The Daily Bruin sat down with Academic Senate officer Tom
Minor and Sophia Kozak, the Undergraduate Student Association
Council Academic Affairs Commissioner to talk about the progress of
the campus diversity requirement. Ңbull;Ӣbull;Ӣbull;
Daily Bruin: What is the ultimate goal of the diversity
requirement, and what will it do for students?
Sophia Kozak: Teaching diversity at the university should be
seen as an essential component of education, especially here at a
public institution. I think UCLA in particular has tried many
different avenues of doing so in the past. (But UCLA) hasn’t
really continued that work as actively as they have in the past,
and a diversity requirement would ensure that process continues and
would ensure that faculty (who) do teach diversity would be
rewarded and encouraged to continue doing that. And students would
have an opportunity to be exposed to a number of issues which would
prepare them to be leaders in an increasingly multicultural
society.
DB: How will the university deal with the fact that
diversity means different things to different people? What is the
definition of diversity? Would a class on European culture
qualify?
Tom Minor: What diversity is depends on where you start. So for
a Chicano studies student, then a course on Scottish history would
be appropriate. There is a definition created by students “¦
(and) there is a definition that was created by the diversity
committee last year, and that is somewhat different: The diversity
requirement helps to ground students in the realities of a
multicultural, transnational, global society, and provides tools
for studying the complexity of diverse communities defined by
characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic
background, religion, sexual orientation, age and others. As part
of ““ but not in addition to ““ the existing General
Education requirement, students must take one course in any of the
three GE foundation areas (Foundations of Arts and Humanities,
Foundations of Society and Culture, and Foundations of Scientific
Inquiry) that focuses in a central and substantial way on issues,
theories, and methods relevant to analyzing and understanding
inter-group dynamics and diversity in its broadest sense. It was
determined that 60 percent of GE requirements fit within this broad
definition of diversity. And that’s important. I think its
important for everyone to recognize the problems of creating a
diversity requirement here. Under no circumstances did anyone
create a diversity requirement ““ we didn’t start from
ground zero and say: “˜OK we are going to add one or two
courses to the number of required courses that a student must take
in order to graduate from this university.’ No one wanted
that; that will keep you here longer than you need to be here. We
want you here four years, not longer. If we keep you here longer,
we are not educating someone else. So the challenge was to fashion
a diversity requirement from what exists. So, of this long list of
courses here that satisfy GE requirements, about 60 percent contain
a diversity component and meet the requirements of the diversity
proposal. So now it’s basically just traveling though the
various committees of the academic senate and though the colleges,
and eventually it will get to the faculty.
DB: Would you say you agree with his definition of diversity
being defined by where you start?
SK: I think diversity can take many forms and … we’ve
been looking at issues of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual
orientation, socioeconomic status, age, religion, exceptionality
““ all these things qualify as diversity. The important point
for me, however, is whatever issue you are studying or examining,
diversity is a term that has over time … become a little watered
down. It has become this term used to talk about individual
differences and to promote tolerance. (And) while (that’s)
important, I think also it needs to be emphasized that people are
treated differently based on these differences in many cases, and
understanding … power dynamics and understanding how different
groups interact because of those differences needs to be emphasized
and highlighted in these courses. If we are going to be members and
contributors to society, we need to understand those dynamics. A
study has been done ““ and is actually going to be redone
though the GE Governance Committee ““ hopefully in a little
more rigorous fashion ““ to kind of reexamine those courses.
Like Tom was saying, I don’t think anyone here wants to put
students though an extra burden of taking many more classes to
graduate, (especially with) minimum progress forcing students out
of the university even faster, but I think the idea is that
whatever goes in … really reflects these principles.
TM: … I think it’s really important that you (include)
one of these (written) definitions of diversity.
SK: But I think I’ve defined it, didn’t I?
TM: I’m not sure, I just think one of these ones that are
written … that is, in the latest proposal … should be
(included). This is what is meant by diversity. I think generally
you said that, but I think the specific definition is important.
Generally we all know what it means, but I think for the readers
it’s important.
SK: I think for the students … the point of diversity (is
what) I listed, but also the emphasis on the inter-group dynamics
and the relationship of power ““ and understanding how that
plays out between whatever the dominant and non-dominant groups
are.
DB: So, ultimately, how would the requirement look? How many
classes would be involved for each student?
TM: Last year … the ad hoc committee developed (I was not
chair last year) a two-course proposal … and presented that to
the Undergraduate Council. It wasn’t voted on; it was tabled
and sent on to the GE Governance Committee and Faculty Executive
Committee. Both of those committees came back with a one-course
proposal for a variety of reasons, and what was nixed is the idea
of an upper division course on diversity. Not that those
shouldn’t exist “¦ (but) I think the most compelling
argument against (requiring this), is that as we learn more and
more about everything, we require more and more courses for a
bachelor’s degree. It’s gotten to the point where we
are requiring so many courses that you have no freedom in saying,
“˜I’d like to take a course in art history or this or
that’ … because all those options are taken up by required
courses. So if we require you to take a diversity course “¦
you’re not be able to take some other courses that you might
want to. Now, having said that, if you want to take these
(diversity) courses, I think one of the things we could do is
clearly identify the courses that fulfill the requirement, and
people should be able to (take them). But there is a one-course
proposal that made its way though the Faculty Executive Committee
(and) GE Governance Committee, (and has) been discussed in the ad
hoc committee, and eventually will be presented to the
Undergraduate Council, and I imagine it will pass. So hopefully by
the end of the year we will have a diversity requirement. It may be
subject to change in the future, and I think if change is going to
occur, it’s important for students to really take the
responsibility for motivating (any change).
DB: So the requirement will be one class with the label of
diversity? And then in addition to that, there will be a large
number of classes with this label, and students would have the
option of taking them?
SK: In our proposal, the students articulated a need for a
two-course requirement. This is something we felt was important to
emphasize, (to include) issues of diversity within the United
States, but also to recognize that international issues are also
very important to understand. So we initially came in with that
request.
DB: So there would be two courses?
SK: One would be focused on the United States, and (the other)
more globally. This was based on UC Irvine’s Diversity
Requirement. Also, on the issue of upper division courses, what we
put in our proposal was a suggestion to have a supplemental course
list of upper division courses. This is what UC Santa Barbara and
other schools do. There is a supplemental list of upper division
courses, if students opt to fulfill their diversity requirement
like that. But it’s optional, so that students who
don’t want to take that extra course don’t have to. I
think the most important thing at this point is students having
some say in the implementation of the diversity requirement.
DB: You’ve both said existing courses have diversity
elements in them. Was there ever any discussion about changing
existing courses to create this requirement ““ to perhaps make
this requirement partially a requirement for professors to fulfill
as well as a requirement for students?
TM: This runs into some real tricky issues. As a rule, we do not
tell professors what to teach in their courses. We may ask to have
professors indicate their interest in teaching a course on
diversity or adding a diversity component to their course. We might
suggest what that might include, (but) … what they actually do is
up to them. Professors have that privilege. There have been
suggestions about forming committees to review what is being taught
… but that is meeting a lot of resistance from the faculty who
are unwilling to give up their responsibilities and privileges.
SK: I think from the other side though … in the past when
there have been GE reforms … faculty have had their courses,
understanding there is an element of academic freedom. The review
process requires that syllabi and booklets are made available to
the faculty in those committees to ensure they are able to evaluate
those courses. What I’ve been told is that the diversity
requirement committee would never turn away faculty members who
want their course to be counted “¦ but in some cases might ask
them to revise their course if they want that diversity requirement
credited. And if not, that’s fine; it would still be counted
as a GE course.
Interview conducted by Derek Lazzaro, Bruin senior
staff.