The relatively recent movement in higher education for a
diversity requirement in many ways has its origins in the
historical struggle for ethnic studies on college campuses. The
history of the diversity requirement can be traced back to the late
1960s, when students at San Francisco State College fought for five
months in order to institute the first School for Ethnic Studies in
the country. These students saw the implementation of ethnic
studies as one step in a long-term struggle to eliminate racism and
to end the exploitation of the oppressed. This struggle for
educational reform was based on a philosophy that emphasized the
institutionalized nature of racism, the right to
self-determination, and the need for relevant education. What does
this all mean and how does it apply to the current campaign for a
diversity requirement here at UCLA in 2003?
First, it should be mentioned that the diversity requirement has
been debated within the University of California since 1983, when
Assemblywoman Teresa Hughes passed ACR-71, ordering the UC to
review its policy on ethnic experience. The struggle for an ethnic
and gender studies requirement at UCLA began two years later. UC
Santa Barbara was the first UC to implement an ethnic and gender
requirement, but only after 100 students staged a 12-day hunger
strike. UC Berkeley followed in 1991 when they instituted an ethnic
and gender requirement after a student sit-in at the faculty
center.
The 1990s was a decade of wide-spread campus activism, which led
to the implementation of some form of a diversity requirement at
every UC except UCLA. The issues that have hindered the passage of
a diversity requirement at UCLA are reflected in debates around the
principles outlined by the students engaged in the struggle for
ethnic studies in San Francisco State College in 1969.
The first principle mentioned above was the acknowledgment and
fight against the institutionalized nature of oppression. Many
people have come to see racism, for example, as an issue of
interpersonal prejudice ““ discrimination against one person
by another because of race. What this type of thinking fails to
take into account is that racism is not just about making
derogatory comments because of the color of another person’s
skin. It is given form outside the realm of interpersonal relations
and supported by a whole system of power, interwoven into every
institution in this country ““ education, health care, the
judicial system, the legislative system, etc. ““ which
privileges some while subordinating others because of their
race.
The debate over a diversity requirement at UCLA has largely been
propelled by a debate over the definition of diversity. Students
and progressive faculty have been advocating a requirement that
focuses on learning about the institutionalized nature of
oppression and the systems of power that subordinate people because
of their differences.
Opponents, however, have pushed for a requirement that defines
diversity in terms of “multiculturalism.” This
conception of a diversity requirement focuses on learning about a
different culture in a pluralistic society where all people are
presumably equal. By defining a diversity requirement in this way,
the idea that people are systematically exploited because of their
race/ethnicity, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, religion,
etc. is rendered invisible.
The second and third principles outlined above are
self-determination and relevant education. Briefly defined,
self-determination is the right of a people to have control of
their own destiny. In the context of education, this means having
the ability to determine the content of our education ““ the
curriculum.
Knowledge is not a neutral construct and what is seen as
objective information is often written from the perspective of
those in power. American history, for example, has usually been
written in a way that minimizes or excludes the experiences of the
oppressed. This has often led to a societal amnesia about the
atrocities that have occurred or the ways people have struggled to
resist such repression.
Thus, those calling for relevant education seek to have more of
a say in what we are learning at school, in order to ensure that
our education is accurate, inclusive and conscious. The campaign
for a diversity requirement originates and is part of this
movement.
The creation and implementation of a diversity requirement at
UCLA has fallen into various people’s hands over the last
decade; however it is imperative that students and faculty who
represent various communities are actively present in the
development of a diversity requirement to ensure that it stays true
to the principles upon which it was founded.
Kozak is the USAC Academic Affairs
commissioner.