IT HAS been a while since my last column, which was written just before the incident involving the alleged assault on Daisy Lundy. Since then, the University's efforts to improve diversity and cultural awareness within our community have greatly increased. The Board of Visitors should definitely be commended for taking such strides toward awareness with such expediency, particularly with their decision to bring diversity training to all University students in an academic setting. However, the proposed plan for the soon-to-be mandated Internet-based diversity course has some foreseeable flaws that, if allowed to exist, could not only set back the goals of the program, but could possibly deter student support for the specific initiative.
Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs Christina Morrell was quoted last week as saying that "the purpose of the online diversity training system is to provide entering students with the opportunity to gain insights into the way their own cultural, ethnic or racial expectations and experiences influence their interaction with other students, faculty and staff from different backgrounds with whom they come into contact as members of the University community." Unfortunately, using a Web interface in order to provide more "privacy" does facilitate this goal. Though privacy and self-honesty is key in diversity training, relying on a Web interface does not provide actual interaction with students from different backgrounds -- a key element of success.
If this program is meant to enhance the effectiveness of current diversity initiatives, it should also play on what has been successful. In this case, the multiculturalism class offered through the Curry School of Education has a discussion section that is vital to making diversity a tangible subject. It may not be enough to depend on what a computer tells you about someone else's cultural diversity to truly draw any similarities or to gain any actual understanding of different people. As of now, the class is self-taught, but learning about different people requires interaction with the people themselves.
This also leads to another point of clarification -- exactly what do we mean when we say "diversity?" Clearly, there has been a lot of talk about racial and ethnic diversity on Grounds, but there is a chance for unequal focus on particular ethnicities or for stereotypical groups of "similar" ethnicities based on geography. Never mind whether or not this class will adequately explore gender, sexuality, age, social class, global relations or disabilities. Diversity is such a broad topic itself that one large Web class may not be able to handle.
Furthermore, the fact that this class is solely for undergraduate students is not enough. It is vital for all faculty and staff of the University to undergo diversity training, not only among other staff members, but in an environment that allows them to interact with students and receive their feedback as well. So far, we have been unable to see this come to fruition. Just as this is the time to develop initiatives for students, the University should also be assessing the needs and desires for opportunities for faculty development.
Lastly, there needs to be significant student involvement in this project if it is to be effective. It is the students who desire diversity awareness for one another, and it is students who can offer specific personal reference and goals for this class that make diversity less of an intangible generality and more relevant to the University students involved in the class. In order to make the most of this opportunity to change our community, students must take ownership of the program and have opportunities for feedback, involvement and greater participation in development and execution. Otherwise, there is a great risk that this course may become to students more of a burden than it is an opportunity for growth. Just as well, without a chance for involvement, there is little incentive or reason for students to fully capitalize on what they have learned outside of the Web site, much less in their daily lives.
Though this is just a first step for increased diversity awareness at the University, it is a groundbreaking step offering progress and hope. However, much is riding on the success and continued improvement of this first mandated class.
The continued review of this cultural requirement will eventually determine the need for new methods and procedures, but the Board of Visitors must do all that they can to secure this class for the future of the University. Though the time push for this class is important, it is the ultimate responsibility of the Board to make sure that this attempt utilizes all resources and research and makes the best impression possible on students. Otherwise, we may lose the enthusiasm imperative to see diversity issues remain prevalent after those of us who were here to witness the events of last spring semester are gone.
(Amey Adkins is a Cavalier Daily columnist. She can be reached at aadkins@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
HARBATH: Compulsory attendance policies are harmful to students
By Julie Harbath | YesterdayBy permitting a return to antiquated, inflexible attendance policies, the University is jeopardizing student health and wellness.
ARRAS: The cavalier tendency to say “I do”
By Aoife Arras | 6 days agoIn continually promoting marriage-mindedness, the University and student organizations actually undermine the educational mission of this institution.
VAN DE SOMPEL: “Rules are Rules”
By Mo Van de Sompel | May 27, 2024In reality, rules are contextual, and enforcement is selective.
