Comprehensive diversity work requires an institutional
framework that illuminates a clear vision of impact, which can drive alignment
and maximize success at the macro- and micro-levels. Indicators within an
institutional framework define success and provide a roadmap that documents
progress of diversity efforts towards a common vision. In other words,
micro-level initiatives, such as those at the department-level or within
specific offices, create a multitude of entryways for pursuing diversity work
that draws on individual expertise, interests, and institutional responsibilities
while macro-level efforts, such as campus-wide policies and structures, foster
alignment and reinforce institutional accountability. The key to an overarching
framework is to not only provide as many entryways for diversity work to emerge
at all levels and across the institution, but also have these individual
contributions converge on a specific vision for diversity rather than compete
against each other, which can inhibit progress.
Therefore, we have chosen an institutional framework by
Daryl G. Smith (1997) to guide our comprehensive diversity work. This framework
has four major components, which are defined below.
- Institutional vitality and viability addresses the
comprehensive university commitments to diversity (e.g., mission, strategic
plan, and policies) and their effects on students achieving defined learning
outcomes
- Education and scholarship involves the inclusion of diverse traditions in the curriculum, the impact of diversity on teaching,
and the effect of diversity on scholarly inquiry.
- Campus climate focuses on understanding the
environment of an institution in terms of promoting or interfering with student
persistence and success.
- Access and success refers to policies, practices,
and the benefits of increasing the numbers of diverse students on campuses and
the ways in which that diversity affects the success of all students.
This framework helps map the connections and track indicators of success
among all of the diversity work and determines if success has been achieved at
Wesleyan University.
Two areas of Smith’s framework guide the Dean of the
College work. The first is campus climate, and the second is student success.
Campus climate efforts are based on research that indicates that the more intergroup opportunities for different social identity groups to dialogue the
more likely a positive climate. In order to do this, safe learning spaces must
be available, supported, and resourced, as well as focused leadership
development that centers on fostering educational environments conducive to
intergroup understanding through difficult dialogues.
Student success initiatives are driven by research that
indicates the more that the institution fosters holistic belonging (i.e.,
intellectual, spiritual, cultural, emotional, and psychological) through
seamless collaborations between academic and student affairs, the greater
likelihood that students will achieve success. While the retention rates are
high across racial/ethnic groups, which is typical of elite private
institutions, the question we are exploring is to what extent are students are
thriving (rather than surviving), especially students of color and marginalized
students.
By putting assessment at the forefront, we have
developed elements of effectiveness (or outcomes) that inform our two areas of
concentration. They are:
- Building Capacity to Foster Dialogue Among
Different Social Identity Groups (new knowledge, abilities, and skills)
- Conducting Intergroup Dialogues (practice)
- Documenting Impact Using Qualitative and Quantitative Data (asessment)
Programs, activities, and events supported by the DOC
must integrate these three elements of effectiveness. That is, DOC initiatives
must increase our capacity to sustain difficult dialogues with people from
different social identity groups (e.g., anti-oppressive facilitating techniques
and research on intergroup dialogue), collect data that documents impact (both
testimonies and quantitative data such as attendance, demographics, and
frequency of dialogues), and provide a plethora of both informal and formal
opportunities in which diverse participants wrestle with tough and important
issues.
