in the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke that student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify using race in university admissions. The Court defers to the Law School’s educational judgment that diversity is essential to its educational mission. The Court’s scrutiny of that interest is no less strict for taking into account complex educational judgments in an area that lies primarily within the university’s expertise.

Attaining a diverse student body is at the heart of the Law School’s proper institutional mission, and its “good faith” is “presumed” absent “a showing to the contrary.” Enrolling a “critical mass” of minority students simply to assure some specified percentage of a particular group merely because of its race or ethnic origin would be patently unconstitutional. But the Law School defines its critical mass concept by reference to the substantial, important, and laudable educational benefits that diversity is designed to produce, including cross-racial understanding and the breaking down of racial stereotypes. The Law School’s claim is further bolstered by numerous expert studies and reports showing that such diversity promotes learning outcomes and better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce, for society, and for the legal profession. Major American businesses have made clear that the skills needed in today’s increasingly global marketplace can only be developed through exposure to widely diverse people, cultures, ideas, and viewpoints (Ancheta and Edley, 2004). High-ranking retired officers and civilian military leaders assert that a highly qualified, racially diverse officer corps is essential to national security (Ancheta and Edley, 2004). Moreover, because universities, represent the training ground for a large number of the nation’s leaders, the path to leadership must be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity. Thus, the Law School has a compelling interest in attaining a diverse student body.

The Law School’s admissions program bears the hallmarks of a narrowly tailored plan. To be narrowly tailored, a race-conscious admissions program cannot “insulat[e] each category of applicants with certain desired qualifications from competition with all other applicants.” (Bakke, Supra.). Instead, it may consider race or ethnicity only as a “ ‘plus’ in a particular applicant’s file”; i.e., it must be “flexible enough to consider all pertinent elements of diversity in light of the particular qualifications of each applicant, and to place them on the same footing for consideration, although not necessarily according them the same weight,” (Bakke, Supra). It follows that universities cannot establish quotas for members of certain racial or ethnic groups or put them on separate admissions tracks. The Law School’s admissions program, like the Harvard plan approved by Justice Powell’s opinion satisfies these requirements. Moreover, the program is flexible enough to ensure that each applicant is evaluated as an individual and not in a way that makes race or ethnicity the defining feature of the application. (Bakke, supra). The Law School engages in a highly individualized, holistic review of each applicant’s file, giving serious consideration to all the ways an applicant might contribute to a diverse educational environment. There is no policy, either de jure or de facto, of automatic acceptance or rejection based on any single “soft” variable. Also, the program adequately ensures that all factors that may contribute to diversity are meaningfully considered alongside race. Moreover, the Law School frequently accepts nonminority applicants with grades and test scores lower than underrepresented minority applicants (and other nonminority applicants) who are rejected.

Student Body Diversity
Expert reports by researchers such as Patricia Gurin, Gary Orfield, Derek Bok, David Chambers, etc. document the educational benefits of student body diversity is substantial and a compelling governmental interest without the use of quotas. In short, “Student body diversity can promote learning outcomes, democratic values and civic engagement, and preparation for a diverse society and workforce – goals that fall squarely within the basic mission of most universities (Gurin, 2001, pg. 10).” Gurin (2001) analyzed three sources for her report: national data collected from over 9300 students at 200 colleges and universities; the Michigan Student Study containing survey data collected from 1300 undergraduate University of Michigan students; and data drawn from a study in the Intergroup Relations, Community, and Conflict class at the University of Michigan. Gurin (2001) reported significant and consistent results across all three data sets. Gurin (2001) concludes that “students who experienced the most racial and ethnic diversity in classroom settings and in informal interactions with peers showed the greatest engagement in active thinking processes, growth in intellectual engagement and motivation, and growth in intellectual and academic skills (pg. 12).”

Gurin (2001) states more specifically that “structural diversity” – the racial and ethnic composition of the student body – leads to institutional transformations that provide the opportunity for “classroom diversity” – the incorporation of knowledge about diverse groups into the curriculum (including ethnic studies courses) – as well as “informal interactional diversity” – the opportunity to interact with students from diverse backgrounds in the broad, campus environment. These diversity experiences are in turn linked to several positive learning and democracy outcomes.
Gurin was able to conduct qualitative research with undergraduate students. She found that students who interacted with students from diverse backgrounds had an increased sense of community and shared interest with other racial/ethnic groups. Other findings show that students who are able to experience diversity are also more likely to be involved and engage in experiential learning such as extracurricular activities, community service, study abroad, etc. This is important because the mission of most universities is to help students become active global citizens in a pluralistic and cosmopolitan society. These traits are also important in the job market as students reported that the diversity they were able to experience helped them adjust to study abroad, internships, and/or research assistantships.

Also Gundemann (2001) emphasizes the importance of “critical mass,” “The need for students to feel safe and comfortable and serves as a counter to the lack of safety or comfort felt when one finds oneself a ‘solo’ or minority of one’(pg. 268).” Critical mass implies that, “enough students to overcome the silencing effect of being isolated in the classroom by ethnicity, race, gender, [etc.]. Enough students to provide safety for expressing views (Gundemann, 2001, pg. 268). The understanding of “critical mass” in State University’s race-conscious admission policy recognizes the harms that accrue from having only token numbers of minority students within its student body. Many researchers have found the dangers of tokenism as racial isolation, alienation, and stereotyping. Therefore, the university strives to admit enough students to represent varied viewpoints and perspectives within underrepresented groups. As stated in Ancheta and Edley’s Grutter Amicus Brief (2004), “Critical mass promotes the notion of intra-group diversity, which undermines the stereotype that all students within a group have identical experiences and possess identical viewpoints (pg. 25).” Ancheta and Edley (2004) continues, “The dangers of tokenism are especially apparent when one considers the actual number of students enrolled, rather than the percentages (pg. 29).”

In Ancheta and Edley’s Grutter Amicus Brief (2004) states, “Under Gurin’s statistical model there should be “interaction” between structural diversity and diversity experience variables (pg. 11).” In other words, Gurin is trying to show that diversity experience variables are more effective at higher levels of minority enrollment. Ancheta and Edley (2004) continue that, “Structural diversity affects the number of students who will have the diverse experiences and gain educational benefits, not the magnitude of the effects. The effects of diversity on hundreds of thousands of students in higher education can, over time, be substantial (pg. 10).”

Universities bears the burden of showing a “strong basis in evidence” to support its claim that promoting educational diversity is a compelling governmental interest. The Gurin report from the Michigan Gratz and Grutter cases supports the compelling interest in promoting educational diversity and, more importantly, the report is useful and reliable evidence documenting the positive effects of educational diversity. Since state government may serve as the trustees of some state universities then the mission of the school must serve the interests of the state and nation. Therefore, university officials feel that the university’s population should reflect the nation’s especially in racial/ethnic makeup.