CIGU Recommendation for IPPC Appendix

I. “What is a Chief Diversity Officer?” Williams and Wade-Golden Article (p. 2) II. “Emerging Trend: The Chief Diversity Officer Phenomenon within Higher Education” Wilson Article (p. 9) III. Goal II of the Strategic Plan (p. 22) IV. I, Too, Am Skidmore (p. 33) V. CIGU Spring 2014 Campus Climate Report (p. 35) VI. Human Resources Statistics (p. 41) VII. 2013 Romney & Associates Student Climate Survey (p. 43) VIII. CIGU’s Strategic Plan White Paper (p. 85) IX. BFSG Strategic Plan White Paper (p. 91) X. Diversity Quad Strategic Plan White Paper (p. 93) XI. CIGU’s May 2011 Report (p. 98) XII. June 2011 Assessing the Triad Report (p. 104) XIII. President Glotzbach’s November 2, 2011 Response to CIGU’s May 18, 2011 Report (p. 108) XIV. President Porter’s 1998 Diversity at Skidmore Report (p. 116) XV. Make No Small Plans Excerpt (p. 146)

1 What Is a Chief Diversity Officer? By

Dr. Damon A. Williams & Dr. Katrina C. Wade-Golden

To meet the needs of increasingly diverse campuses, many institutions have developed executive positions to guide their diversity agendas. In many instances, these individuals and their units are the “face” of diversity efforts and carry formal administrative titles like vice provost, vice chancellor, associate provost, vice president, assistant provost, dean, or special assistant to the president for multicultural, international, equity, diversity, and inclusion — to cite only a few of the most frequently used titles.

Yet despite so many different monikers, if you ask most officers what they do, they often respond in a remarkably similar manner, noting that they are the institution’s “chief diversity officer” (or CDO, as many say), using the title more commonly found among their counterparts in the corporate world. We’ve just finished a national study of these positions: why these roles are emerging, their main characteristics, and the key knowledge, skills, and abilities that institutions should seek when searching for a new officer.

In the last five years, no fewer than 30 institutions have created these new roles. A review of recent higher education job listings illustrates the scope of this phenomenon, as institutions moving towards the CDO are swelling in number and differ by type, control, size, and geographic location. Institutions like the Berklee College of Music, Oklahoma State University, Harvard University, Xavier University, Miami University, Marquette University, Washington State University, and the University of Virginia, have recently hired inaugural officers. These roles have been constructed in an effort to build diversity capabilities similar to those found at institutions like the University of Michigan, University of Connecticut, Indiana University, the University of Washington, Brown University, the University of Denver, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, to name a few of the places that have had these positions for some time.

The emergence of these offices in higher education is not without historical precedence, as some institutions had “vice president for minority affairs” roles in the 1970s, when the first large group of African Americans enrolled at what were nearly all-white colleges and universities. These early units were often criticized as a symbolic appeasement to protesting minority groups and others demanding infrastructure for newly admitted minority populations and campus change.

While these positions have been consistently mentioned in diversity plans, senior leadership and others were often resistant, falsely criticizing these roles as “ghettoizing diversity” by putting the full burden on the shoulders of one person, and creating a campus police officer who would “tell people what to do.” Additionally, many individuals believed that these officers would simply be “student development specialist” or “affirmative action officers” in new clothing.

2

What distinguishes the current executive diversity officer from its historical predecessors is the functional definition of diversity as a resource that can be leveraged to enhance the learning of all students and is fundamental to institutional excellence, in addition to its historic definition as the presence of individuals that differ by race, gender, or some other social identity characteristic.

The most influential of these officers is also distinguished by ability to infuse diversity into the most important academic issues of the institution. For example, the chief diversity officer may collaborate with the academic senate to develop a general education diversity distribution requirement; lead international negotiations for establishing a sister campus in Dubai; or develop incentives to develop new programs and initiatives that infuse diversity into the curriculum and co-curriculum. These types of initiatives are distinct from the traditional responsibilities of affirmative action officers, although chief diversity officers may play a key role in resolving sexual harassment and workplace discrimination complaints, or supervising the unit that performs this function.

Defining the CDO Role

Where others work on issues of diversity as a matter of second or third priority, chief diversity officers engage matters of diversity as a matter of first-priority. Although the structures and vertical portfolios of the CDO range from basic one-person offices, to more complex multi-unit configurations, a number of threads define this emerging administrative role across all areas of corporate, higher education, health administration, non-profit and other areas of organizational life.

A Functional Approach: Chief diversity officers have responsibility for guiding efforts to conceptualize, define, assess, nurture, and cultivate diversity as an institutional and educational resource. Although duties may include affirmative action/equal employment opportunity, or the constituent needs of minorities, women, and other bounded social identity groups, chief diversity officers define their mission as providing point and coordinating leadership for diversity issues institution-wide.

Building a robust chief diversity officer capability insures that the institution has expertise on diversity related matters and infusing this understanding throughout the campus environment. For instance, at the University of Connecticut, the Office of the Vice Provost for Multicultural & International Affairs leads the execution of a five-year board-sponsored strategic plan for diversity and provides key input and leadership to several committees focused on minority faculty mentoring, undergraduate student retention, and increasing the number of historically underrepresented students of color and women studying in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics areas. Moreover, members of the office’s senior leadership team participate in many of the most substantive non-diversity centered committees at the university, ranging from information technology usage, to space allocations, to athletics.

Collaboration: Given complexities like infusing diversity into the curriculum, enhancing

3 the compositional diversity profile of students, faculty, and staff, and developing policies designed to improve the campus climate, the challenge of diversity is beyond the capabilities of any one individual, division, or team. Hence, chief diversity officers serve as powerful integrating forces for diversity issues, collaborating and working through the lateral networks of the institution no matter how large or small their staffs.

Like comparable roles in other administrative areas, such as the “chief financial officer” or “chief technology officer,” the work of the chief diversity officer does not fit into a traditional administrative box. Like diversity, the role of the chief diversity officer spans the boundaries of the institution as officers and their units collaborate with areas like admissions, human resources, faculty development, marketing and communication, academic deans, and institutional advancement in an effort to enhance diversity up, down, and across the institution.

Collaboration is often achieved through consultative relationships. Many officers regularly co-author, write letters of support, and build relationships with community colleges and historically minority serving institutions to support and strengthen the grant writing efforts of faculty members interested in obtaining National Science Foundation and National Institute of Health awards that often emphasize diversity and collaborative relationships. Others work closely with their development offices, playing a key role in identifying prospective donors, cultivating new relationships, and securing resources to fund everything from scholarships, to study abroad opportunities in developing nations.

Because of the boundary spanning nature of the chief diversity officer role, the types of possible relationships is nearly endless. Consequently, these officers must be malleable, innovative, and committed to fluidly adding value in areas outside of their core area of expertise and experience.

Leading Through Status and Influence: Chief diversity officers generally have no formal authority to command, reward, or punish individuals outside of their formal span of control and leadership. As a result, their source of “power” is often grounded in status, persuasion, and symbols. For example, no chief diversity officer has the authority to hire faculty members without support of the academic department or dean, even if they have the resources to provide a portion or all of the salary necessary for the position. Nevertheless, some officers can persuade department chairs to pool resources and hire a potentially high caliber diversity candidate by offering these resources as a start-up incentive. This is one of the main reasons that it is important for chief diversity officers to have resources allowing them to encourage behavior that advances the diversity goals of the institution.

Another primary source of power for these officers is their location at the presidential or provost level of formal administrative hierarchy. Participation in the executive cabinet of the institution insures that the position has visibility, access, and symbolic impact. For that reason, chief diversity officers can infuse diversity into highly politicized discussions about budget allocations, new initiatives, and future priorities of the institution. If these officers were not present, these issues may not be mentioned, nor understand in a

4 manner consistent with diversity goals so often mentioned in institutional academic plans, websites, and marketing materials.

By titling officers at the vice or associate vice president, provost, or chancellor level, a powerful symbolic message is sent to the entire campus community regarding the important role of the CDO and diversity on campus. Some of the most influential officers often have a dual title like academic affairs, student development, international affairs, or faculty development, in addition to their “diversity” title. According to one officer that we interviewed, the presence of a title like “vice provost for diversity and academic affairs,” in combination with a portfolio of units and responsibilities in both areas, signals that the officer is “more than simply a resource on matters of diversity and suggests a fundamental connection between diversity and academic excellence.”

Promoting Change: Chief diversity officers are best defined as “change management specialists” because of the importance that they place on strategies designed to intentionally move the culture of their institutions. At least at the surface, no CDO is hired to maintain the status quo, although some institutions are not serious about change and extend only superficial support to the efforts of the officer.

Nevertheless, change is a fundamental aspect of the chief diversity officer role leading campus-wide diversity planning and implementation efforts, seeding new diversity initiatives to create bubble-up energy and involve others in change projects, developing diversity training and educational strategies for executives, faculty, staff, and students to shift their mental models and skills regarding diversity, developing high profile and symbolic campus diversity events to suggest diversity’s relationship to institutional excellence, and creating new systems to insure that faculty and staff search committees cast a broad hiring net. Although diversity is the targeted domain area, each of these initiatives and projects is intended to affect some type of intentional change in the systems, structure, and culture of the institution.

The Making of a Good Higher Education CDO

When a higher education institution specifically decides to hire a CDO and develop this new capability, great care must be given to finding the right candidate. This task can be difficult with applicant pools that regularly yield between 120 and 150 persons, and include faculty members with a diversity research agenda, lawyers well-versed in affirmative action law, student development specialists, individuals from the corporate community, and others.

In gearing up for a search, a number of tough issues are often bantered by senior administrators and others designing the position and thinking about the type of knowledge, skills, and abilities that define a qualified candidate. These issues include whether the individual should possess a Ph.D. or other terminal degree; qualify for tenure in an academic department; have a legal background and experience with federal and state compliance issues; and whether or not the person charged to do the work must be a member of an ethnic, racial, gender, or other minority group, to name a

5 few of the most common challenging topics for discussion.

While these issues remain the source of debate, the ultimate decision must de determined by the institutional context, and predicated on factors such as core job responsibilities, span of units and offices that the chief diversity officer may supervise, and the degree to which the officer intersects with issues such as tenure, promotion, faculty hiring, and curriculum development. To say that a person is qualified simply because he or she is an African American and a tenured member of the faculty in art history, for example, is as inaccurate as rendering an Irish American, with expertise in botany qualified to serve as the department chair for European Studies or as the vice president for information technology. The superordinate goals of providing leadership for diversity and guiding change must guide the selection of the candidate, or institutions run the risk of hiring individuals that are woefully under prepared for the demands of such a complex, high profile, and politically charged position.

Although the exact mixture of degrees, experiences, and qualifications is hard to define, we believe that the most successful officers will illustrate seven key attributes regardless of academic and administrative background:

Technical Mastery of Diversity Issues: The CDO should have an excellent command of all aspects of diversity issues in higher education, including faculty recruitment and retention issues, identity development, access and equity, diversifying the curriculum, assessing the educational impact of diversity, measuring the campus climate, and the policy and legal dynamics of affirmative action and diversity in higher education. Furthermore, a CDO must be comfortable leveraging the social justice, educational benefits, and business case rationales for discussing diversity’s importance.

Political Savvy: The CDO must be particularly astute at navigating an institution’s political landscape; responding well to politically charged or politically sensitive situations. He or she must posses an ability and willingness to find win-win solutions when contentious circumstances arise, and know how to build consensus, accrue buy- in, and work through competing interests.

Ability to Cultivate a Common Vision: The CDO must be able to develop and cultivate a collaborative vision of diversity on campus. This requires resonating as authentic with students, faculty, staff, and administrators, and being committed to working collaboratively with other senior executives to build positive vision, direction, and results through strategic initiatives that holistically impact diversity.

In-Depth Perspective on Organizational Change: The CDO should possess an outstanding command of the elements and dynamics of organizational change, and also have entrenched experiences having led or been involved with these efforts in the past. Change is rarely easy, and given the inherent difficulties embedded in this often politicized process, the CDO must have a commitment to see the change process through its challenges and rough spaces to effect deep structural change. They must exhibit passion and patience, realizing that change does not happen quickly, and

6 oversee the organizational change process from a holistic point of view — guiding the design, implementation, assessment, and evolution of key milestones over time.

Sophisticated Relational Abilities: The CDO must possess a high degree of emotional intelligence, charisma, and communication abilities. Given that much of the work will be accomplished through lateral coordination, a CDO must have ability to cross numerous organizational boundaries with a fluid ability to adapt language and styles to different audiences.

Understanding of the Culture of Higher Education: The CDO should possess in- depth knowledge and experience regarding the culture of the academy. Colleges and universities are different than any other type of organization, and to achieve success, the CDO must understand the culture of shared governance, tenure and promotion, multiple and competing goals, decentralized campus politics, and the unique needs of students, faculty, staff, and executives with respect to diversity.

Results Orientation: Although not singularly responsible for results, the CDO must be results oriented and committed to encouraging the change agenda along to achieve significant results. Consequently, it is fundamental that they illustrate how diversity is an integral component to the successful fulfillment of the institutional mission, and a fundamental aspect of academic excellence in the 21st century.

As more institutions grapple with the challenge of building diversity capacity, changing demographics and ever broadening definitions of diversity, these positions will become even more a part of the educational landscape in higher education. Understanding the role and skills necessary to accomplish the job can help higher education institutions insure that diversity units are populated by leaders that have the best chance of supporting the organization, and helping it to obtain its long range diversity goals.

Dr. Damon A. Williams is assistant vice provost for multicultural and international affairs at the University of Connecticut. Dr. Katrina C. Wade-Golden is a senior research specialist in the Office of Academic Multicultural Initiatives at the University of Michigan. They are co-principal investigators for the “Diversity Officer Study.” An earlier version of this article appeared at www.insidehighered.com. Please contact Dr. Damon A. Williams at [email protected] with questions or comments.

7 8 Document 1 of 1

Emerging Trend: The Chief Diversity Officer Phenomenon within Higher Education Author: Wilson, Jeffery L ProQuest document link Abstract: Given that this study touched on the sensitive topic of diversity, very little research exist on the subject of chief diversity officers (CDO), this research investigated the emergence of the CDO position within higher education. This qualitative study examined seven CDOs and their institutions, in order to assess the impact these leaders' are having on the campus culture at their institutions as multicultural educators'. The CDOs at the institutions differed in how they ascended to that role, their titles, who they reported to, and areas of responsibilities. Some cited near perfect harmony among members of the campus community around diversity issues, while others had met with challenges. Additionally, the CDOs did experience some success with collaboration on diversity initiatives. Links: Linking Service Full text: Headnote Given that this study touched on the sensitive topic of diversity, very little research exist on the subject of chief diversity officers (CDOs), this research investigated the emergence of the CDO position within higher education. This qualitative study examined seven CDOs and their institutions in order to assess the impact these leaders are having on the campus culture at their institutions as multicultural educators. The CDOs at the institutions differed in how they ascended to that role, their titles, who they reported to, and areas of responsibilities. Some cited near perfect harmony among members of the campus community around diversity issues, while others had met with challenges. Additionally, the CDOs did experience some success with collaboration on diversity initiatives. Keywords: diversity, chief diversity officer, higher education institutions INTRODUCTION A growing trend on campuses nationwide appears to be the hiring of chief diversity officers (CDO). This development in achieving diversity outcomes has yielded a professional association, the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE), that is dedicated to serving "as the preeminent voice for diversity officers in higher education" (NADOHE, 2009, p. 1). Incorporated in 2006, NADOHE boasts well over 90 members and close to 150 institutions (NADOHE, 2009). Gose (2006) noted that elite universities, such as Harvard, Texas A&M, the University of California at Berkeley, the University of Texas at Austin, and the University of Virginia, all have chief diversity officers. But, he posited: Are universities making a serious new commitment to diversifying the faculty, curriculum, and student body, or are these high-profile appointments a way for university presidents to appease minority students and professors who have been clamoring for a stronger voice on campuses? (Gose, 2006, p. B1 ) The quest to educate members of a community on matters related to diversity has often been left up to a few individuals, in this case: CDOs. These individuals have a tremendous responsibility and must navigate through unpredictable channels in order to enact change. A potential threat to the CDO's effectiveness is the unwillingness of members of the campus community to abide by and comply with the policies and initiatives generated out of the diversity office. A backlash over the need for a CDO can result in members of the community becoming hostile to the individual's attempts to break down barriers causing obstacles for those within the institution. Resistance can occur because of the perception that little, if any, problems related to diversity exist at the institution; therefore, a CDO, let alone any new diversity policy, is unnecessary. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of seven CDOs on the campus culture at their respective

04 October 2014 Page 1 of 12 ProQuest9 institutions. For those who hold the title CDO, a presumption exists by some within the institution that the CDO should be the sole authority for building a campus culture that embraces diversity. This can sometimes lead to an overload for the CDO and have unintended consequences. Rosser and Javinar (2003) concluded that there is a correlation between how a student affairs professional views their job responsibilities and their job satisfaction. Already, those who work in diversityrelated positions on college campuses, typically at the director, assistant director, and coordinator levels, acknowledge they are the go-to individuals when it comes to diversity. As a result, other colleagues not in diversity-related positions take on the persona that they are free from having to focus too much attention to diversity. This situation has caused some within diversity and multicultural affairs positions to feel alienated from colleagues who demonstrate little or no interest in diversity, but who pass multicultural responsibilities to the diversity person. Although the hiring of CDOs might provide one avenue to promote diversity on college campuses, it is uncertain how effective they will be in implementing diversity initiatives. Smith (2009) warned of the practice of tokenism where individuals may be visible representatives of an organizational leadership structure, but functionally invisible. Still new to the scene, CDOs effectiveness remains unknown. The Diversity Challenge on College Campuses Chubin (2006) reported that college campuses are continually dealing with issues related to diversity, tolerance, and equity. More recently, Smith (2009) stated "diversity is an imperative that must be embraced if colleges and universities are to be successful in a pluralistic and interconnected world" (p. 1). Therefore, these institutions need better ways to communicate the importance of diversity. Attention to diversity has expanded over the last century to include gender issues, racial and ethnic differences, and to a lesser extent, sexual orientation, religion, and physical disability. Many institutions of higher learning are preparing their graduates to be more diversity conscious and to be able to work with individuals from many cultures by increasing opportunities of exposure to and interaction with diverse populations. Williams and Clowney (2007) observed four driving forces that contribute to higher education institutions increasing their attention to diversity: (a) legal and political dynamics, (b) changing demographics, (c) rise of a postindustrial knowledge economy, and (d) persistent societal inequities. Institutions have enacted diversity policies, implemented aggressive minority recruitment plans, created multicultural centers, and hired additional staff to program multicultural events for the entire campus community. However, despite their best efforts to create environments that are conducive and receptive to diversity, some institutions have been ineffective due to opposition or lack of commitment on campus from multiple groups including the administration (Williams, 2008; Williams, Berger, &McClendon, 2005). As Walker (1979) stated decades ago "universities can be incredibly tenacious in their counteractions to being shoved," and "university administrators possess no immunity from the tendency of people in organizations to resist orders" (p. 96). Higher education has long played a key role in the preparation and development of young men and women to fulfill societal needs in the workforce and civic sectors. McDonald and associates (2002) asserted that colleges and universities were "sanctuaries of our personal and civic values, incubators or intellect and integrity (p. 8)." Decades ago, Boyer (1987) noted the world needs more innovations from younger generations who are well- informed and thirst for new knowledge. In characterizing America as a nation transforming into a knowledge- driven economy, Florida (2002) contends higher education will be essential in increasing the creative class. Seemingly, as colleges and universities help prepare America's future workforce and leaders, they have struggled to create effective multicultural campuses in which to do so. Affirming Diversity on Campus Multicultural education has taken on numerous descriptions. Nieto (2000) likened it to an ongoing learning process aimed at overcoming bigotry. According to Banks and Banks (2007), A major goal of multicultural education is to change teaching and learning approaches so that students of both

04 October 2014 Page 2 of 12 ProQuest10 genders and from diverse cultural, ethnic, and language groups will have equal opportunities to learn in educational institutions, (p. 13) Banks and Banks (2007) identified four approaches to applying multicultural content in an educational setting. They include the contributions approach, or level 1. On this level, the general focus is placed on key historical figures and dates. Level 2 is the additive approach where more emphasis is placed on historical content; however, little substantive change is infused into the existing structure or curriculum. Level 3 or the transformation approach seeks to change existing forms of instruction in order to encompass a more diverse perspective. The last stage, level 4 or the social action approach, challenges individuals to make their own conclusions and take action. The different levels represent the progression that multicultural education can take if given proper attention. The quest to educate members of a community on matters related to diversity has often been left up to a few individuals, in this case: CDOs. These individuals have a tremendous responsibility and must navigate through unpredictable channels in order to enact change. Chief Diversity Officers Defined The United States is a diverse country. Its people-a mixture of various ethnicities, races, religions, and thoughts- somehow converge to make for a widely unique living-learning environment that brings together individuals of different heritage, faith, and beliefs. Ten years ago, Thelin (2003) concluded that dealing with the growing diversity within our higher education institutions would be a major challenge. The emergence of the CDO has proven to be a popular solution for many institutions to promote and coordinate diversity on college campuses. However, it is uncertain how effective these CDOs are in implementing diversity initiatives. While the evolution of a new administrative head within higher education is not necessarily novel, it is new to have an administrative head whose sole responsibility is diversity, even for higher education. Previous additions to the higher education organizational structure include chief communications officer, chief information officer, and chief student affairs officer. In defining a CDO, Williams and Wade-Golden (2007) characterized this individual as "a senior administrator who guides, coordinates, leads, enhances, and at times supervises the formal diversity capabilities of the institution in an effort to build sustainable capacity to achieve an environment that is inclusive and excellent for all" (p. 8). They contend that CDOs can influence their respective institutions by "elevating visibility and credibility of campus diversity function, leading strategic diversity planning efforts, building new institutional diversity infrastructure, enhancing structural diversity success, informing the search process, and building new academics diversity courses and initiatives" (p. 9). Smith (2009) offered a framework derived from historical and current trends within higher education. Smith (2009) factored in * access and success of underrepresented student populations; * campus climate and intergroup relations; * education and scholarship; and * institutional viability and vitality. According to Smith (2009) "these dimensions provide a way of understanding what institutional capacity for diversity might mean and what it might look like (p. 64)." An Instrument of Change Undoubtedly, CDOs can be viewed as instruments of change. Change agents tend to be leaders who are skilled at framing issues, building coalitions, and establishing a climate where group members can seek a common solution (Bolman &Deal, 2003). Kotter (1996) offered eight strategies for successful change within an organization: (a) create a sense of urgency, (b) assemble a team of skilled, competent, and well-connected individuals, (c) develop a vision and a strategy for change, (d) communicate that vision within the organization, (e) reorganize structure, (f) generate short term wins, (g) use the change as a building block to success, and (h) explore new approaches. As with most organizations, members can sometimes resist change. Often, resistance to change is a result of organizational members feeling that the power structure to which they were accustomed

04 October 2014 Page 3 of 12 ProQuest11 is now threatened (Senge, 1990). In higher education environments, "change to create diverse learning and professional environments is hard" (Williams, 2008, p. 29). CDOs, although they may be viewed skeptically by some, have the potential to tum a hostile situation into a nonhostile one through outreach and collaborative relationships. Bolman and Deal (2003) recognized that leaders who fail at leading their organization through change tend to lack mobility in four essential frames: (a) structural, (b) human resource, (c) political, and (d) symbolic. Frames are "mental maps" that allows for clarity when maneuvering in an organization (Bolman &Deal, 2003). Understanding and successfully navigating between these frames are critical for leaders to be effective when their organization is experiencing change. CDOs must be skilled at managing people and navigating through bureaucracy. A Point of Reference for the CDO Position When embarking on new initiatives that require restructuring, resources for more assessments are often necessary. These resources should provide the person leading these initiatives with a foundation for assessing the dynamics and needs of the institution as it relates, in this instance: diversity. Williams and Wade-Golden (2007) argued that when an institution hires a CDO, it must factor in the fiscal cost to enable the CDO to be successful. This includes provisions for adequate staffing, office space and other essentials in order to properly assist with policy formation and implementation. In addition to resources, CDOs must have the power and authority to enforce the policies created to guide the institution into becoming more tolerant on diversity. Advocates for a CDO position argue that the chief diversity officer must be classified at an executive-level position that reports directly to the president. Williams and Wade- Golden (2007) observed that "a primary source of influence for chief diversity officers is their location at the presidential or provost level of the administrative hierarchy" (p. 15). If CDOs were lower in the organizational structure some would argue that their effectiveness to initiate substantive change would be difficult because they would not have as much direct access to the upper administration that sets the policy for the organization. A potential threat to the chief diversity officer's effectiveness is the unwillingness of members of the campus community to abide by and comply with the policies and initiatives generated out of the diversity office. A backlash over the need for a CDO can result in members of the community becoming hostile to the individual's attempts to break down barriers for those within the institution. Resistance can result because of a perception that the institution has no problems with diversity; therefore, a chief diversity officer is neither necessary nor is diversity policy needed. Also, a threat to bringing in a chief diversity officer is the possibility of overloading the position with the sole responsibility for diversity. Williams and Wade-Golden (2007) stated "the chief diversity officer is not singularly responsible for diversity" (p. 10). Senior-level diversity officers can fall subject to being the "go to" person unless steps are taken to communicate to the campus community that this individual is charged with motivating and leading campus diversity efforts and not with bearing the sole responsibility for all diversity initiatives. Chief diversity officers play an integral role in creating a campus climate that is receptive to diversity. "They are not hired to maintain the status quo but to improve the campus climate, diversify the campus community, and enhance the diversity capabilities of the institution through their leadership, projects, initiatives, relationships, and presence" (Williams &Wade-Golden, 2007, p. 11). Creating a campus community that values diversity cannot be the sole responsibility of a one person instead diversity efforts must be included within all units of the institutional structure. Therefore, CDOs are constantly searching for ways to collaborate within the institutional community and the outside community as well. This study sought to ascertain the following: What educational impact do chief diversity officers have on their campuses in this leadership role? METHODOLOGY Design This study examines chief diversity officers at four-year higher education institutions. Merriam (2009) observed that qualitative research allows the researcher to gain a better understanding of how people make meaning of

04 October 2014 Page 4 of 12 ProQuest12 and interpret their experiences. Yin (2003) found that the case study method affords the researcher an opportunity to holistically identify and understand situations and circumstances. Similarly, Miles and Huberman (1994) observed that the differences in conditions and reactions within complicated situations surface in case study research. While the definition of diversity is broad, this study included but was not limited to the following: race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, socioeconomic status, and physical abilities. Given that this study touched on the sensitive topic of diversity, and very little research exists on the subject of CDOs, qualitative research was chosen to capture not only the uniqueness of each CDO who participated in the study, but to establish any common patterns, as well as inconsistencies, across them. Participant Selection Participants for this study were recruited during the annual conference of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education held in Washington, DC in February 2009 (NADOHE, 2009). At the conference, potential participants were screened by the researcher to ensure they were the designated CDO at their institution and contact information was collected. After the conference a follow-up e-mail was then sent out to potential participants soliciting their involvement in the study. Upon agreement by the CDO to take part in the study, an e-mail was then sent to set-up the actual interview along with a consent form explaining the study to the CDO. Once confirmation of their participation was received, a date and time was set-up for a telephone, and in one instance, a face-to-face interview with the CDO. Sample Seven CDOs from different institutions were selected for participation in this study. CDO participants were selected, in part, because their respective institutions had stated in their missions or a separate document a commitment to creating and maintaining diversity. They were purposefully selected so that individuals who can best represent and contribute to understanding the phenomenon being studied are selected (Babbie, 2001 ; Creswell, 2003; Lincoln &Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2003). The selection criteria used to identify and include individuals to this study were: * their designation as the CDO at the institution, * their employment at different Carnegie types, and * their location in different regions of the U.S. Prior to obtaining data, internal review board (IRB) approval to conduct this research was granted. To protect the participants, assuring confidentiality and anonymity are critical in securing participation and gaining access (Darlington &Scott, 2002; Fontana &Frey, 2000; Lincoln &Guba, 1985; Merriam, 1998). Therefore, pseudonyms for participants and their institutions were used in the reporting of findings. Data Collection Interviews with the CDO were conducted over the telephone or in face-to-face meetings. Interviews varied from one-half hour to one hour and a half. As an aid, a tape recorder assisted in obtaining full and exact quotations for analysis and reporting (Patton, 1990). For reliability purposes, the interviews followed a standard protocol in which each CDO was asked the exact same fifteen questions relating on their background and their role as CDO (see the Appendix). As a result of this format, the researcher was able to probe each interviewee for additional information or to elaborate on responses. The interviews were immediately transcribed, thereby keeping consistent with Yin's (2009) recommendation for conducting case study research. To aid with reliability, transcripts were reviewed and checked for accuracy. In defining triangulation, Merriam (1998) stated that "using multiple investigators, multiple sources of data, or multiple methods to confirm the emerging findings" (p. 204) is necessary. Although the primary source of data in this study were the interviews with the CDOs, for purposes of triangulation and data verification, the institutional website was used to corroborate or add information about organizational structure of the CDO office, diversity initiatives and documents, and programming.

04 October 2014 Page 5 of 12 ProQuest13 Data Analysis Data analysis was conducted using what Glaser and Strauss (1967) identified as typological categories or themes or grounded theory. To address the research question, further analysis consisted of the following: To determine the educational impact of chief diversity officers at their institutions, transcribed interviews were twice-read looking for emerging themes. The interviews were then coded into categories to make generalizations. Merriam (2009) noted that coding enables the researcher to pull together pieces of data that are relevant to answering the research questions. Analysis of essential documents such as diversity reports and statements produced another source of information since they provided "valuable information because of what the evaluator can learn directly by reading them" (Patton, 1990, p. 233). Initially, a cross-case analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed using pattern coding to identify emerging themes (Miles &Huberman, 1994). Study Institutions and CDOs Seven CDOs from different institutions were selected for participation in this study. Two were situated in the Midwest, two in the North and Northeast, one in the Northwest, one in the South, and one in the Southwest region of the United States. The types of institutions were also diverse in that participating institutions were either public research or private liberal arts institutional types. In addition to the CDOs and institutions having their own distinct qualities, each shared some similarities. For example, all but one of the CDOs is female; however, in respect to race, one is Hispanic, one is Caucasian, and five are African American. The titles held by the CDOs also varied because two were classified as Vice Presidents, one was an Associate Vice Chancellor, two were Special Assistants, and two were Directors. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the CDOs and institutions. Study Findings In this study, the institutions varied by type, enrollment size, percentage of student diversity, and geographical location. Three major themes that emerged from this study were (a) personal connection to diversity; (b) gaining visibility on campus; and (c) looking toward the future. The CDOs at the institutions differed in how they ascended to that role, their titles, and areas of responsibilities. Some cited near-perfect harmony among members of the campus community around diversity issues, while others were met with challenges. CDOs Personal Connection to Diversity It is not uncommon for individuals who work in diversity to have an emotional connection to the topic. Sometimes prior experiences, whether personal or professional, compel individuals to champion the cause of equity and inclusion. Such was the case with several of the CDO participants. For Dr. Lee, who happened to be a person of color, diversity is important because "I've had to deal with the issue of diversity all my life." This CDO had been exposed to injustice at an early age and saw firsthand as an educator the inequalities within education. Adding to the sentiment of dealing with diversity over the course of one's life, Ms. Drake added "I've been a recipient of the Civil Rights Movement." In reflecting on her passion for diversity, Dr. Harris, who is not a person of color, acknowledged, "I've had the privilege of being brought up to speed by African Americans on cultural awareness." Another way of looking at diversity is that it is inevitable in this age of rapidly growing and changing global society. Projected demographic trends in the U.S. population suggest that we are going to see a substantial increase in the number of minority groups, specifically, the Latino population (Llagas &Snyder, 2003). Therefore, in the grand scheme of things, as Dr. Giles stated, "diversity is something we have no choice in." The CDO on Campus In recalling why the CDO position was created at their campuses, Dr. Harris noted, "the campus climate survey that the previous President initiated in the 1990s and one of the things that came up in that document was the need to do something about diversity." One other CDO cited a campus climate survey as the reason for the CDO position at that campus. All but one CDO indicated that their president was a major factor in the creation of

04 October 2014 Page 6 of 12 ProQuest14 the position. Responding to the growing need to adequately address the needs of a changing campus appears to be the main reason for the emergence of the chief diversity officer position within the institutions studied. For example, the duties of CDO were assigned to Ms. Drake because she already worked on multicultural issues. Now with a staff to assist her, she oversees the mandatory diversity program during freshmen orientation, the academic bridge program, and faculty of color mentoring and support. Still on her agenda is to make the curriculum more inclusive. She commented, "We still have some work to do in terms of infusing the topic into the curriculum and we have some work to do to get faculty on board." In speaking of the institution's current culture about diversity, Dr. Hall described it as "being taken for granted." Student retention has been positive (not everyone dropped out). But retention may not be as high as one likes. Adding to the diversity climate conversation, Dr. Lee explained, "diversity is on everybody's list, but where it is on everybody's list is what I question," while Mr. Burke characterized the culture at his campus as having "a level of respect for diversity." However, Mr. Burke remains skeptical on whether this respect is genuine or if it is the sometimes obligatory public display of support for diversity that is expressed by individuals who privately may feel otherwise. It is worth noting that the location of one institution in a remote part of the country that historically has been unreceptive to diversity led Dr. Harris to acknowledge "there is a strain in regards to diversity, but it hasn't yet reached a tipping point." Earlier, Williams (2008) discussed the proper placement of the CDO within the organizational chart. Researchers and practitioners suggest that having the CDO positioned at the director's level is adequate for influencing campus culture, but it would be beneficial if this person were to be on the president's cabinet. In explaining his institution's success with implementing changes that affect campus culture, Dr. Lee stated "instead of going bottom up, we go top down, that means talking to the administration and legislatures about diverse issues and have them send information down." Due to the newness of the position, a permanent role had not been defined for Dr. Harris: "we are sort of left to do what we want." In describing her duties, Dr. Giles reflected "[1 try] to be a strong advocate for diversity. Everything that I do, I look for the diversity in it. . . I live it, I speak it... I try to be a resource through my office." In respect to collaboration across campus, Ms. Drake makes it a point to collaborate and connect with all units. She said, "I cannot think of one area that I have not collaborated with." Dr. Giles echoed the importance of collaboration and offered "1 have to. There is no way that I could do everything that I have to do without collaboration." All the CDO participants stated they had created or oversaw a committee of individuals from the campus community that met regularly to promote diversity. Having such a committee was essential to getting members of the campus involved in the implementation of diversity initiatives and creating an awareness and appreciation of diversity. Some CDOs did have success collaborating with faculty on diversity initiatives while others were still exploring opportunities. Dr. Hall noted that some faculty expressed initial frustration about her position as they felt her office would direct resources from academic affairs. Ms. Drake acknowledged: I am beginning to work on that. I have not had a lot of experience with that. We recently recognized that we need to increase minority representation within the faculty ranks. I had conversations with Human Resources looking into climate and environment. Dr. Giles noted he collaborates with faculty by doing, "diversity training at the invitation of faculty. I role model how you can infuse diversity into the curriculum. Faculty members will come to me with I have a great program and I'd like to bring a speaker to campus." Being a part of the university president's cabinet has its advantages, especially if the CDO can go to his or her colleagues with an initiative related to diversity and your colleagues happen to be vice presidents. Ms. Kay pointed out that "I serve on the president's cabinet and I collaborate with all the other vice presidents." This kind of access makes a difference because information about diversity is delivered to organizational chiefs directly as opposed to having to work its way through structural channels that often begin at the counselor/advisor or

04 October 2014 Page 7 of 12 ProQuest15 coordinator level. Responding to the impact the CDOs were having on their campuses with diversity-related strategies and programs, Dr. Lee noted, "I've continued a lot of the programs in place. One of the programs is the retention of minority faculty. My role is to talk to Deans and articulate that the needs of minority faculty are different than the traditional faculty." Dr. Harris commented that her efforts made her unit more "faculty oriented" and a "strategic planning group." Dr. Harris added "We brought somebody in to train us to do workshops using the National Coalition Building Institute (NCBI) model. We did a good job in training the trainers that we eventually trained the upper administration. Dr. Hall noted she "worked with student organizations and developed collaborative efforts with Title V initiatives and work more closely with Hispanic-serving institutions." She added "I'm currently putting together a faculty tool kit." Ms. Drake remarked that at her institution, "we now have a mandatory freshmen orientation program that introduces the topic of respect for self and respect for others." Ms. Kay commented that her campus just "completed our second campus climate survey." The evolution of diversity at the CDOs' respective campuses was also of interest in this study. Dr. Lee observed, "I've seen it evolve from one point where we didn't hear the president talk about diversity." Looking ahead to what needs to be in place in order for the campus to move forward with diversity, Dr. Harris stated "we are not going to get to the next level of change until there is an accountability component to diversity." In other words, the administration needs to ask the necessary question of how many minorities were hired in the division, and why they left the institution or department. Collectively, all the CDO participants observed that the main concern of the administration, given the uncertainty of the economy, is the budget. However, not too far off the radar is retention of students and faculty of color, as well as increasing women in administration. The Future of CDOs In looking to the future, some CDOs commented that as changing demographics increase the number of students of color on campus, institutions are going to have to be better prepared to accommodate them. Dr. Lee said, "Colleges and professors are going to have to be taught to deal with these students." Dr. Lee is optimistic that she can increase the diversity campus on campus by beefing up local recruitment. Dr. Harris explained "we are working with the various minority populations to grow the next generation of faculty and leadership within the institution out of people who are already here." Not everyone shared a sense of optimism about their institution's growth in diversity. Ms. Drake shared, "Personally, I fear my college will look just the way it is today. They do not see a need to change and be different because it has served them well in the past." Admittedly, all of the CDO participants were optimistic about the impact that their work will have on the culture in their institutions. They confess that they will have to confront certain challenges, such as conveying the importance of diversity in an ever-changing society, offering programming that will expose and inform the campus community about diversity, and recruiting and retaining students and faculty of color. Discussion and Conclusion There is no precedence for the CDO position within the upper higher education administrative ranks. Those who assume such a role are undoubtedly trailblazers for their success in transforming their campuses. Their success can be interpreted as a major innovative development in administrative leadership and diversity efforts. To examine how CDOs tackle their responsibilities yields important information about innovative leadership changes within higher education. While this study was based on a small sample size, it produces findings similar to Williams and Wade-Golden (2007) therefore it may be consistent with that larger study. Further studies should incorporate more CDOs within the participant pool and include CDOs at historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) as well. It would be interesting to study HBCUs that have a large minority enrollment (who may be Caucasian) and see what their campus community is like. In addition, future studies may want to also include Hispanic-serving and Native Americanserving institutions. And while the qualitative approach allowed for CDOs to tell their stories, a

04 October 2014 Page 8 of 12 ProQuest16 quantitative survey would encompass more institutions for study. Although chief diversity officers may be one solution to promoting diversity on college campuses, it is too soon to know how effective they will be in implementing diversity initiatives. This in no way undermines their importance and the fact that their presence as a senior administrative head of a division is a major breakthrough in American higher education. As with any new initiative, resources would provide the person assuming the position with the means for assessing the dynamics and needs of the institution for diversity. This should also include staff to assist with policy formation and implementation, as well as programming. In addition to resources must be the power and authority to enforce the policies created to guide the institution into becoming more receptive to diversity. The power to enforce is a key issue with the CDO position. Oftentimes with diversity efforts, those persons charged with promoting diversity (who are at the rank of a CDO) have very little impact because of the inability to enact meaningful change due to a reluctant community who face little to no consequences for being indifferent to diversity. That is why it is imperative that the chief diversity officer is an executive-level position that reports directly to the university president if this appointment is going to have any influence. As a direct report to the person who has the most authority at the institution, the chief diversity officer should be able to effectively pursue diversity policy and change without going through a lot of campus bureaucracy. The likelihood that everyone within the campus community will agree that diversity is valued and embraced is increased once the entire campus community sees that the president has taken a serious interest in promoting diversity by appointing a CDO who directly reports to him or her. In order for organizations to get the message that diversity is the responsibility of everyone and not one individual, the CDO must be a strong and effective leader. This individual will have to successfully get the campus community to support diversity efforts by for example, assembling an institution-wide diversity committee comprised of representatives from the various units and employee levels of the institution who will then assist in conveying the diversity message and initiatives that the CDO is trying to implement. Furthermore, it makes sense for the president to communicate to members of the institution in the beginning that the CDO position was created to assist the various sectors of the campus community improve on their diversity initiatives and outreach. This would eliminate any perception from employees of the institution that diversity is covered and is not part of their job functions. While this is not a final solution, it would at least be a start. The emergence of the CDO position is an innovation within higher education that has farreaching implications for the future of diversity efforts. The appointment of a CDO could be perceived as another "Band-Aid" tactic to appease critics and onlookers. It would be a major blow to diversity efforts across college campuses if the evolution of such an important position as the CDO became a casualty to budget cuts, business as usual, and continued aloofness toward diversity. Therefore, if higher education institutions are serious about wanting to address diversity to ensure an inclusive campus community, then they should * appoint a senior level CDO who reports directly to the president, * provide the CDO with sufficient financial resources and staffing, and * support the initiatives and recommendations made by the CDO for addressing diversity on campus. References References Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Banks, J. A., &Banks, C. A. M. (Eds.). (2007). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (6th ed., rev.). New York: Wiley. Bolman, L. G., &Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organization: Artistry, choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Boyer, E. L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper &Row. Chubin, D. E. (2006). The new backlash on campus. College and University Journal, 81, 65-68.

04 October 2014 Page 9 of 12 ProQuest17 Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Darlington, Y., &Scott, D. (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Stories from the field. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class. New York: Basic Books. Fontana, A., &Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin, &Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 645-672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Glaser, B., &Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Gose, B. (2006, September 29). The rise of the chief diversity officer. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53, Bl.

Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Lincoln, Y. S., &Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Llagas, C., &Snyder, T. D. (2003). Status and trends in the education of Hispanics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics. (NCES 2003008). McDonald, W. M. &Associates. (2002). Creating campus community: In search of Ernest Boyer's legacy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Miles, M. B., &Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education. (2009). Mission statement. Retrieved from http://www.nadohe.org/mission.html Nieto, S. (2000). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (3rd ed.). New York: Longman. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rosser, V. J., &Javinar, J. M. (2003). Midlevel student affairs leaders' intentions to leave: Examining the quality of their professional and institutional work life. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 813-830. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday. Smith, D. G. (2009). Diversity's promise for higher education: Making it work. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University Press. Thelin, J. R. (2003). Historical overview of American higher education. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodard, Jr., &Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (pp. 322). San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Walker, D. E. (1979). The effective administrator. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Williams, D. A. (2008). Beyond the diversity crisis model: Decentralized diversity planning and implementation. Planning for Higher Education, 36, 27-41. Williams, D. A., Berger, J. B., &McClendon, S. A. (2005). Toward a model of inclusive excellence and change in postsecondary institutions. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Williams, D. A., &Clowney, C. (2007). Strategic planning for diversity and organizational change: A primer for higher education leadership. Effective Practices for Academic Leaders, 2, 1-16. Williams, D. A., &Wade-Golden, K. C, (2007). The chief diversity officer: A primer for college and university presidents (3, Serial No. 311683). Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R. K.. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. AuthorAffiliation

04 October 2014 Page 10 of 12 ProQuest18 Jeffery L. Wilson The University of Memphis AuthorAffiliation Author JEFFERY L. WILSON is Assistant Professor, Higher and Adult Education at The University of Memphis in Tennessee. All comments and queries regarding this article should be addressed to [email protected] Appendix Appendix Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) Interview Protocol 1. What is your background and how did you come into this position? 2. Why is diversity important to you personally? 3. Why did your institution decide to create the CDO position? 4. What are your primary areas of responsibility? 5. Do you collaborate with other entities in the institution? How? 6. To what extent are you involved with working with faculty on diversity initiatives? 7. Before you took the CDO position, what strategies did the institution use to build a campus culture that embraces and celebrates diversity? 8. How well did they work? 9. What diversity-related strategies and programs have you helped the institution develop and implement? (committees, personnel, finances, training) 10. Do you feel supported in your efforts to promote diversity? Why or why not? 11. Describe your campus's current culture as it relates in respect to diversity? 12. Has the institution's view on diversity changed over time? In what ways? Do you have concrete evidence of change? 13. Today, how do people on campus view diversity? 14. Today, what do you believe are the university's main concerns? 15. What will this campus look like ten years from now? (students, faculty, staff, administration)?_ Subject: Colleges & universities; Workplace diversity; Multiculturalism & pluralism; College campuses; College students; Publication title: The Journal of Negro Education Volume: 82 Issue: 4 Pages: 433-445 Number of pages: 13 Publication year: 2013 Publication date: Fall 2013 Year: 2013 Publisher: Howard University Place of publication: Washington Country of publication: United States Publication subject: Ethnic Interests, Education

04 October 2014 Page 11 of 12 ProQuest19 ISSN: 00222984 CODEN: JNEEAK Source type: Scholarly Journals Language of publication: English Document type: Feature Document feature: Tables References ProQuest document ID: 1498933451 Document URL: http://search.proquest.com/docview/1498933451?accountid=13894 Copyright: Copyright Howard University Fall 2013 Last updated: 2014-02-18 Database: ProQuest Education Journals,ProQuest Psychology Journals,ProQuest Research Library ______Contact ProQuest  Copyright 2014 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms and Conditions

04 October 2014 Page 12 of 12 ProQuest20 21 Engaged Liberal Learning The Plan for Skidmore College 2005­2015

Executive Summary

Colleges and universities tend to focus either on their past or on their future. While Skidmore honors, takes pride in, and builds upon the legacy of its past, we are accustomed to thinking in the future tense: about our hopes for our students, changes to be made in our curriculum, or a greater role to be played by our College throughout higher education and in the world at large. Even our declaration that creative thought matters orients us toward a distant horizon: The concept of creativity itself points to a moment that does not yet exist – when something hidden will be revealed, a plan realized, a quandary resolved through an imaginative approach. Creativity threatens the status quo and so entails risk. Yet Skidmore has always invited change and embraced risk. Because of the dedication, foresight, and audacity of so many who have come before us, the College has made enormous progress across its first century. Throughout our history, we have challenged ourselves to make no small plans – to make no ordinary choices – and we do so still today.

Since our founding, Skidmore College has prepared generations of young women and, more recently, young women and men, to become both successful, productive citizens and personally fulfilled human beings. We also have embraced the education of a smaller cohort of non­traditional students who affirm the power of liberal learning to illuminate both their professional and personal lives. In both cases, we attract students who are sophisticated, eclectic, collaborative, creative, and adventurous. We offer them a cosmopolitan and challenging institutional culture, one infused with opportunities to participate in and appreciate the visual and performing arts. We emphasize the importance of creative thought and its practical applications across our curriculum – from the natural sciences, to pre­professional majors, to the humanities, and social sciences, to the visual and performing arts. We encourage our students to experiment, to explore multiple areas of inquiry, and to pursue their individual passions. By modeling the way an educated person examines, challenges, critiques, and synthesizes existing beliefs and creates new ones, the Skidmore faculty communicates to our students what it means to be liberally educated and capable of acting responsibly in the world. A Skidmore education provides the foundation in both the cognitive skills and the personal maturity required to excel in both the workplace and in the polity of the 21 st Century. Most importantly, it offers the resources for composing a sustainable life as a moral being in a world where the ethical signposts periodically seem to have been knocked flat.

The members of our faculty take justifiable pride in cultivating our students’ intellectual and personal excellence and curiosity; others within the extended Skidmore community take similar pride in their contributions to students’ success. Indeed, one of our historic strengths has been to awaken previously unrecognized interests and talents, suggesting new possibilities to students who have not yet appreciated – much less risen to – their potential. Traditional and non­ traditional students alike report that Skidmore has enabled them to accomplish objectives and grow personally to an extent impossible to predict when they entered the College. We hear in the testimony of our alumni, from the observations of appreciative parents, and through our own experience that our best students – those who take full advantage of what they find at Skidmore today – receive an educational experience second to none.

The preceding characterization represents not only a description but also a promissory note issued to every new student upon matriculation. Each of them (and their parents) arrives with the legitimate expectation that this obligation will be redeemed in full. We certainly do not say to any individual matriculant, “It’s all right with us if you fail at Skidmore: your success

22 doesn’t really matter.” Instead, we begin with the assumption that each admitted student can meet the challenges we present and – with the proper commitment, effort, and assistance – join the ranks of Skidmore alumni. We regard matriculation as the beginning not of a four­year relationship but rather of a lifelong relationship between a student and the extended Skidmore community. Even so, despite our best intentions, we must acknowledge that for too many of our students Skidmore remains a promise unfulfilled. The gap between the aspirations of our Mission Statement and our actual performance provides both a significant challenge and our most important opportunity.

Our overarching objective, therefore, is to become a College that fully realizes the objectives of our Mission: one that inspires, challenges, and supports the highest levels of excellence for all our students, not just for some or even many of them – as evidenced by their achievements in realizing the values of engaged liberal learning while at Skidmore and expressing them throughout their lives. The Skidmore we envision expects that an intellectually rigorous, transformative educational experience will lead to graduates whose achievements at Skidmore will launch them into the next phase of their lives, who are prepared to function effectively in the complex and increasingly diverse world of the 21 st Century, and who understand and embrace the responsibilities of living as informed, responsible citizens. Moreover, we expect our alumni to remain deeply connected to one another and to Skidmore as a continuing source of inspiration and support.

More specifically, we seek to become

• A College that involves students immediately and passionately in a life­altering learning experience, from their first days on campus – a process that leads to significant individual academic achievement by the time of graduation, along with demonstrable personal development that will position all our alumni to embark with assurance on the next phase of their lives.

• A College that offers its students a balanced curriculum, reflecting strength across the arts, humanities, natural sciences, social sciences, and selected pre­ professional programs, one that enables its students and faculty to make insightful connections across disciplinary boundaries.

• A College that expects every student to develop increased appreciation of the value of difference in human society, in which each student progresses in his or her ability to interact successfully with persons of unfamiliar background, and that provides every graduate an entrée to the understanding necessary to function effectively not only as a citizen of our country but also as a citizen of our increasingly interconnected world.

• A College that expects responsible behavior of everyone within our community, that empowers and inspires all of our students to make the choices required of informed, responsible citizens throughout their lives, and that itself acts as a responsible corporate citizen.

• A College that values creativity and excellence in the research of our faculty, expects it in the collective decisions that determine the course of our institution, and insists on it in the work of our students.

• A College that increasingly is recognized for its role as a leading national liberal arts college in advancing the cause of engaged liberal learning within our

23 national community and world at large – both through the actions of our alumni and through the College’s own contribution to the advancement of knowledge.

This Plan establishes the framework to make the choices required to maintain our forward momentum and, above all, to realize our aspirations. We have identified four ambitious Goals, together with the Priority Initiatives intended to realize them. Some of these Initiatives incorporate work that is already underway; others will require new investments of time, effort, or funding and may entail the redirection of existing resources or the development of new ones. To bring our shared vision to reality – to make our own most creative educational thinking matter across our community – we call upon our tradition of audacity, invoke our powers of imagination, and prepare to focus our efforts as never before. One of our greatest assets is the passion for our mission that characterizes us at our best, that is shared by so many members of the extended Skidmore community, and that has led us in the past to our greatest achievements. We reaffirm our sense of shared purpose and commit our collective energy to the task of achieving new levels of excellence and recognition – taking us ever closer to realizing the bold promise that is Skidmore College.

Goal I – Student Engagement and Academic Achievement

We will challenge every Skidmore student to achieve academic excellence through full engagement with our rich and rigorous educational experience.

Priority Initiatives

Ø Increase student academic engagement in the first year. Ø Increase support for research and creative activity throughout faculty careers. Ø Enhance intellectual life for the faculty, students, and others who comprise the extended Skidmore community. Ø Strengthen information resources across the College. Ø Strengthen the natural sciences to increase the number of science majors and enhance the science literacy of all Skidmore students. Ø Increase our effectiveness in helping our graduates plan and prepare for their post­ Skidmore lives. Ø Take better advantage of the resources and capacity for innovation in the Office of the Dean of Special Programs (ODSP) to support the relevant initiatives identified under this Goal (and others, as appropriate).

Goal II – Intercultural and Global Understanding

We will challenge every Skidmore student to develop the intercultural understanding and global awareness necessary to thrive in the complex and increasingly interconnected world of the 21 st Century.

Priority Initiatives

Ø Increase global awareness across the community in order to sensitize all Skidmore students to a complex, diverse, and interdependent world. Ø Renew the conversation about diversity both within the Skidmore faculty and broadly across the campus community; building upon the work of the Middle States review

24 and other past efforts, establish clear educational objectives relating to this Goal and develop shared expertise in achieving them. Ø Enhance the diversity of our student population while providing the resources necessary to support all of our students in meeting our educational objectives. Ø Enhance the diversity of our faculty and other employee populations and enhance their skills that relate to achieving this Goal.

Goal III – Informed, Responsible Citizenship

We will prepare every Skidmore student to make the choices required of an informed, responsible citizen at home and in the world.

Priority Initiatives

Ø Foster pedagogical innovation relating to responsible citizenship; support campus initiatives that teach and exemplify this value. Ø Enhance residential learning. Ø Enhance the campus residential environment, with special attention to common spaces. Ø Increase support for athletics, fitness, and wellness. Ø Develop, broaden, and deepen the College’s connections to the local community; enhance our ability to function as a socially and environmentally responsible corporate citizen.

Goal IV – Independence and Resources

We will preserve Skidmore’s independence by developing the resources required to realize our aspirations.

Priority Initiatives

Ø Develop and enhance our key financial resources and our capacity to manage them. Ø Achieve and maintain competitive compensation for Skidmore faculty, staff, and administrators; enhance our ability to support their professional development. Ø Develop and enhance our capacity to manage our physical resources. Ø Develop and enhance those relationships essential to the Skidmore community. Ø Develop and enhance the “equity” in the Skidmore name.

A detailed discussion of each Goal and each Priority Initiative can be found in the body of Engaged Liberal Learning – The Plan for Skidmore College: 2005–2015. Readers are encouraged to review and respond to the Plan by accessing the strategic planning website at: http://www.skidmore.edu/planning/.

25 Ø Increase our effectiveness in helping our graduates plan and prepare for their post­Skidmore lives.

• Expand collaboration among our academic departments, career services office and alumni affairs to provide students with information, guidance, and support in exploring career options related to various majors. Encourage departments to share best practices related to such activities. 24

• Enhance our capacity to mentor students earlier in their careers regarding graduate and professional school options. Improve mentoring related to post­ graduate fellowship opportunities.

• Develop ways to engage alumni, parents, Trustees, and friends more effectively in career­related mentoring.

Ø Take better advantage of the resources and capacity for innovation in the Office of the Dean of Special Programs (ODSP) to support the relevant initiatives identified under this Goal (and others, as appropriate).

• Expand current efforts and develop new ways to facilitate greater cross­ fertilization and shared participation between activities and programs sponsored by Special Programs and those occurring during the traditional academic year. In particular, encourage more involvement in summer programs by traditional students in support of the effort to attract and retain stronger students and to enhance students’ sense of Skidmore as a place for intellectual growth and artistic innovation.

• Broaden the conversation about student engagement, assessment, citizenship and independent learning by considering ODSP experience with non­traditional students.

• Continue to foster collaboration between ODSP and relevant areas of the college in support of student and faculty engagement in ODSP residencies and events.

• Provide support for faculty members to take greater advantage of ODSP resources and programs for pedagogical innovation and experimentation. [$]

Goal II – Intercultural and Global Understanding

We will challenge every Skidmore student to develop the intercultural understanding and global awareness necessary to thrive in the complex and increasingly interconnected world of the 21 st Century.

It has perhaps never been more important for the world’s voices to be heard in America, never more important for the world’s ideas and dreams to be known and thought about and discussed, never more important for a global dialogue to be fostered. … The cold

24 A 2004­05 Mellon grant provides resources to assist such efforts.

26 war is over, but a stranger war has begun. Alienation has perhaps never been so widespread; all the more reason for getting together and seeing what bridges can be built.

– Salman Rushdie 25

It is arguable that the global situation changed in the 1980’s but the United States did not fully wake up to those changes until September 11, 2001. No longer is the world divided into two spheres of superpower influence. Although the United States retains a preponderance of military power in the Post­Cold­War era, multiple sources of economic influence, political power, and cultural energy compete for attention on the world stage and affect every aspect of our students’ lives – from the price they will pay for gasoline, cement, and steel to the types of jobs available to them in our economy to the quality of the global environment to the governmental policies that will be necessary to maintain not just their accustomed standard of living and personal freedom but the very possibility of a stable world order. If we want them to emerge as leaders and not just as observers, our students must understand this world and their place in it. Our job is to immerse them in that world. It is their future.

We need to do more to include global perspectives in our curriculum and foster global awareness throughout our community. Specifically, all Skidmore students need to understand that no one’s worldview is universal, that other people may have profoundly different perspectives and values, that world systems are interdependent, and that local choices have global impact. To become globally aware, students must study at least one foreign culture and language; understand the dynamics of international conflict, collaboration, and negotiation; learn to differentiate between phenomena that are area­specific and transnational; and develop the skills to identify and analyze complex international problems in their historical, technological, and ethical contexts. We will encourage more of our students to undertake transformative study abroad as part of their undergraduate education – with destinations such as Asia, India, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America becoming as common as Paris or London. For their part, 61% of the students entering in Fall 2003 indicated a desire to study abroad. We must enable them to do so, and we need to affirm these values by supporting our faculty as well, to enhance their own ability to lead such efforts.

This project begins with the composition of our student body itself. We seek to recreate Skidmore as a more diverse, globally conscious community better able to prepare all our students for the world each of them will encounter upon graduation. For any college, each year’s applicant pool marks a moment of transition and opportunity. As we look towards the Skidmore student population of the future, we must first of all assert that creative thought knows no boundaries. We want our strongest accepted candidates, whatever their backgrounds, to make Skidmore their first choice. We also need to be clear about our objectives with regard to increases in specific populations, such as students of color, international students, and so on. For example, creating an educational context capable of supporting meaningful discussions about the world situation, requires a student body that includes meaningful numbers of students whose backgrounds place them in direct touch with the perspectives of persons living in other countries. Accordingly, our long­term objectives must include not only a more diverse student body drawn from across the United States but also a substantial increase in the number of international students attending Skidmore. Furthermore, in attending to diversity, we need to think inclusively: considering factors such as socio­economic background, geographical distribution, and national origin, as well as race, gender, ethnicity, cultural heritage, sexual orientation, religious background, and the like.

25 Salman Rushdie, “The PEN and the Sword,” New York Times Book Review, April 17, 2005, p. 31.

27 In the first few years of this planning cycle, we will build upon our existing strengths to make the most significant differences with our foreseeable resources. In 1969 we created the Skidmore Higher Education Opportunity Program (HEOP). 26 This innovative initiative has gained national recognition for enabling students whose backgrounds would not have predicted academic success to gain access to higher education and, indeed, to realize significant achievement. That program later was extended to a broader population as the Academic Opportunity Program (AOP). In Fall 2004, we expanded this program by 40%. We will continue this progress by expanding and enhancing HEOP/AOP, take best advantage of existing relationships with known feeder schools in the United States, and work to extend those relationships to new schools.

As a complement to the preceding efforts, we will work to identify high schools with significant populations of first­generation American and immigrant students who can bring to Skidmore perspectives shaped by first­hand international experiences. We also will make selective use of existing contacts with individuals and schools in other countries and programs such as United World College where, with their help, our recruiting efforts can be most efficient and effective. As we progress over the term of this planning cycle, we will increase our efforts to attract more international students. We must match these efforts to change our student population by continuing to challenge ourselves to enhance the diversity of our faculty and staff. We have begun these efforts, though to date our success has been limited. This is an area in which we must aggressively employ both our own ideas and the best practices of other schools – raising our expectations to see not just increased efforts but increased results.

Though our concern with diversity begins with questions of access, it is ultimately not about numbers of students from specified backgrounds. Rather it is about understanding and achievement. We will succeed only to the extent that our graduates are accomplished at interacting with persons whose backgrounds differ from theirs – seeing difference as a positive feature and knowing how to forge relationships that span what once would have constituted divides within the human community. We must address the complex needs of an increasingly diverse student population, enabling all our students to attain high levels of achievement. We will continue our efforts to understand why the performance of certain student sub­populations fails to meet our expectations and, based on that enhanced understanding, we will increase our efforts to meet their needs more successfully. We need to become more creative in helping all of our students develop the interpersonal skills required to interact successfully not just within an increasingly diverse College population but even more importantly within our increasingly pluralistic world. As one vehicle for fostering such learning, we will develop new ways to engage our students beyond the classroom through collaborative research, service learning, internships, and volunteer activities

We have not yet reached consensus within the College about how to achieve these aims or even about their meaning. More specifically, there is no agreed upon articulation of the skills and competencies required by today’s graduates – much less a consensus on how to develop them systematically and measure our success in doing so. Important conversations regarding these issues have occurred in the past, and these matters represent one of three primary foci of the current Middle States review. We need to build on this good work and engage a vigorous conversation within our faculty and across our community to clarify our understanding of what our students need to know in this area and how we can best assist them in coming to know it. In short order, this conversation needs to result in action, with departments and programs taking the lead in enhancing courses and curricula to advance this initiative. These concerns also need to be reflected in the shared conversations prompted by visiting speakers, symposia, performances and other such public events that are vital to the life of any academic community.

26 Skidmore was a “founding institution” in this New York State program.

28 Priority Initiatives in Support of Goal II

Ø Increase global awareness across the community in order to sensitize all Skidmore students to a complex, diverse, and interdependent world.

• Under the leadership of the President, constitute a College­wide Intercultural and Global Understanding Task Force (replacing the Diversity Committee) co­ chaired by the President and a faculty member to provide leadership in achieving the objectives of this Goal. Primary among its responsibilities, the Task Force will be charged to advise the President in leading the College to define specific objectives and develop initiatives to achieve those outcomes in support of this Goal. Fund the Task Force using Presidential Discretionary Funds, enabling the Committee to provide internal grants to individuals and groups on campus who propose creative approaches to advance the objectives of this Goal.

• Increase our efforts through mentoring and programmatic changes to enable a higher percentage of our students to study abroad for at least one semester. Our initial goal will be to raise the percentage of Skidmore graduates who have had such experience to 60%. 27 Draw on the expertise and professional connections of our faculty to provide additional opportunities for students to study abroad. Find new ways to take advantage of the resources represented by students returning from study away to enrich the campus community.

• Provide additional encouragement and assistance to faculty members whose research and teaching have an international focus. Help them develop their expertise and assist their efforts to share their expertise with the larger Skidmore Community. [$]

• Support programs (e.g., the International Affairs major), curricula, courses, lectureships, and symposia that enhance global awareness on campus. Consider adding faculty positions in international areas not currently well represented in the curriculum (e.g., the Middle East). [$]

• Develop additional resources to support faculty efforts to create opportunities to take our students abroad for experiences that foster global awareness. [$]

• Reduce the obstacles to students going abroad from certain disciplines (e.g., the natural sciences). Allow all majors to offer study­abroad as an option, through more effective mentoring, help students choose relevant courses to prepare them effectively for study abroad.

• Increase our institutional capacity to take advantage of the experiences of students returning from study abroad (including London Program first­year students); develop new ways for such students to share their experiences with others (e.g., via web logs, Academic Festival, etc.).

27 Once this target is achieved it will be reevaluated to see if it is feasible to increase it.

29 Ø Renew the conversation about diversity both within the Skidmore faculty and broadly across the campus community; building upon the work of the Middle States review and other past efforts, establish clear educational objectives relating to this Goal and develop shared expertise in achieving them.

• Charge the Intercultural and Global Understanding Task Force to initiate and support this conversation.

• Provide additional resources to faculty members to meet the pedagogical needs of an increasingly diverse student population and take advantage of the opportunities represented by a more multicultural classroom environment. [$]

• Identify individuals who will have leadership and operational responsibility for guiding the implementation of this initiative. 28 [$]

Ø Enhance the diversity of our student population while providing the resources necessary to support all of our students in meeting our educational objectives.

• Expand and stabilize the resources of our remarkably successful HEOP/AOP programs, ensuring that these will continue regardless of the vicissitudes of external (primarily governmental) funding. We will target some of these new scholarships toward students with strong interest in science and mathematics. 29 [$]

• Support the initiative to increase diversity through improved collaboration between the relevant ODSP programs and Admissions, HEOP/AOP, and relevant departmental programs.

• Increase our endowed scholarship funds for students with economic need – paying special attention to students who will contribute most to the goals of educational excellence, rigor, and diversity. [$]

• Improve retention and achievement among traditionally under­represented student groups by improving academic support where it is needed.

• Strengthen programs that enhance campus climate and promote understanding among cultures, races, religions, and individuals, such as the Intercultural Center. [$]

• Increase the number of international students. An important but less immediate focus in the first five years of this planning cycle is to begin with existing contacts and target our admissions efforts to recruit additional foreign students who can afford to study at Skidmore and who – through their presence here – have the potential to attract additional students from their homelands. We also will pay special attention to children of recent immigrants to America. We will make targeted use of our limited need­based financial aid funds to attract students with very high academic potential or who come with assistance from other sources (e.g., United World College). [$]

28 One such position, a Director of International Education, is proposed in the report of the CEPP Subcommittee on Study Abroad and Diversity, Fall 2003. 29 A significant part of our strategy for achieving this objective is increasing our retention rate.

30 Ø Enhance the diversity of our faculty, staff, and administration and enhance their skills that relate to achieving this Goal.

• Increase our efforts to recruit and retain faculty members, administrators, and staff members who represent excellence in their field and who also will increase the diversity of our employee population. Where feasible, we will use flexible interdisciplinary faculty positions to increase the diversity of applicant pools. We will send clear signals that we are seeking faculty members with an interest and experience in working with previously under­served student populations.

• Using Fulbright and other international grants, bring accomplished international scholars to Skidmore to teach as visiting faculty members, in short­term residencies, etc.

• Consistently include programs to enhance the skills that relate to this Goal in the professional development of our faculty, staff, and administrators.

Goal III – Informed, Responsible Citizenship

We will prepare every Skidmore student to make the choices required of an informed, responsible citizen at home and in the world.

The crucial work of educating informed, responsible citizens decidedly begins at home on a campus that has moved beyond the concept of residential life to that of residential learning. To establish this context, we will forge stronger links between the campus built environment and our Mission, ensuring that the spaces we provide for our students to live and work are conducive to their intended purposes. We will scrutinize our systems and procedures to ensure that our institutional actions consistently reinforce our stated values (e.g., that our weekly class schedule does not encourage Thursday­night partying). We must overlook no opportunity to encourage our students to take full responsibility for their beliefs and to act responsibly during their time at Skidmore. Indeed, responsible student behavior is the foundation of academic achievement.

The concept of responsible behavior encompasses every dimension of college life: the intellectual climate on campus (as enhanced by visiting speakers, conferences, and performances, and as supported by more extended­hour study spaces on campus), the student culture in our residence halls, the social opportunities available to our students on campus (especially on evenings and weekends), our insistence that each of our students grapples with issues of local, national, and global concern throughout the curriculum, and our systematic promotion of lifelong habits of health – not just for those involved directly in intercollegiate athletics but for all of our students. In fact, it begins with the Admissions process itself. Developing the strongest possible student body includes seeking out those applicants best able to take advantage of our distinctive resources and most likely to make their own contributions to the College as Skidmore students and as alumni. Just as we seek students eager to engage energetically in intellectual inquiry across disciplines and ways of learning – students who value educational excellence and will challenge themselves to meet the standards and expectations of the faculty – we also seek students who will contribute to the sense of honor and responsibility of the campus, and eventually contribute to the communities they will join upon graduation.

31 32 “I, too, am Skidmore” Campaign The I, Too, Am Skidmore" campaign, inspired by campaigns at Harvard University, The University of Oxford, Cambridge University, Iowa, and NYU is dedicated to sharing the stories of people of color who have experienced micro-aggressions on college campuses due to the color of their skin. We invited students, staff, and faculty of color to write about their experiences as a person of color here at Skidmore College, micro-aggressions they have heard or personally encountered, and any other statements they wanted to make to the larger White Skidmore community on a whiteboard; and then take a picture with their statement. Our goal for this campaign was to empower the community of color here at Skidmore, and to provide more visibility for the community of color and the issues they face here on Skidmore's campus. We also focused on uniting our community of color and reassuring each other that we are not alone in our struggles, nor our frustrations. As people of color our voices and experiences are all too often silenced. Our presence here is questioned. This campaign centers our voices and sheds light on our myriad experiences on Skidmore's predominantly white campus. We are here. Our voices matter. We, too, are Skidmore. As members of the Skidmore community we believe it is time for Skidmore to begin seriously addressing issues of race on our campus. It is time for Skidmore to listen to the voices of its students and implement some significant changes in terms of the academic content available, services and resources available to students of color, and overall campus climate. 1. We demand that Skidmore invest in an Ethnic Studies Department that focuses on the transnational experiences, cultures, histories of colonized and exploited groups around the world including, but not limited to African American, Caribbean American, Arab American, Indigenous, Latinx, and Asian Pacific American courses. We demand that the courses in this department be taught by faculty of color. 2. We demand that Skidmore establishes required courses for all students focusing on racial micro-aggressions, race, and ethnicity. Again, we demand that Skidmore hire faculty of color to teach these courses. 3. We demand that Skidmore build a physical Multicultural Center here on campus that would offer services, support, and resources for students of color, including academic advising, study spaces, club spaces, mentors and counselors of color. 4. We demand that Skidmore hosts dialogues and workshops for all students, faculty, and staff focusing on micro-aggressions on Skidmore’s campus twice a semester. 5. We demand that Skidmore create a First Year Seminar and Pre-Orientation group focused on race relations and diversity. 6. We demand that the panel assembled to talk with prospective students of color during Discovery Tour more explicitly address campus climate and race relations. 7. We demand that Skidmore publicly respond to our demands in the form of a press release and in the Skidmore Scope newsletter. We are holding you accountable.

1

33 34 The Committee on Intercultural and Global Understanding Campus Climate Comprehensive Report and Recommendations Spring 2014

Introduction

Skidmore College has been working on issues of diversity and inclusion for many years. Throughout, we have tried to understand the ongoing concerns of community members who feel unwelcome and marginalized in an effort to address the causes of this marginalization. Skidmore has sponsored and participated in several important surveys and reports (listed below and included). The Committee on Intercultural and Global Understanding (CIGU) is making the following recommendations that have been drawn from the data in the results of these surveys and reports.

Surveys and Reports ❏ CIGU Exit Interviews: ❏ 2009-2010 CIGU Annual Report ❏ 2013 CIGU Exit Interviews [unredacted] ❏ 2007-2009 CIGU Assessment Document ❏ 2009 Consortium on High Achievement and Success (CHAS) survey ❏ 2013 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) survey ❏ 2013 Institutional Policy and Planning Committee (IPPC) Assessment Sub-Committee Report. ❏ 2013 Romney & Associates Student Climate Survey (Romney)

CIGU would like to acknowledge the progress the College has made since the present Strategic Plan was implemented. According to the NSSE data from 2013, compared to all other institutions participating in NSSE and without chosen comparative sub-group, more first-year Skidmore students self-report attending events where they were encouraged to examine their understanding of economic and social inequality, gender or sexual orientation, and religion.

Regarding access and financial aid, between 2008 and 2014 we have seen a 6.6% increase in the number of students receiving Skidmore grants, which contributes to increased socio-economic diversity. The population of international students has grown by 286% from 2008 to 2013; our current international student population represents 7% of our total enrollment. The press has recognized Skidmore for being welcoming to students of various sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions. Academic Affairs has provided incentives to faculty to develop courses in areas that support diversity and inclusion. The Faculty approved new minors in Intergroup Relations, Chinese and Japanese. We hired Romney

35 and Associates to conduct faculty seminars on best practices in the multicultural classroom and to design and run a student survey on campus climate issues. Skidmore also hosted at a CHAS conference on faculty recruitment and retention. Partnering with Academic Affairs, Romney Associates successfully helped to overhaul hiring practices for tenure-track faculty and the firm will offer a workshop on best practices for retention and mentoring of faculty, particularly of international faculty and faculty of color.

All this progress notwithstanding Skidmore still has a much to do to improve the social climate and make the college community more welcoming. CIGU has studied the surveys and reports listed above in order to identify the areas where students report negative experiences around issues of diversity and inclusion both in and outside the classroom. What follows are the more significant themes that appear in most or all of the instruments with recommendations on how to address them.

1. Students of Color (SOC) are more dissatisfied with Skidmore’s climate than White students. For example, SOC feel there are differential expectations placed on them based on race. Both White and SOC would recommend Skidmore to peers, but White students would do so more often. The data also shows that Black students and faculty feel less welcomed and less valued. The Romney survey showed that all students agree that campus climate is worse for Black and Latinos compared to other racial/ethnic identity groups. Recommendations: A. Introduce intercultural learning early and often in the student experience. B. Establish a Black or Africana Studies program. Skidmore is the only one of its peers that does not have such a program. C. Help all of our students develop the interpersonal skills required to interact successfully within an increasingly diverse College population. D. Increase the number of residence hall programs that focus on race and develop more Campus Life programming that addresses issues of class as it relates to diversity. E. Share these data widely, especially at student orientation.

2. All of our sources point to the classroom as a site where students, including White students, experience or witness insensitivity around issues of race and class . White students find the classroom the most welcoming, whereas Black, Hispanic and Multiracial students place the classroom in the top three least welcoming sites. CHAS data and college exit interviews reveal that students of color (SOC) at Skidmore perceive problems in the classroom around issues of diversity more than White students. Students report that some faculty in certain traditionally white or male dominated disciplines are less sensitive or unskilled in dealing with a diverse classroom. Students noted that the FYE program’s attempt to introduce discussion about diversity through the summer reading selection has had uneven success. Success is

36 largely dependent on the faculty members’ ability to teach inclusively and mitigate microaggressions that tend to occur among students. Students of color feel most comfortable in IGR, Sociology, and American Studies courses and say they can expect issues of diversity to arise and to be handled well in the classroom. Some students expressed pleasant surprise that certain professors in Religion and Chemistry were willing and able to handle issues of diversity well whenever they arose in class. Students have mixed perceptions of Management and Business; students say some faculty handle micro aggressions among students around race and socio-economic ineffectively. Students express frustration that certain MB faculty only recognize binary gender expression. Students of color (SOC) have experienced resistance from certain faculty members in Classics. When a student attempted to raise issues of race in a class, the student felt shut down and that the classroom atmosphere became uncomfortable. Students do report, however, that in some of the cases, the faculty members having difficulties dealing with issues of diversity in the classroom have tried to address them somewhat more adequately outside of class.

Recommendations: A. Assessment report-support for faculty/staff; changes to curriculum; hire faculty who have experience with inclusive teaching. B. Continue the Teaching for Inclusive Excellence Seminar for faculty, being sure to dedicate one of the three days to managing diversity conversations in the classroom. C. Have Opportunity Programs (OP) staff attend new faculty orientation and visit departments in order to explain the student demographics and needs, focusing on the fact that OP students are promising students with economic need. Data regarding OP successes should be more widely distributed. D. Provide feedback to offices, departments and personnel on campus where students state that they feel least welcomed or where they have identified problems. Provide training as needed to increase capacity for recognizing and addressing issues of insensitivity. E. Continue to provide incentives for course development around intercultural literacy and intercultural and global understanding, including courses with an international focus. and those that examine both global and cultural differences as defined by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic class, gender, nation, religion, and sexuality. F. Showcase student coursework/projects that successfully incorporated/embraced diversity and related topics/dialogues. G. Enrich course offering where promoting diversity competency is at the core of the syllabus. H. FYE should consult with CIGU about how to include topics about diversity in the program. I. Training should be provided for members of CAPT and Department Chairs on how to detect bias in student and peer evaluations of teaching.

37 3. While improvements have been made related to resourcing areas of the College focused on diversity initiatives, such as investment in Intergroup Relations (IGR) and the addition of a full-time, permanent staff member in the Office of Student Diversity Programs (OSDP), there needs to be more institutional support for diversity initiatives within and beyond these areas. It is also clear that students feel the need for more support for initiatives and events that cross affinity groups (Discovery, SOC not in OP).

Recommendations: A. Initiate program of intergroup dialogue in residence halls. B. Increase the number of residence halls programs that focus on these questions. C. Begin to systematically track student clubs and organizations’ activities and how they relate to matters of race, ethnicity, socioeconomic differences, gender and sexualities. Encourage deliberate planning of activities around these areas. D. Develop new ways to engage our students in questions of diversity and inclusion beyond the classroom, through collaborative research, service- and community-based learning, internships, study abroad, and volunteer activities. E. Encourage programming that allows for shared conversations prompted by visiting speakers, symposia, performances, and other public activities.

4. According to the data in NSSE, Skidmore’s scores are significantly lower than selected peers and other private Liberal Arts and Sciences colleges when respondents were asked if they had discussions with people of different social identities or political views from their own. Students express concern that on the campus they can feel marginalized based on social identity factors such as: politically identity, socio-economic status, first-generation status, international identity, access/disability status. According to CHAS and Romney data, International students and first-generation students express less satisfaction with the ways they experience the campus, with differences across racial/ethnic groups. White first-generation students express higher satisfaction than black first-generation students. Students with access/disability and mental health issues report that Skidmore is not welcoming.

Recommendations: A. Courses and dialogue trainings should be expanded to include social class, nationality, disabilities, and sexual orientation. B. Learning outside of the Classroom contributes to cross-cultural learning. C. Establish a program of intergroup dialogue in the residence halls. D. Create educational opportunities that build awareness and understanding about different social identities.

38 5. SOC and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) students experience Saratoga Springs as an unfriendly and/or hostile environment.

Recommendations: A. Continue to build town-gown relations by strengthening the collaborative group that has been meeting over the last two years. Develop a strategy for connecting with sites that students have named as either very positive or very problematic. (Romney) B. Engage in conversations with local business establishment where our students reported/experienced bias or unfair treatment; make sure people understand not all Skidmore students came from wealthy families. C. Let LGBTQ students know about Saratoga Pride.

39 40 Skidmore College Change in Employment Demographics Report 2006 - 2014

2006 American Native Black or Two or Overall Indian Hawaiian or % % White Minority Asian African Hispanic More Totals Alaskan Other Pacific White Minority American Race Native Islander Faculty 210 188 22 0 9 5 7 0 1 89.52% 10.48% 100.00% Staff 444 425 19 0 4 10 5 0 0 95.72% 4.28% 100.00% Union 173 159 14 0 3 8 3 0 0 91.91% 8.09% 100.00% Total 827 772 55 0 16 23 15 0 1 93.35% 6.65% 100.00% 2014 American Native Black or Two or Overall Indian Hawaiian or % % White Minority Asian African Hispanic More Totals Alaskan Other Pacific White Minority American Race Native Islander Faculty 214 177 37 0 21 2 9 0 5 82.71% 17.29% 100.00% Staff 462 425 37 0 8 17 9 1 2 91.99% 8.01% 100.00% Union 159 140 19 0 1 8 8 0 2 88.05% 11.95% 100.00% Total 835 742 93 0 30 27 26 1 9 88.86% 11.14% 100.00%

Those who left 2006 - 2014 American Native Black or Two or Overall Indian Hawaiian or % % White Minority Asian African Hispanic More Totals Alaskan Other Pacific White Minority American Race Native Islander Faculty 80 67 13 0 6 4 3 0 0 83.75% 16.25% 100.00% Staff 288 264 24 0 5 12 6 0 1 91.67% 8.33% 100.00% Union 116 107 9 0 0 6 3 0 0 92.24% 7.76% 100.00% Total 484 438 46 0 11 22 12 0 1 90.50% 9.50% 100.00%

Those who started in 2006 and are still here American Native Black or Two or Overall Indian Hawaiian or % % White Minority Asian African Hispanic More Totals Alaskan Other Pacific White Minority American Race Native Islander Faculty 4 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 75.00% 25.00% 100.00% Staff 30 25 5 0 2 3 0 0 0 83.33% 16.67% 100.00% Union 8 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 87.50% 12.50% 100.00% Total 42 35 7 0 3 4 0 0 0 83.33% 16.67% 100.00%

10/21/2014 These figures do not include any temporary employees

41 42

Executive Summary Student Climate Study Skidmore College

PROJECT SUMMARY

• In spring 2013 Romney Associates conducted a student climate study focused on all students’ experience of diversity and inclusion. Of particular interest was the experience of students of color, as well as students with disabilities. • The 2013 Student Climate Study was part of a multi-year assessment and consultation project focusing on diversity and inclusion at Skidmore. The purpose of the study was to understand how different identity groups experience the climate at Skidmore. The ultimate goal is to use the data to support the College’s agenda of being “a respectful and inclusive community” providing a positive context for all students.

BACKGROUND

• The multi-year diversity assessment and consultation project at the College provided a background for the study. • The Compton’s incident and other incidents, some which have been reported to the Bias Response Team, provided an important impetus for the study. • Data from exit interviews with graduating students of color and bias reports revealed that students of color experience difficulties at Skidmore. There was a need to get additional data to help understand the experience of students of color.

PROCESS • Several student climate studies from other colleges were reviewed. • Survey construction was developed by the consultants with CIGU’s input about their key questions and with modifications based on CIGU’s feedback. • Survey went live on April 16th and several gifts were offered to students to provide an incentive to participate. • There were 2,689 students during the 2012-2013 academic year. 832 students (31% of the student body) participated in the survey. 174 participants (21%) identified as students of color. 50% identified as female; 19% identified as male.

1

43 2

FINDINGS • Welcoming: o Students believe age, gender identity and sexual orientation are most welcomed at Skidmore. o Students of all identities agree that SES is a characteristic toward which SC is least inclusive and welcoming. o Students of color also see race and ethnicity as a characteristic toward which SC is least inclusive and welcoming. o White students, Asian/Asian American, and multiracial students identified political views as a characteristic toward which SC is least inclusive and welcoming. o The library and dining facilities received high ratings from students as places they feel welcomed. o Half of respondents name classes as a place they feel most welcomed, but the percentage of students who rate them most highly is highest for White students and then decreases along the racial spectrum. o There is a similar trend for feeling welcomed in resident halls. o Students across all groups feel least welcomed in the Williamson Sports Center. o Classes were among the top three least welcoming places for Black, Hispanic and Multiracial students. o Residence halls were rated as the second least welcoming place on campus by Latino students. o Whites don’t feel welcomed as diversity programs. o Black students report a significantly lover score for being welcomed than to White students. o Among students of color, three key variables (valued by professors, welcomed based on race, believing professors are concerned about your welfare) play an important role in predicting whether students of color feel welcomed. o Asian Students rate the writing center as one of the least welcoming places on campus

Discrimination & Microaggressions:

o Most students report never or seldom having experienced microaggressions. o 16% of Black students report frequent microaggressions. o Asians and Asian American students report experiencing microaggressions because of their accent o All groups, except White students, report some experience of microaggressions abased on SES. o Source of most microaggressions is students. Second source is Saratoga area businesses, especially for Blacks and Latinos.

44 3

Climate:

o All participants agree that campus climate I worse for Blacks and Latinos compared to other racial/ethnic identity groups. o Perceptions do not match up. There is a significant difference between how White students see the environment for Black and Latino students and the ways that students see it; White students tend to see the campus climate as more respectful toward Black students that Black students find it to be. The same is true of Latino students o Black students report being significantly less satisfied with their experience at SC

Saratoga Community Climate

o When reflecting on race, ethnicity and SES, Saratoga is seen as unwelcoming by many student respondents. o Students feel most welcomed on the main strip of North Broadway and in the Wilton Mall. o Students feel least welcomed in the “upper-scale” stores and restaurants.

Recommendations

• The Dean of Students and Academic Affairs Dean/VP for Academic Affairs should share data from the climate studies and should develop plans for improving campus climate in their respective areas as well as collaborate on improvements that relate to both areas.

• Opportunities for more inclusive conversations on campus should be a priority. Many students noted the benefits of IGR and the results indicate that more dialogue is needed among students to help them to understand how experiences differ at Skidmore based on race and socio- economic status. Courses and dialogue trainings should expand to include social class, disabilities, and sexual orientation if they have not yet done so. These expanded dialogues will touch more people and deepen the dialogue, building on what is already being done in IGR classes, conferences and other trainings.

• Continue the Teaching for Inclusive Excellence Seminar for faculty, being sure to dedicate one of the three days to managing diversity conversations in the classroom.

• If not already being done, OP staff should attend new faculty orientation each year and also make visits to departments in order to explain that their students are not all students of color. OP students are promising students whose entry is dependent on economic need, not poor performance. In particular the successes of the OP program should be highlighted – on the whole OP students have a better graduation rate and better GPA than the overall student body.

• Begin development of a Black or Africana Studies Department. Black students report feeling less welcomed and less valued, and Black faculty have been difficult to retain. Skidmore is the only

45 4

one of its peers that does not have an Africana Studies. Having a Black Studies or Africans Studies Department would help.

• Initiate a program of intergroup dialogue in the resident halls.

• Share these data widely, especially at orientation of students.

• Follow up with the sites and personnel in campus sites and offices where students state they feel least welcome or where they have identified problems.

• Continue to build town/gown relations by strengthening the collaborative group that has been meeting over the last year or two and also by developing a strategy for connecting to sites that students have named as either very positive or very problematic.

• Consider whether any focus groups are desirable or necessary in order to clarify the data here presented.

• Repeat this study in two to three years to assess the progress of efforts made in the interim.

46 5

Report on the Skidmore College Student Climate Study Spring 2013

Introduction

The 2013 Student Climate Study at Skidmore is part of a long-term assessment and consultation project focusing on diversity and inclusion at Skidmore College that was initiated in January 2011 because of what was described as “a very challenging few years for the college.”

In December 2010 there was an incident in which four Black male students were arrested in downtown Saratoga Springs on charges stemming from an altercation that erupted at the Compton’s Diner. What came to be known as the Compton’s incident caused significant strife on campus and in the Saratoga Springs community and surrounding towns. There were racial and ethnic differences about how the incident was viewed and how it should have been responded to and there were concerns that justice was being differently defined by different identity groups.

Of particular concern to many was the experience of the students of color who were charged in the Compton’s incident and the impact of this on students of color specifically and more broadly on all students at Skidmore. Although there were also some positive occurrences with regard to diversity and inclusion during that time, (Skidmore had recently brought in one of the most diverse classes for example), there were other concerns as well. CHAS data and college exit interviews revealed that students of color at Skidmore perceived problems in the classroom around diversity and suggested that the faculty was not as sensitive or as skilled in dealing with diversity as they would like. The President reported that despite good work in increasing the enrollment of students of color, the college had not been as successful with recruiting and retaining faculty of color. Faculty of color was approximately 13% and there was a pattern of lack of success with hiring and retention.

Romney Associates, Inc. was contracted by the College and began development work with the Cabinet in January 2012 which lasted until spring 2012. The work focused on Leadership for Inclusive Excellence. Five all-day workshops were conducted focusing on cultural competence, anti-bias perspectives, conflict resolution, teambuilding and multicultural conflict resolution. This work was followed by on-gong consultation to the President, Academic Affairs, Student Affairs and several other programs and divisions at the College.

In March 2012 Barbara Krause, Assistant to the President, strongly suggested that a climate assessment of both faculty and staff be conducted. The President agreed and emphasized that they should be focused around diversity and inclusion. Beau Breslin, Vice President for Academic Affairs, championed the Faculty Climate Study as well and in July 2012 Romney Associates launched a climate study for faculty focused on diversity and inclusion with particular emphasis on the climate for faculty of color due to concerns expressed above. The data from the study would add to data from a climate study focused on women faculty previously done and a student climate study to come.

47 6

In spring 2013, Rochelle Calhoun, Dean of Students secured funding to conduct a climate study for students and with the help of CIGU survey construction began. This report details the results of that study, discusses the results in the context of information generated from the wider consultation, and makes recommendations designed to improve campus climate for all students.

Note: There is much confusion and overlap in the way that racial/ethnic identities are named and perceived in the United States. There is personal self-identification, which may be the same or may differ, from how others would identify a person based on appearance. There are several places where this is of particular concern. Hispanics may be of any race and may identify in varying and multiple ways. Big Papi, David Ortiz, of the Boston Red Sox, for example, identifies as both Hispanic and Black. How is or would he be identified by others if he did not speak? Multiracial students have a myriad of backgrounds and appearances and yet they are important to study, especially because they are the fastest growing racial/ethnic group in the United States. Asian and Asian America students may be indistinguishable to others, but may have a keen sense of identity that doesn’t conform to how they are viewed. International students may be of any race and any of the groups named above may be international. As one Hispanic student wrote on her survey, “You asked me if I was from the US or international. I am both. I am a dual citizen and that status is very important for me.” For these reasons, race and ethnic data must always be interpreted cautiously and with a good sense of the context they are in.

Literature on Climate and Climate Studies

Since the 1960s climate has been used as a variable in organizational research to measure organizational environments. Because it provides information about specific areas within an organization, which is useful for study as well as for targeting interventions and improvements, climate is a useful construct for both researchers and practitioners (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2000).

In the present study, diversity climate has been conceptualized according to Hurtado and colleagues’ (1999, 2008) framework. Their framework includes four dimensions that the researchers assert must be understood in order to have a complete picture of diversity climate. These four dimensions are the institutional history of inclusion/exclusion, the structural climate, the psychological climate, and the behavioral dimension. Institutional history of inclusion/exclusion is conceptualized as how welcoming the campus has been to traditionally underrepresented groups of students. In this dimension “Success often depends on an institution’s initial response to the entrance of diverse students and its early establishment of programs to accommodate them” (Hurtado et al., 1999, p. 22). The structural dimension refers to the physical representation of members of different groups on campus. The psychological climate captures individuals’ perceptions and attitudes about discrimination and conflict on campus, the institution’s commitment and support of diversity, and how people feel they are treated differently due to background characteristics. Finally, the behavioral dimension captures information about the frequency and quality of interactions between different members of different groups on campus. The following graphic illustrates the researchers understanding of the four dimensions in the institutional context.

48 7

Figure: Framework for Diversity Climate (Hurtado et al., 2008)

Previous climate research has demonstrated that climate has implications for student and faculty outcomes and that climate is perceived differently depending on group membership. In a study of general campus climate, Reid and Radhakrishnan (2003) found that students of racial minorities had more negative perceptions of all three climates that were studied: general, racial, and academic. Moreover, for students of color, their perceptions of the academic climate seemed to be most related to their overall satisfaction with the institution. For example, “students’ experiences with racism, instructors, and advisors were among the best predictors of their perception of the [general campus climate]” (2003, p. 271). Perception does not just vary based on race, but also other aspects of background and experience.

The Skidmore climate study was designed to focus on two of the four dimensions – the psychological and the behavioral dimensions. This decision was based on the need for a survey short enough for students to respond to and also because there are other data at the College that reveal information about the structural climate and the institutional history of inclusion/exclusion. Cognizant of the findings of Reid and Radhakrishnan cited above, we also asked students to identify other factors of their background, most notably social class.

Method

Romney Associates used three approaches to the development of the Skidmore Climate Survey. We reviewed climate studies of other colleges and universities (Carlton College, Commonwealth College at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Texas A&M) available on line and we asked CIGU to also review some of these studies and to share with us their interests and needs. The concerns and question emerging from Student Affairs centered on: the climate for students of color and the topics of disability, sexuality, gender identity and expression, and international students. Student Affairs staff was also interested in the climate related to town/gown relationships, students sense of belonging and being valued, issues of class/first generation experiences, how the behavior of peers affects the experiences of

49 8

students from diverse backgrounds and whether the college displays an understanding of its own sociological and historical relationship to diversity and inclusivity for all groups.

We reviewed documents sent to us related to students’ needs and concerns. These included: the Unreported Bias Incidents Spring 2013, the Alliance Reader: Reflections on our Racial Campus Climate and a document on emerging themes related to issues of student climate at Skidmore. The Romney Associates team then developed a preliminary survey draft and sent it to Student Affairs for review. Given the multiplicity of interests and questions, the survey had to be substantially pared down to a length that would maximize completion by students taking the survey. Themes to be explored in the survey were: students feelings of being welcomed, students feelings of being valued, students experiences of discrimination, exclusion and microaggressions, overall campus climate, and town/gown relations, and the decision was made to look at these themes across the social identities of ability, domestic/international status, gender, race/ethnicity, religion, sexuality, and social class. Because of the history of problems of race and ethnic (Compton’s, recruitment, retention and promotion of faculty of color, bias reports, etc.) we focused particularly on the climate for students of color. Our ultimate goal was to determine the campus climate for diversity among students at Skidmore College and to examine whether there were intergroup differences in the perceptions of the climate for diversity.

Procedure

All students at Skidmore College were invited to complete the climate survey. The Dean of Students sent a link to the online questionnaire via email to all students at Skidmore College. On accessing the link, students were told that the survey would take approximately 25-30 minutes to complete. They were told that their participation was voluntary and that they could skip questions without consequence. They were also advised that the survey responses would only be seen by Romney Associates staff and only aggregate data would be presented to the college with no personal identifying information shared. Participants were also informed that they could enter a drawing to win one of three prizes - IPad, a Kindle Fire or a $25 gift certificate to Plum Dandy’s.

Participants

At the time of the study, 2,689 students were enrolled at the College. Of these, 61% were female and 39% were male. The survey had 832 participants, which represents 31% of the student body. Of the students who reported demographic information, 417 identified as female, 156 identified as male, and 4 identified as transgender. The sample consisted of 392 White/Caucasians, 64 Multiracial students, 40 Asian/Asian Americans, 31 Black/African Americans, 29 Hispanic/Latino(a)s, 9 South Asians, and 1 Pacific Islander. Table 1 provides information about the sample’s race and gender, and Table 2 provides information about participants’ socio-economic status.

50 9

TABLE 1 (Frequencies marked) Female Male Transgender Black/African American 21 10 0 Hispanic/Latino(a) 19 10 0 Multiracial 49 14 1 Asian American/Asian 29 11 0 White/Caucasian 282 107 3 South Asian 8 1 0 Pacific Islander 1 0 0 Identity Not Listed 5 1 0 Missing Racial Data 3 2 0

As the table indicates the majority of students responding were White, as are the majority of students at the College.

Table 2 Which social class identity best describes you (p. 26) (% in each category) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Low-Income/Working-Class 74.2 71.4 20.3 25.0 8.2 Middle Class 19.4 10.7 40.6 52.5 35.5 Upper-Middle Class 6.5 17.9 39.1 22.5 55.8 Not Listed 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .5

As this table indicates most White students are upper middle class while a sizeable majority of Black and Hispanic students report being low-income. Asians/Asian American and Multiracial students fall in the middle.

Findings

Feeling Welcomed

Feeling welcomed on campus is an important part of belonging. Table 3, which follows, shows how welcoming students perceive Skidmore to be based on various characteristics.

51 10

TABLE 3 How Welcoming SC is based on the Listed Categories (p. 5) (Mean: min = 1; max = 6)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 5.03 5.18 4.78 4.88 5.03 Country of origin/ 4.48 4.39 4.56 4.77 5.01 international students Gender identity 4.77 4.66 4.89 5.00 5.04 Immigrant status 4.32 4.18 4.44 4.62 4.72 Learning disability 4.10 3.96 4.21 4.50 4.42 Physical disability 4.06 3.52 3.76 4.31 4.09 Political views 4.03 3.71 3.17 4.00 3.34 Psychological disability 4.20 3.93 4.13 4.44 4.41 Race/ethnicity 3.45 3.68 3.97 4.50 4.59 Religion/spiritual affiliation 4.03 3.93 4.21 4.30 4.34 Sexual orientation 4.48 4.89 5.03 4.92 5.26 Socioeconomic status 3.48 3.68 3.67 4.27 4.07 First-generation college 3.97 4.04 4.10 4.60 4.53 student

Note: In many of this and many of the graphs to follow, the top 3 are highlighted in YELLOW for each group. At times those over 50% marked in BLUE.

Students across all racial/ethnic identity groups give the highest ratings to age, gender identity and sexual orientation, making clear that these are characteristics that they believe Skidmore welcomes.

Table 3 is closely connected to Table 4 and here again age, gender identity and sexual orientation receive high rankings as characteristics that are welcomed at the College.

52 11

TABLE 4 Characteristics of “Diversity” that SC is MOST inclusive and welcoming toward (p. 5) (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 58.1 62.1 48.4 32.5 34.2 Country of origin/ 38.7 27.6 45.3 50.0 51.3 international students Gender identity 54.8 51.7 71.9 50.0 64.8 Immigrant status 12.9 13.8 7.8 22.5 13.5 Learning disability 9.7 10.3 14.1 17.5 16.1 Physical disability 12.9 13.8 10.9 2.5 7.9 Political views 35.5 20.7 3.1 15.0 9.2 Psychological disability 16.1 17.2 20.3 15.0 16.6 Race/ethnicity 3.2 24.1 39.1 42.5 38.0 Religion/spiritual affiliation 12.9 27.6 35.9 27.5 23.5 Sexual orientation 58.1 72.4 90.6 70.0 79.8 Socioeconomic status 16.1 24.1 29.7 15.0 21.2 First-generation college 19.4 13.8 12.5 25.0 17.6 student

Table 5 asks students to identify the diversity characteristics Skidmore is least welcoming of.

TABLE 5 Characteristics of “Diversity” that SC is LEAST inclusive and welcoming toward (p. 6) (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 6.5 3.4 12.5 10.0 8.9 Country of origin/ 22.6 20.7 9.4 15.0 8.2 international students Gender identity 12.9 6.9 3.1 5.0 7.7 Immigrant status 22.6 48.3 15.6 17.5 11.5 Learning disability 6.5 17.2 20.3 10.0 16.3 Physical disability 22.6 24.1 32.8 15.0 26.8 Political views 19.4 31.0 60.9 40.0 54.6 Psychological disability 6.5 10.3 14.1 17.5 14.5 Race/ethnicity 71.0 58.6 37.5 30.0 23.7 Religion/spiritual affiliation 16.1 13.8 15.6 15.0 26.0 Sexual orientation 19.4 3.4 0.0 5.0 3.6 Socioeconomic status 54.8 48.3 43.8 22.5 42.3 First-generation college 16.1 24.1 18.8 5.0 12.5 student

53 12

The findings in Table 5 again reveal some agreement across groups. All groups agree that SES is a characteristic toward which SC is least inclusive and welcoming. Race and ethnicity are rated by all students of color as one of the three characteristics that Skidmore is least inclusive and welcoming toward. White students, Asian/Asian American students, and multiracial students state that Skidmore is least inclusive and welcoming of different political views.

TABLE 6 Characteristics of “Diversity” that SC is MOST/LEAST inclusive and welcoming toward (p. 5-6) (% marked)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 58.1/6.5 62.1/3.4 48.4/12.5 32.5/10.0 34.2/8.9 Country of origin/ 38.7/22.6 27.6/20.7 45.3/9.4 50.0/15.0 51.3/8.2 international students Gender identity 54.8/12.9 51.7/6.9 71.9/3.1 50.0/5.0 64.8/7.7 Immigrant status 12.9/22.6 13.8/48.3 7.8/15.6 22.5/17.5 13.5/11.5 Learning disability 9.7/6.5 10.3/17.2 14.1/20.3 17.5/10.0 16.1/16.3 Physical disability 12.9/22.6 13.8/24.1 10.9/32.8 2.5/15.0 7.9/26.8 Political views 35.5/19.4 20.7/31.0 3.1/60.9 15.0/40.0 9.2/54.6 Psychological disability 16.1/6.5 17.2/10.3 20.3/14.1 15.0/17.5 16.6/14.5 Race/ethnicity 3.2/71.0 24.1/58.6 39.1/37.5 42.5/30.0 38.0/23.7 Religion/spiritual affiliation 12.9/16.1 27.6/13.8 35.9/15.6 27.5/15.0 23.5/26.0 Sexual orientation 58.1/19.4 72.4/3.4 90.6/0.0 70.0/5.0 79.8/3.6 Socioeconomic status 16.1/54.8 24.1/48.3 29.7/43.8 15.0/22.5 21.2/42.3 First-generation college 19.4/16.1 13.8/24.1 12.5/18.8 25.0/5.0 17.6/12.5 student

*Note. Table 6 is a combination of Tables 4 and 5. Looking at both percentages at once can be helpful

Having seen what characteristics students see as most and least welcome on campus, we turn to the question of location.

Specifically, which places on campus do students feel MOST welcomed?1

The table below displays the percentage of students who reported feeling MOST welcomed at the various locations listed on campus in column one. In addition to these percentages, some students opted to write in additional areas on campus where they reported feeling most welcomed. The open- ended responses we received from students are listed below the following table.

1 Please see p. 3 on survey for question reference.

54 13

TABLE 7 (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Residence Halls 45.2 48.3 51.6 55.0 60.7 Dining Facilities 51.6 48.3 56.3 67.5 62.5 Williamson Sports Center 45.2 41.4 31.3 32.5 37.2 Classes 54.8 48.3 78.1 70.0 86.2 Counseling Center 25.8 27.6 28.1 20.0 28.1 Disabilities Services 9.7 6.9 1.6 2.5 5.1 Health Services 67.7 44.8 45.3 45.0 49.5 Career Development Center 45.2 13.8 29.7 35.0 19.1 Registrar’s Office 29.0 27.6 23.4 30.0 19.9 Library 64.5 55.2 70.3 70.0 68.9 Writing Center 45.2 31.0 31.3 45.0 23.2 Academic Services 61.3 31.0 29.7 47.5 26.8 Human Resources 9.7 10.3 6.3 5.0 3.8 Opportunity Programs 54.8 48.3 15.6 25.0 3.8 Diversity Programs 41.9 37.9 12.5 20.0 7.4 Leadership Activities Office 25.8 3.4 10.9 5.0 8.4 Religious and Spiritual Life 16.1 3.4 7.8 12.5 10.5 Community Service Programs 12.9 3.4 6.3 10.0 3.6

Top Open-Ended Responses for where Students Feel MOST Welcomed

Frequency

The Theater/Theater Dept. 7 Art Studios/Building 4 Professor's Office 4 Clubs 3 Off Campus Study and Exchanges 3 Social Work Dept. 3 Center for Sex and Gender Relations 2 Riding Center 2

As we can see in the chart, the library is named most frequently as a place where students of most groups feel most welcome. Black and Hispanic students rank the Opportity Programs as very welcoming but few White, multiracial or Asian and Asian American students rank it as very welcoming. Dining facilities and classes are named with great frequency by all students. While classes are not in the top three most welcome places for Black students, more than half of respondents say they feel most welcomed there. With the exception of health services and the opportunity programs, in those places which are named most welcoming (e.g., residence halls and classes), the percentage of students who rate them most highly is highest for Whites and then decreases for each group along the continuum from White to Black.

55 14

Specifically, which places on campus do students feel LEAST welcomed?2

The table below displays the percentage of students who reported feeling LEAST welcomed at the various locations listed on campus in column one. In addition to these percentages, some students opted to write in additional areas on campus where they reported feeling least welcomed. The open- ended responses we received from students are listed below this table.

TABLE 8 (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Residence Halls 6.5 17.2 9.4 0.0 9.2 Dining Facilities 12.9 10.3 10.9 10.0 7.9 Williamson Sports Center 16.1 17.2 17.2 12.5 15.1 Classes 29.0 20.7 12.5 5.0 3.8 Counseling Center 9.7 10.3 3.1 2.5 5.4 Disabilities Services 0.0 0.0 9.4 2.5 3.8 Health Services 6.5 6.9 12.5 2.5 7.7 Career Development Center 3.2 3.4 1.6 0.0 11.5 Registrar’s Office 0.0 10.3 21.9 10.0 22.4 Library 3.2 3.4 1.6 2.5 3.3 Writing Center 6.5 3.4 4.7 10.0 5.9 Academic Services 0.0 3.4 4.7 0.0 4.3 Human Resources 0.0 3.4 3.1 5.0 6.1 Opportunity Programs 6.5 0.0 10.9 7.5 8.7 Diversity Programs 3.2 10.3 7.8 0.0 13.5 Leadership Activities Office 0.0 13.8 4.7 2.5 5.6 Religious and Spiritual Life 6.5 13.8 9.4 0.0 6.6 Community Service Programs 3.2 0.0 4.7 5.0 4.3

Top Open-Ended Responses for where Students Feel LEAST Welcomed

Frequency

The Card Office 9 Financial Aid Office 6 Office of Residential Life 6 Bursar's Office 2 Office of Campus Safety/Security 2 SGA 2 SC Social Life 2

2 Please see p. 4 on survey for question reference.

56 15

The Williamson Sports Center was named as one of the top three least welcoming places on campus by all identity groups. Classes were among the top three least welcoming places for Black, Hispanic and Multiracial students. Hispanics named the Residence Halls as the second least welcoming place on campuses. It is also noteworthy that a number of students took the time to write in the Card Office as one of the least welcoming. The Registrar’s office was named as unwelcoming by all racial/identity groups other than Black students. And Asian and Asian Americans were the only group to name the Writing Center as one of the least welcoming spaces.

Table 9 is a composite table representing a combination of Tables 7 and 8, providing an opportunity to look at both percentages at once.

TABLE 9 Which places on campus you feel MOST/LEAST welcome3 (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Residence Halls 45.2/6.5 48.3/17.2 51.6/9.4 55.0/0.0 60.7/9.2 Dining Facilities 51.6/12.9 48.3/10.3 56.3/10.9 67.5/10.0 62.5/7.9 Williamson Sports Center 45.2/16.1 41.4/17.2 31.3/17.2 32.5/12.5 37.2/15.1 Classes 54.8/29.0 48.3/20.7 78.1/12.5 70.0/5.0 86.2/3.8 Counseling Center 25.8/9.7 27.6/10.3 28.1/3.1 20.0/2.5 28.1/5.4 Disabilities Services 9.7/0.0 6.9/0.0 1.6/9.4 2.5/2.5 5.1/3.8 Health Services 67.7/6.5 44.8/6.9 45.3/12.5 45.0/2.5 49.5/7.7 Career Development Center 45.2/3.2 13.8/3.4 29.7/1.6 35.0/0.0 19.1/11.5 Registrar’s Office 29.0/0.0 27.6/10.3 23.4/21.9 30.0/10.0 19.9/22.4 Library 64.5/3.2 55.2/3.4 70.3/1.6 70.0/2.5 68.9/3.3 Writing Center 45.2/6.5 31.0/3.4 31.3/4.7 45.0/10.0 23.2/5.9 Academic Services 61.3/0.0 31.0/3.4 29.7/4.7 47.5/0.0 26.8/4.3 Human Resources 9.7/0.0 10.3/3.4 6.3/3.1 5.0/5.0 3.8/6.1 Opportunity Programs 54.8/6.5 48.3/0.0 15.6/10.9 25.0/7.5 3.8/8.7 Diversity Programs 41.9/3.2 37.9/10.3 12.5/7.8 20.0/0.0 7.4/13.5 Leadership Activities Office 25.8/0.0 3.4/13.8 10.9/4.7 5.0/2.5 8.4/5.6 Religious and Spiritual Life 16.1/6.5 3.4/13.8 7.8/9.4 12.5/0.0 10.5/6.6 Community Service Programs 12.9/3.2 3.4/0.0 6.3/4.7 10.0/5.0 3.6/4.3

A few figures in this composite table are worth noting. The library is reported to be a very welcoming place for students across ethnic/racial identities. Classes are rated as least welcoming by a fifth of Hispanic students and a quarter of Black students. Very few White students cite diversity programs as a place they feel welcome and over 10% say they feel least welcome in these settings. Looking at feeling of welcoming across the responses, the following questions can be raised.

3 Please see pp. 3-4 on survey for question references.

57 16

Do students’ responses to the question, “I feel as though I am a welcomed member of the SC Community” differ among the various racial/ethnic backgrounds?4

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling welcomed at SC differed based on their reported racial/ethnic background. This feeling welcomed variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling welcomed. A significant mean difference was found among the various racial/ethnic categories, F(4, 550) = 7.12, p < .001. A post hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate pairwise differences among the means. An SPSS Bonferroni post hoc was used to control for Type I error across the multiple testing. Specifically, Black/African American students reported a significantly lower mean score for feeling welcomed (M = 3.29, SD =1.04) compared to White/Caucasian students (M = 4.08, SD =.93) and Asian/Asian American students (M = 3.95, SD =.85).

There was a trend in the data indicating that Hispanic/Latino (a) students (M = 3.62, SD =.94) also felt less welcomed at SC compared to White/Caucasian students, although it was not statistically significant. There were no statistically significant differences between the reported mean score of Multiracial students (M = 3.78, SD =1.00) and any other group. Therefore, these data suggest that the reported mean score for feeling welcomed is lowest for Black/African American students at SC, followed by Hispanics/Latino(a)s. Student Rangs for Feeling Welcomed

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 Rang for Feeling 2 Welcomed 1.5 1 0.5 0 Asian American Black White Hispanic MulRacial

Given that Black students have a significantly lower mean score (M = 3.29, SD = 1.04) for feeling welcomed, with 4 indicated agreement with feeling welcomed and 5 indicated strong agreement with the statement and the data for Hispanic students trending toward significance in the same direction, we might ask:

Which variables seem to influence if students of color feel as though they are welcomed members of the SC community?

4Please see p. 2 on survey for question reference.

58 17

A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted on data from 172 students of color. This analysis revealed two key variables that play an important role in predicting if students of color feel as though they are welcomed members of the SC community F(2, 170) = 31.36, p < .001, adjusted R2= .261. Placed in the order of effect that they had on students’ ratings of feeling welcomed, these three variables were: Variable Standardized Beta Coefficient

Variable 1: I feel valued by professors .392 Variable 2: I feel welcomed based on race .234

Using these two varibles we can predict 26.1% of the variance of students’ responses to the statement “I feel as though I am a welcomed member of the SC community”. From a statistical point of view this is substantial. According to the survey data, as students’ ratings went up on these variables, they reported feeling more welcomed at SC. Though we cannot infer causality based on these data, we can infer that professors play an important role in helping students of color to feel welcomed at SC.

Is there a significant mean difference in the way students’ rate feeling valued by professors based on their reported racial/ethnic background?5 A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling valued by professors differed based on their reported racial/ethnic background. This variable “feeling valued by professors” was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling valued.

The analysis did not reveal any significant mean differences among the students’ responses F(4, 550) = 1.77, p = .133. Even though Black/African American students reported a slightly lower mean (M = 4.00, SD = .89) compared to Hispanic/Latino(a) students (M = 4.03, SD = .91), Multiracial students (M = 4.08, SD = .95), Asian/Asian American students (M = 4.25, SD = .81), and White/Caucasian students (M = 4.26, SD = .76) these mean differences were not statistically significant. Therefore, we can infer that students do not significantly differ in their responses for how valued by their professors they reported feeling based on their racial/ethnic background.

Student Rangs for Feeling Valued by Professors

4.6 4.4 4.2 4 3.8 3.6 3.4 Asia n Mul Student Rangs for Blac Whi Hisp Am Ra Feeling Valued by k te anic eric cial Professors an Student Rangs for Feeling Valued by 4.25 4 4.26 4.03 4.08 Professors

5 Please see p. 9 on survey for question reference.

59 18

Discrimination & Microaggressions

Here we report the data that speaks to experiences of discrimination and microaggressions, specifically whether students have experienced them, based on what identity they think they experienced them and who perpetrated these. TABLE 10 Experienced microaggressions at SC (p. 16) (% marked in each category)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Frequently 16.1 6.9 6.3 5.0 5.4 Occasionally 9.7 20.7 23.4 20.0 24.7 Seldom 45.2 34.5 29.7 25.0 32.9 Never 29.0 37.9 37.5 50.0 36.2

It is noteworthy that most students across all ethnic and racial groups report never or seldom having experienced microaggressions on campus. Still 16% of Black students report frequent microaggressions and all other identity groups report that they occasionally experience microaggressions in a range between 20%-25%.

Why do these microaggressions occur and what are the sources? Tables 11 and 12 provide some answers.

TABLE 11 Believe that microaggressions that occurred to me were based on: (p. 16) (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 3.2 3.4 7.8 2.5 4.8 Country of origin 12.9 6.9 9.4 12.5 6.4 Educational background 22.6 10.3 17.2 12.5 9.4 English language accent 9.7 13.8 12.5 20.0 9.2 Ethnicity 41.9 34.5 29.7 32.5 18.1 Gender identity 6.5 6.9 12.5 12.5 22.2 Immigrant status 6.5 3.4 3.1 7.5 2.0 Learning disability 6.5 10.3 3.1 5.0 5.6 Psychological disability 3.2 6.9 6.3 2.5 10.2 Physical disability 0.0 6.9 3.1 0.0 5.6 Political views 9.7 10.3 20.3 10.0 24.7 Race 54.8 34.5 32.8 42.5 23.7 Religious views 6.5 6.9 15.6 15.0 18.1 Sexual orientation 6.5 3.4 17.2 10.0 21.4 Socioeconomic status 35.5 37.9 32.8 12.5 26.5

60 19

16% of Black students report frequently experiencing microaggressions and they report this as the result of race, ethnicity and socio-economic status. In fact, all students who say they have experienced microaggressions name race as a frequent cause. Socioeconomic status and ethnicity (except for Whites) closely follows. Asians and Asian American students also report experiencing microaggressions because of their accent.

TABLE 12 Who was the source of the microaggressions that occurred? (p. 17) (% marked) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Academic administrator 6.5 0.0 3.1 2.5 1.5 Administrator 16.1 0.0 9.4 0.0 2.0 Campus media 12.9 0.0 9.4 7.5 5.1 Campus security 12.9 0.0 7.8 2.5 3.1 Campus visitor 12.9 0.0 7.8 10.0 3.8 Person or business in 25.8 20.7 12.5 7.5 8.2 Saratoga area Department chair 3.2 0.0 1.6 0.0 .5 Source unknown 6.5 10.3 1.6 7.5 6.4 Professor 12.9 10.3 18.8 5.0 9.2 Staff member 12.9 3.4 4.7 0.0 3.1 Another student 61.3 41.4 53.1 45.0 54.8

The source of the highest number of microaggressions is reported as from students, with persons or businesses in the Saratoga area following second, especially for Blacks and Latinos.

Campus Climate

In addition to discussing feelings of welcome and value, students were also asked to rate the climate at Skidmore.

TABLE 13 How would you rate climate on campus for students in the listed categories (p. 7) (Mean: min = 1; max = 6)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Black/African American 3.65 3.45 3.95 4.50 4.57 Asian/Asian American 4.55 4.14 4.39 4.68 4.78 White/ Caucasian 5.10 5.41 5.34 5.23 5.41 Hispanic/Latino(a) 3.87 3.66 4.06 4.53 4.61 Native Amer/ Amer Indian 4.17 3.79 4.18 4.62 4.74 Pacific Islander 4.10 4.07 4.30 4.59 4.80

61 20

South Asian 4.13 4.14 4.19 4.49 4.73 Multiracial 4.48 4.00 4.53 4.72 4.90

Living with disabilities 2.97 2.66 2.89 3.67 3.22 From low-income 3.52 3.17 3.38 3.45 3.65 backgrounds First-generation college 1.97 3.24 3.39 3.33 3.11 Lesbian, gay, bisexual 4.17 4.36 4.80 4.64 4.88 Transgender 2.48 2.76 3.48 3.33 4.03 Christian 3.50 3.55 3.73 3.77 4.10 Jewish 3.77 4.03 4.67 4.25 5.04 Muslim 2.30 3.21 2.86 3.10 3.05 International 3.90 3.69 4.36 4.45 4.64

Black students see climate as better for every ethnic/racial group other than their own. Hispanics see climate similarly. Everyone agrees that campus climate is worse for Blacks and Hispanics compared to other racial/ethnic identity groups. When looking at variables other than race and ethnicity, climate is seen by Blacks as lowest as or worse for first generation students than other characteristics. These findings lead us to ask the following questions:

Is there a significant mean difference in the way Black/African American students view climate on campus for themselves compared to how White/Caucasian students view climate on campus for Black/African American Students?6

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare Black/African Americans students’ ratings of climate on campus for themselves to White/Caucasian students’ ratings of climate for Black/African American students. The question on climate for Black/African American students was measured using a 6-point Likert scale, with a high score of 6 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of the climate on campus being respectful toward Black/African American students.

The results of this analysis were significant t(413) = 4.26, p < .001. The test revealed that White/Caucasian students (M = 4.57, SD =1.13) tended to view the climate on campus as being significantly more respectful toward Black/African American students than how Black/African American students (M = 3.65, SD = 1.52) perceived the climate to be. This indicates that White/Caucasian students generally view the campus climate as being more respectful toward Black/African American students than it actually is. Thus, the perceptions of White/Caucasian students do not match the perceptions of how Black/African American students experience climate at SC.

6 Please see p. 7 on survey for question reference.

62 21

Student Percepons of Climate on Campus for Black Students

5

4

3 Climate Percepon for 2 Black Students

1

0 Black Student Rang White Student Rang

Is there a significant mean difference in the way Hispanic/Latino(a) students view climate on campus for themselves compared to how White/Caucasian students view climate on campus for Hispanic/Latino(a) Students?7

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare Hispanic/Latino(a) students’ ratings of climate on campus for themselves to White/Caucasian students’ ratings of climate for Hispanic/Latino(a) students. The question on climate for Hispanic/Latino(a) students was measured using a 6-point Likert scale, with a high score of 6 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of the climate on campus being respectful toward Hispanic/Latino(a) students.

The results of this analysis were significant t(408) = 4.42, p < .001. The test revealed that White/Caucasian students (M = 4.61, SD =1.09) tended to view the climate on campus as being significantly more respectful toward Hispanic/Latino(a) students than how Hispanic/Latino(a) (M = 3.66, SD = 1.42) students perceived the climate to be. This indicates that White/Caucasian students generally view the campus climate as being more respectful toward Hispanic/Latino(a) students than it actually is. Thus, the perceptions of White/Caucasian students do not match the perceptions of how Hispanic/Latino(a) students experience climate at SC.

7 Please see p. 7 on survey for question reference.

63 22

Climate Percepon for Hispanic Students

5

4

3 Climate Percepon for 2 Hispanic Students

1

0 Hispanic Student Rang White Student Rang

Is there a significant mean difference in the way that Black/African American students’ rate the climate on campus for first-generation college students compared to White/Caucasian students?8

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to evaluate the students’ ratings of climate on campus for first-generation college students at SC between Black/African American students and White/Caucasian students. The question on climate for first-generation students was measured using a 6-point Likert scale, with a high score of 6 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of the climate being respectful toward first-generation college students. The test revealed significant mean differences t(416) = 2.48, p = .013 such that Black/African American students (M = 1.97, SD = 2.16) tended to rate the climate on campus for first-generation college students as being less respectful than White/Caucasian students (M = 3.11. SD = 2.45).

Climate Percepon for First- Generaon Students

3.5 3 2.5 2 Climate Percepon for 1.5 First-Generaon Students 1 0.5 0 Black Student Rang White Student Rang

8 Please see p. 7 on survey for question reference.

64 23

So, Blacks and Hispanics rate the college climate lower and White students don’t recognize this. If we ask the question differently, if we ask how satisfied students are, will we see the same trend in responses? Perhaps the view about overall campus climate can be summed up in the responses to the question,

Do students’ responses to the question, “I am satisfied with my experience at SC” differ among the various racial/ethnic backgrounds?9

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling satisfied with their experience at SC differed based on their reported racial/ethnic background. This feeling satisfied variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling satisfied. A significant mean difference was found among the various racial categories F(4, 549) = 6.11, p < .001. A post hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate pairwise differences among the means. An SPSS Games Howell post hoc was used to control for Type I error across the multiple testing of means with heterogeneous variances. Specifically, Black/African American students reported a significantly lower mean score for feeling satisfied (M = 3.23, SD =1.20) compared to White/Caucasian students (M = 4.08, SD =.95) and Asian/Asian American students (M = 4.03, SD =.73).

There was no significant difference in the means among any other racial demographic, such as Hispanic/Latino(a) students (M = 3.93, SD =1.07) and Multiracial students (M = 3.81, SD =1.08). Therefore, these data suggest that the reported mean score for feeling satisfied with one’s experience as SC is lowest for Black/African American students. This finding supports the findings noted above.

Rang for Feeling Sasified with SC Experience

4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 Rang for Feeling 2 Sasified with SC 1.5 Experience 1 0.5 0 Asian American Black White Hispanic MulRacial

9 Please see p. 2 on survey for question reference.

65 24

Saratoga Community Climate

TABLE 14 How welcoming is Saratoga based on: (p. 21) (Mean: min = 1; max = 6) Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Age 4.40 4.41 4.24 4.83 4.51 Country of origin 3.96 3.83 3.98 4.15 4.39 Ethnicity 3.13 3.24 3.80 4.22 4.05 Gender identity 3.97 4.03 3.82 4.43 3.86 Immigrant status 3.75 3.81 3.78 4.24 3.99 Learning disability 4.04 3.96 4.17 4.55 4.32 Physical disability 4.00 3.78 4.00 4.58 4.20 Political views 3.68 4.00 4.08 4.40 4.11 Psychological disability 4.04 3.89 4.16 4.46 4.36 Race 2.97 3.24 3.61 4.15 3.88 Religious/spiritual status 3.64 4.18 4.25 4.51 4.47 Sexual orientation 3.59 3.82 3.79 4.38 3.84 Socioeconomic status 2.90 3.50 3.55 4.13 3.89

TABLE 15 Have you ever been harassed off campus while in Saratoga Springs? (p. 22) (% “yes” and “no”)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White All American or Asian No 87.1 67.9 77.8 92.1 83.9 83.7 Yes 12.9 32.1 22.2 7.9 16.1 16.3

Sixteen percent of students report being harassed while in Saratoga Springs.

Where do students feel MOST welcomed while off-campus in Saratoga Springs? The qualitative data revealed that students tended to feel most welcomed on the main strip of North Broadway and the Wilton Mall. In addition, many students commented that they also felt welcomed at many of the “casual restaurants and coffee shops” downtown. Specifically, students listed Plum Dandy’s, Uncommon Grounds, Saratoga Coffee Traders, and Starbucks.

Where do students feel LEAST welcomed while off-campus in Saratoga Springs?

The qualitative data revealed that students tended to feel least welcomed in the “upper-scale” stores and restaurants in Saratoga Springs. In addition, many students stated that they felt least welcomed in restaurants that had bars and the “bar scene” more generally downtown. Students specifically stated that they felt least welcomed at the bar scene on Caroline Street. In addition, a few students stated that

66 25

there were certain stores in the Wilton Mall that made them feel least welcomed, though they did not list which stores these were.

One student wrote, “The farther I get from the main strip of North Broadway in a north or south direction, the less safe and welcomed I feel.”

Another, who is Black and female, wrote, “Not only does the climate at Skidmore need to improve but so does the climate in Saratoga Springs. We live in Saratoga Springs, so it would be nice to be accepted and included in the city that we live in. Skidmore and the Saratoga community should work more together to help students feel more comfortable.”

Student Suggestions

Finally, we end this report with students suggestions made in the open ended questions at the end of the survey about how to improve the climate at Skidmore. Specifically students responded to the following:

How do students think SC could be more inclusive and welcoming toward diverse groups on campus?

This qualitative question had nearly 300 responses and there were some clear themes emerging in the data about how students felt SC could be more inclusive and welcoming toward diverse groups on campus. The themes below are discussed in order of frequency on the survey. That is, the themes with the most student endorsement are listed first.

Racial Diversity. One prominent theme that emerged was student comments regarding racial diversity. Approximately 100 students commented on this topic. About one-third of these comments were students requesting that the College recognize that hosting segregated events (e.g., diversity dinners, tours) does not promote diversity. These comments came from both students of color and White/Caucasian students. Some student comments on this topic included:

“I feel that sometimes having race/ethnic events is kind of excluding students of color from the other students. It makes you more aware of how different you are, and how you are kind of fulfilling the SC needs in diversity.” Source: Female, Multiracial

“Students of color should be less separated from the White students. For example, there should be one accepted students' event rather than one for students of color and one for White students.” Source: Female, Black/African American

“SC makes a good effort to create positive race relations, however, although they are well intentioned, they are extremely segregated! Non-White people have talks about how to fix the racial issues, but White people are never included! Why do we segregate our diversity efforts? Why can't we all come together to talk about and try to fix these types of issues? Don't call together all mixed-race students, call together everyone who wants to see change on campus!” Source: Female, Multiracial

“Do not have a dinner for students of other races called "Student of color Dinner." Something is incredibly off putting about that. Why not hold a dinner for everyone on campus instead of

67 26

singling out races and separating them from the rest of the campus? That doesn't sound very inclusive to me.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

Of particular interest, about half of the student comments requesting that the College recognize that hosting segregated events does not promote diversity were comments specific to the Discovery Tour. These comments came from both students of color as well as White/Caucasian students. Some student comments on this topic included:

“While I see the value in programs like the Discovery Tour as well as International Student Orientation, I think they cause those groups to isolate themselves from everyone else (mainly because they become friends from that bonding experience). Targeting groups as underrepresented and dedicating tours and the like to them only perpetuates exclusion.” Source: Female, Multiracial

“In terms of race/ethnicity, I think things like the Discovery Tour are good, but they come with the issue of "all the ethnic kids start off knowing each other" so that there's some separation between White and Non-White.” Source: Male, Multiracial

“Get rid of the Discovery Tour and stop emailing only minority students about certain dinners or events. You are creating segregation at SC by doing this.” Source: Female, Hispanic/Latina

“Discovery tour essentially creates a group of people who enter SC already being friends that are all of color. This program perpetuates a racial division between the students because when groups have already been formed it is intimidating to talk to them. Creating friend groups on Discovery Tour means that they will not be inclusive of White students.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

In addition to commenting on segregated events, a number of students commented that they wished that the College hosted more dialogues that encouraged students from all races and cultures to participate and learn more about diversity issues. Some student comments on this topic included:

“[The College should host] more talks about diversity and classes on diversity.” Source: Female, Black/African American

“There must be actions made to ensure that conversations are being had and that students are engaging in issues of diversity. As of now, most of that action is being fueled by the students themselves and partially with faculty.” Source: Female, Asian/Asian American

“There needs to be more programs that acknowledge that there is a difference in socioeconomic standings and race. There has been a step forward with the racial diversity courses that can be taken but that is not enough. There needs to be more, maybe more activities that focus around this. Maybe concert events that focus on just being exposed to each other’s culture.” Source: Female, Hispanic/Latina

“Involve this passion for "diversity" among faculty. Require students and faculty to engage in a productive IGR type race and gender discussion. Change not only the people on campus but the culture is what matters.” Source: Female, Black/African American

68 27

“Have more group projects within classes so that students actually speak to one another and have the opportunity to engage with students who are not like them.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“Educate the community, especially professors, about what the OP program is.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“….more importantly, the SC administration needs to support programs, classes, and faculty that TEACH issues of systemic racism/classism/diversity. In my sophomore year, the college let go two extremely important professors (Jon Zibbell of Anthropology and Winston Grady-Willis of American Studies) who were leaders and teachers on race and social justice issues. You wonder why some students feel alienated and others ignorant? It's because the administration isn't actively supporting the growth of education in these fundamental and important areas but is instead letting the most groundbreaking professors leave and then wondering why our community is so torn and alienating! I want more attention toward social justice issues within the curriculum of each department. It seems that the SC mission supports this, yet fails to actually follow through by stressing the importance of these issues and educating students as soon as they enter the SC community." Source: Female, White/Caucasian

Political Diversity. Approximately 90 students commented on their desire to see the college less politically one-sided. Many students felt that the college environment was unwelcoming toward conservative viewpoints. These remarks came from both students who identified as politically conservative and liberal. There is a desire among students to have an opportunity to discuss political issues in a more open way. Quantitative data reveal that these concerns are largely concerns of White, Multiracial and Asian students as the comments below suggest.

The theme of Political Diversity included comments from students stating that the general culture of SC was unwelcoming citing both student resistance and faculty resistance as the source of the unwelcoming environment. Some student comments on this topic included:

“I have just felt a general intolerance among SC students of those who have differing political and religious views than the majority of students (Liberal Left and agnostic or atheist, respectively). I don't know if there is anything that the administration can do about this, because it seems to be a general attitude of the students.” Source: Female, Multiracial

“I do feel very uncomfortable with the way most of the student population reacts to someone who is even slightly conservative. While I am very liberal, I feel as though it is important to listen to all different views and respect everyone's individual opinions and beliefs. It would be beneficial to carry over some of our accepting morals into the political realm. I'm not sure exactly how to do this, but I think it's an issue that needs to be brought to light in order to make everyone on our campus feel more comfortable.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“Political views - well, I am more on the liberal side, but I have definitely heard my conservative or Republican friends feel their voices are not heard and feel attacked or cut off because of their views. It's important for professors to discuss not only liberal topics and viewpoints, but conservative ones as well.” Source: Transgender, Multiracial

69 28

“I think a lot of these problems have to do with the general SC culture among students. BUT things like intolerance towards more conservative beliefs, whether political or religious, is perpetuated by professors unprofessionally conveying distaste for conservative political/religious views during class and making students who have those views feel unwelcome and uncomfortable in that classroom.” Source: Female, Asian/Asian American

“I think that attitudes towards the less wealthy, the religious, and people with right-wing political ideas are occasionally appalling on our campus. People are extremely intolerant of differing political or religious beliefs, and blind to socioeconomic differences. I'm not sure what there is we can do about this, other than attempting to open up a dialogue.” Source: Male, White/Caucasian

“I think that professors need to be more careful disseminating their own liberal biases in classes. It's not necessarily that it's not a shared opinion, but I feel that students should not ONLY be challenged and asked to defend their political orientation if they're conservative.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“I feel this campus is dogmatically liberal. While one is free to express their gender and sexual orientation freely, non-mainstream political or religion identities, such as conservatives, republicans, Catholics, and those of us raised to have what are often insulting called "social constructs" are marginalized.” Source: Male, South Asian

Socioeconomic Diversity. Nearly 50 students commented on the need to improve awareness about socioeconomic diversity at SC. Although some comments were more general in stating that the College could increase diversity by “admitting a larger range of socioeconomic backgrounds”, other comments focused on the need for students and professors to stop making assumptions about class on campus. Other students focused their comments on sharing situations where they felt marginalized due to class issues, and yet others still mentioned ways in which the College could help them to feel more welcomed. The majority of these comments came from self-identified low-income White/Caucasian students. Student comments on this topic included.

“I will self-identify as a Caucasian female from a low socioeconomic background. At SC, White privilege is a serious problem. Most members of the SC community assume that the White students are fairly wealthy whereas the students of color are from poorer backgrounds. THEY NEED TO STOP WITH THESE ASSUMPTIONS. I feel uncomfortable when people assume that because I am White that I have a lot of money.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“I feel like people don't talk about socioeconomic diversity enough. I occasionally feel stigmatized as someone who comes from a working-class background. I feel like people often assume that everyone around them is as wealthy as they are, when in reality that is simply not true.” Source: Male, White/Caucasian

“I think it is important for professors to recognize that some students work two jobs and don’t have the same kind of time or resources or energy as others due to their SES. In addition to that, I think it's important for professors to know that not all students have smart phones and can only check email when they get home from work for the night.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

70 29

“I am poor. Just going to say it. I am. One event really stands out. It was in class and we were discussing the ramifications of eating at McDonalds and what it indicates. People were saying that meals at McDonalds were about $5. Having been there quite often recently, I mentioned that, “no, prices have gone up and you cannot get a meal for less than about $7.” She stared at me for a second, and then I could literally see the gears click into place as she realized what it meant that I knew EXACTLY how much a meal costs. The look she gave me was somewhere between pity and disgust, and it hurt like hell.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“Instead of trying to hide the problem of socioeconomic divide on campus by people not talking about it, make everyone aware of the different classes on campus. We're not all of the same class and we should all be able to bond over the differences in each class.” Source: Unknown

“SC itself must know which students are first-generation college students and the students with the highest financial need. I feel like even if the school just checked in every once and a while to see how these students are doing, and if there is anything they can do on an individual level. I would honestly feel a lot more supported if I knew that the college cared about my experience here and recognized and acknowledged that it is very different from the majority of people who attend this school.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“That SC is NOT need-blind in its acceptance process is indicative of the socioeconomic status tension that exists on this campus. To create a more inclusive community PLEASE consider moving SC towards need-blind acceptances to create an environment in which every student is here purely based on merit--not on money.” Source: Female, Multiracial

“In terms of reactions to my socioeconomic background, there have been instances where people with money can't understand that, yes, I have to work because, yes, I need to make money because, yes, that is an issue.” Source: Woman, Asian/Asian American

Religious/Spiritual Diversity. Approximately 40 students commented on their experiences with religion on campus. These comments represented students desire to have a more inclusive campus for individuals who wished to practice their religion and their desire to not feel marginalized by students and faculty for their religious beliefs. Comments regarding religion came from both students of color as well as White students and they represented a number of varied religious and spiritual beliefs. Student comments on this issue included:

“… I'm a devout Christian who grew up in a significantly lower class than most students at SC. Overall, people here are rather accepting of various religious beliefs, but there are many here, self-proclaimed atheists, who are very disrespectful to the religious students here at SC. These people act out of ignorance, and in no way do I blame the school for that. I do however believe SC should respect religious holidays of many religions, not just Judaism.” Source: Male, White/Caucasian

“…Arabs and Muslims feel like they don't belong here.” Source: Female, South Asian

“People talk down about religion and specifically, Catholicism a lot. It is kind of a joke to treat Catholicism with no respect.” Source: Woman, Multiracial

71 30

“It would also help if rather than only recognizing Jewish holidays such as Yom Kippur they also recognized Christian holidays like Good Friday the school would be more welcoming to various beliefs.” Source: Male, White/Caucasian

“I have faced a handful of experiences in which people have said awful things about my religion [Judaism].” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

“I am Catholic/Christian, which I believe is very under represented at SC. When I mention my religion or believing in God I am often scoffed at by the innumerable atheists at SC. This makes me feel uncomfortable practicing my religion at all at SC, or talking about it.” Source: Unknown

“[SC should provide] more forums for interfaith dialogue - minority religions better represented with means for Muslims to pray.” Source: Female, South Asian

“Sometimes professors make comments that make it sound like other people who think differently are ignorant, especially when it comes to religion. I think it is fine for professors to believe whatever they want and express their beliefs, but not in a way that puts other beliefs down and hurts/insults students. [Note. Participant identified as being Christian].” Source: Female, Middle-Eastern

“As a religion major, I am often astounded by the lack of respect shown by professors for the idea of religion in general. I've seen it dismissed many times as something that humans simply made up to calm anxieties about the unknown. Fine, believe whatever you want to believe, but that could be incredibly insulting to someone who bases their life around religious practice. That view is also useful in small doses, but incredibly problematic overall to the study of religion. It's rude, and quite frankly, childish for a professor to say.” Source: Male, White/Caucasian

Disability Awareness. Approximately 40 students commented on the Colleges need to improve awareness and accessibility for students with physical and learning disabilities, and mental health issues. In regards to Physical Disabilities students commented:

“A lot of the wheelchair buttons around campus do not work. I realized this when I sustained an injury and needed to use them. I also fear that with the construction of the new buildings on campus, it may be difficult for a student who has a physical disability to access them during construction or without ramps and only stair-access etc. I think SC needs to make sure they are welcoming and accommodating students with physical disabilities.” Source: Transgender, White/Caucasian

“I think campus could be much more welcoming to students with physical disabilities. The majority of buildings on campus require using stairs to enter or exit, and the elevators are all outdated, a bit creepy, and poorly kept (they all smell and are dirty). More accessibility would be nice.” Source: Unknown

“SC could be structurally more inclusive by adding elements that would benefit people who are disabled. SC is NOT handicap friendly.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

72 31

“SC is not very handicapped accessible; I think it's ridiculous that people in wheelchairs if parked in the Jonsson Tower lot have to go through Jonsson Tower (which requires access)/through the kitchens (which aren't safe) to access the main campus. This is not the only location where this is apparent--SC needs more ramps/easier access to its buildings.” Source: Female, Multiracial

In regards to Learning Disabilities students commented:

“I believe that the support offered to students with learning and developmental disabilities is severely lacking. … [The] majority of classes are designed in a way that is extremely stifling because of my ADHD symptoms. Whenever, I discuss my disability with a professor it always backlashes and I feel targeted and extremely vulnerable. It is as though the professor does not have a true understanding of the challenges students with ADHD face and how to support them in the process. I recommend workshops and lectures about learning disabilities and especially ADHD. It hurts so much when I hear professors and admin say that accommodations like, a grace-period for arrival, extended-times on assignments students, or excused absences for visiting the psychologists in times of crisis, gives ADHD an advantage (all of the aforementioned, I strongly believe are questions of ACCESS). There is an extreme lack in understanding the experience and challenges of people with ADHD school-wide and nation-wide. I think that the school needs to triple its staff and resource support for students with disabilities, help to form peer-groups and networks, and deeply engage with possibilities of extending accommodations and ending stigma and able-ism from the classroom and school environment.” Source: Male, Black/African American

“I recently learned about SC’s policy of absolutely never granting extra time on homework/ out- of-class assignments for students with learning disabilities such as ADHD. I do not have ADHD but a friend of mine does, and I have watched how this policy has negatively affected her. She is rarely able to finish her assignments on time, due in part to her ADHD, but also (I believe) more in part to the lack of confidence that this policy has created within her. Because she now believes that she is not a good enough student by SC's standards to get her homework done on time because of her disability. She has had to withdraw from one of her favorite classes this semester because of this, and it has caused me to feel outraged and saddened by the inflexibility of SC's policy toward students with disabilities.” Source: Female, Multiracial

In regards to Mental Health Issues students commented:

“My main point regards students that deal with mental health issues and difficulties. The counseling center has a limit of only 8 sessions per student, which is far too low for effective treatment of serious or mild problems. I speak from personal experience.” Source: Male, Hispanic, Latino

“…I have also had friends who experienced a lot of judgment and stigmatization associated with mental illnesses, and a minimally supportive counseling center.” Source: Unknown “I have personally been wary of attending the counseling center, even though I wanted to attend counseling, because of previous poor and irresponsible experiences I and others have had with it.” Source: Female, White/Caucasian

73 32

Summary and Discussion

The data are robust and informative and there are many items to be discussed and further investigated. This summary notes some of the key issues.

In many ways the data mirrors information we have gleaned from other sources. There are large differences in perceptions of Skidmore and in experience at the college based on identity differences in race, ethnicity and socio-economic status. This supports what we have learned throughout our time consulting at Skidmore, as well as what we heard in the summary of emerging themes, the data on bias incidence and the concerns described in the exit interviews of students of color. The data here are similar to the faculty climate study in that the data reveal that people of color view and experience the campus quite differently. The data also seem to indicate that sexual orientation, gender and gender identity/expression do not significantly interfere with students experience at Skidmore. The environment is seen as welcoming of these identities.

This report adds clear data about how students perceive these differences and the data help us to see the sources of some of the differences and difficulties. Race/ethnicity and social class are revealed to be important determinants of differences in experience. In many cases, the data require further investigation. For example, Asian and Asian Americans were the only group to name the Writing Center as one of the least welcoming spaces. Is this because of their language or accent or differences in writing style? Are Writing Center Staff in need of greater competency in working with these students or is some bias operative?

The data also clarify the large socio-economic discrepancies that exist in the differing racial and ethnic groups. Because White students state they are predominantly upper-middle class (55.8%) and Black and Hispanic students state they are predominantly low-income/working class (74.2% and 71.4% respectively,) what Skidmore sees and deals with as students’ race/ethnicity may be predominantly a social class issue. When most of White students are in upper income categories and most of the Black and Latino students are in low income categories, it is difficult to know which is more salient and/or more determinant of individuals’ experiences. It is also important to keep the social class issue in the forefront because it is the issue that often gets obfuscated due to an emphasis on race-based analysis. One African student’s written comments stand out here. “My grades have strongly been affected by my low-income. I worry more on how I will ever be financially stable that worrying about my studies. Lack of laptop has contributed to my poor performance. I have sought the best help I could from various offices but none of them has been able to give me any support apart from generally assuming that I can afford it. My parents’ pay slips are in my file in my financial aid office and I feel embarrassed to refer to this whenever I go seeking help.”

Of particular import is the role that professors play in the experience of students, as noted on page 17of this report, and as supported by the findings from the multiple linear regression analysis we conducted. Classes were named as one of the top three least welcoming places by Black, Hispanic, and multiracial students and as the least welcoming space for Black and Hispanic students. When we look at the sources of microaggressions on campus, students are largely the source. When we look at students’ perceptions of how skilled professors are in handling classroom discussions on difficult topics around identity and diversity there is clear need for improvement. Interventions aimed at maximizing the faculty’s ability to facilitate these discussions and interrupt bias and microaggressions in the classroom would be very valuable.

74 33

Special programs for students of color are controversial as the data reported here reveal. This is a national and historical controversy. At this time we know of no good data that suggests whether these programs should be continued or discontinued, though we are currently researching this topic.

Although there is variation according to who is rating, welcoming of first generation college students, students with disabilities, and students with differing political views get the lowest rankings when students rate how welcoming SC is to a list of characteristics other than race and ethnicity. This suggests there is work to improve attitudes about these groups and climate for these groups.

The high numbers of reported microaggressions from persons or businesses in the Saratoga area is also important to note, suggesting work needs to be done on town/gown relations.

In many places we can see students’ ratings but we don’t know why students rated things the way they did. We can only ask questions of the data. For example, Hispanic students are the only group that the residents halls as unwelcoming. We don’t know why this is, but we can raise questions. Are they speaking Spanish in the dorms and, if so, is this unwelcomed? We are hopeful that as this report is read, many questions will be asked as this will inform next steps.

Recommendations

Following are recommendations stemming from the findings of this report and are designed to improve campus climate for students.

1. The Dean of Students and Academic Affairs Dean/VP for Academic Affairs should share data from the climate studies and should develop plans for improving campus climate in their respective areas as well as collaborate on improvements that relate to both areas.

2. Opportunities for more inclusive conversations on campus should be a priority. Many students noted the benefits of IGR and the results indicate that more dialogue is needed among students to help them to understand how experiences differ at Skidmore based on race and socio- economic status. Courses and dialogue trainings should expand to include social class, disabilities, and sexual orientation if they have not yet done so. These expanded dialogues will touch more people and deepen the dialogue, building on what is already being done in IGR classes, conferences and other trainings.

3. Continue the Teaching for Inclusive Excellence Seminar for faculty, being sure to dedicate one of the three days to managing diversity conversations in the classroom.

4. If not already being done, OP staff should attend new faculty orientation each year and also make visits to departments in order to explain that their students are not all students of color. OP students are promising students whose entry is dependent on economic need, not poor performance. In particular the successes of the OP program should be highlighted – on the whole OP students have a better graduation rate and better GPA than the overall student body.

75 34

5. Begin development of a Black or Africana Studies Department. Black students report feeling less welcomed and less valued, and Black faculty have been difficult to retain. Skidmore is the only one of its peers that does not have an Africana Studies. Having a Black Studies or Africans Studies Department would help.

6. Initiate a program of intergroup dialogue in the residence halls.

7. Share these data widely, especially at orientation of students.

8. Follow up with the sites and personnel in campus sites and offices where students state they feel least welcome or where they have identified problems.

9. Continue to build town/gown relations by strengthening the collaborative group that has been meeting over the last year or two and also by developing a strategy for connecting to sites that students have named as either very positive or very problematic.

10. Consider whether any focus groups are desirable or necessary in order to clarify the data here presented.

11. Repeat this study in two to three years to assess the progress of efforts made in the interim.

Thank you for the opportunity to conduct this study. I am hopeful that the findings and recommendations will be useful to the Skidmore community.

Respectfully submitted,

Pat Romney Patricia Romney, Ph.D. 8/25/13

76 35

Additional tables that may be of interest.

These final tables my reveal additional useful data that the College may wish to analyze further.

TABLE 16

Level of agreement with the statements below (p. 9) (Mean: min = 1; max = 5)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Feel valued by: Profs in the classroom 4.00 4.03 4.08 4.24 4.26 Students in the classroom 3.23 3.14 3.84 4.02 3.87 Think the following are genuinely concerned about my welfare: Professors 3.48 3.90 3.89 4.12 4.17 Staff members 3.52 3.76 3.67 4.05 3.90 Administrators 3.31 3.38 3.16 3.83 3.41 Think profs prejudge my abilities based on my identity/ 2.97 2.83 2.36 2.50 2.34 background Perceive racial/ethnic tensions in: The classroom 3.53 2.93 2.70 2.43 2.23 Social situations 3.90 3.25 3.27 2.64 2.66 Believe SC encourages free & open discussion about difficult topics such as: Racial diversity 3.19 3.28 3.56 3.71 3.79 Gender identity & gender 3.65 3.72 3.80 4.00 4.09 expression Religious/spiritual diversity 2.94 3.14 3.20 3.55 3.41 Socioeconomic (social 2.61 3.03 2.80 3.43 3.08 class) diversity

77 36

TABLE 17 I believe that discrimination based on the categories listed below is a problem at SC. (p. 15) (mean: min =0; max = 5)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Race/ethnicity 3.16 3.18 2.73 2.07 2.37 Gender identity 1.87 1.57 1.81 1.58 1.87 Sexual orientation 1.97 1.79 1.58 1.53 1.81 Religion 1.60 1.43 1.70 1.85 2.02 Disability 1.10 1.54 1.70 1.43 1.82 Low-income background 2.48 2.57 2.25 1.85 2.28

TABLE 18 Regarding different groups of people, I feel: (p. 18) (mean: min = 1; max = 5)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian I belong in many groups 2.65 2.72 3.29 3.42 3.40 Comfortable interacting with 3.10 2.93 3.62 3.58 3.58 many groups Like an outsider or excluded 2.52 2.83 2.13 2.05 2.15 in most groups Awkward in most groups 2.84 2.79 2.19 2.21 2.22

78 37

TABLE 19 Regarding my education at SC (p. 20) (Mean: min = 1; max = 6)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian SC professors have a high level of 3.42 3.31 4.19 4.48 4.35 diversity awareness. SC professors have the knowledge and skills to handle 3.19 3.28 3.75 4.45 4.21 topics of diversity and inclusion in the classroom. Classroom discussion has advanced my understanding of 3.55 3.48 3.69 4.10 3.76 diversity on campus. Classroom discussion has improved my relationships 3.52 3.38 3.41 3.88 3.56 among diverse groups on campus. My professors understand how to engage students of color in 3.48 3.55 3.86 4.18 4.32 classroom discussion. My professors understand how to engage with students of various gender identities and 4.00 3.97 3.92 4.35 4.44 gender expression in the classroom. SC is committed to transforming the campus so that it is truly 3.81 3.76 3.92 4.26 4.12 diverse and inclusive in all respects. The lack of socioeconomic class diversity in Saratoga Springs 3.70 3.52 3.52 3.46 3.40 impairs SC’s ability to recruit and retain diverse students. The lack of racial diversity in Saratoga Springs impairs SC’s 4.03 3.52 3.55 3.46 3.55 ability to recruit and retain diverse students. SC prefers sameness over 3.16 3.52 3.45 2.78 2.91 diversity. Students challenge the authority of professors of color more than 2.71 2.69 2.51 2.80 1.95 White professors.

79 38

Students challenge the authority of International professors more 3.10 2.66 3.06 2.70 2.37 than professors from the US. There is not enough racial and ethnic diversity in the majority of 4.83 5.17 4.61 4.51 4.30 my classes. I feel free to speak up when I see bias, harassment, or 4.00 3.69 4.31 4.08 4.29 discrimination on campus. I have strong relationships with one or more professors on 4.45 4.21 4.45 4.33 4.83 campus. When it comes to diversity, I feel free to learn, grow, and make 4.39 3.90 4.48 4.38 4.23 mistakes. Improving diversity on our campus has enhanced the 4.00 3.97 3.97 4.10 3.97 academic environment in my classes. I believe SC is improving its credentials and reputation as it 4.26 4.28 4.37 4.59 4.15 strives to increase racial and ethnic diversity on campus.

TABLE 20 My level of financial resources has affected my ability to: (p. 23) (mean: min = 1; max = 5):

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Socialize with other students 3.19 2.86 2.86 2.35 2.42 at SC Buy textbooks 2.39 2.34 2.53 2.15 2.20 Afford other academic resources (e.g., computer, art 2.81 2.54 2.73 2.40 2.18 supplies) Participate in unpaid 3.35 3.62 3.06 2.69 2.60 internship opportunities Study abroad 2.03 2.97 2.53 2.15 2.04 Register for classes in a timely 1.61 1.79 1.81 1.78 1.54 manner Participate in campus 2.23 2.69 2.22 1.85 1.80 programs and activities

80 39

TABLE 21 Please indicate your religious/spiritual affiliation (p. 24) (% in each category)

Black/African Asian American Hispanic Multiracial White American or Asian Agnostic 10.0 25.0 23.8 27.0 22.3 Atheist 0.0 7.1 15.9 10.8 15.2 Buddhist 0.0 0.0 1.6 16.2 1.0 Christian 70.0 39.3 17.5 18.9 17.5 Islam 3.3 3.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 Judaism 0.0 0.0 11.1 5.4 22.5 Pagan 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 .3 Quaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .8 Sikh 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 Taoist 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .5 Unitarian Universalist 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 3.1 Wiccan 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 None 16.7 25.0 23.8 18.9 16.8

81 Supplemental Data Analysis for Student Climate Survey

Socioeconomic-Focused Analyses

Is there a significant mean difference in the way students’ rate feeling valued by professors based on their reported socioeconomic status?

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling valued by professors differed based on their reported socioeconomic status. This feeling valued by professors variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling valued.

The analysis revealed a significant mean difference between working-class (M = 4.02, SD = .93) and upper-middle class students (M = 4.27, SD = .80), with working-class students reporting that they feel less valued. There was no significant difference between middle class (M = 4.22, SD = .74) and upper- middle class students. In addition, there was no significant difference between middle class and working-class students. Thus, these data suggest that working-class students feel less valued by professors than upper-middle class students at SC.

Do students’ responses to the question, “I feel as though I am a welcomed member of the SC Community” differ among the three reported socioeconomic backgrounds (working-class, middle class, upper-middle class) on campus?

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling welcomed at SC differed based on their reported socioeconomic background. This feeling welcomed variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling welcomed. A significant mean difference was found among the various socioeconomic categories. Specifically, working-class students reported a significantly lower mean score for feeling welcomed (M = 3.57, SD =1.08) compared to middle class (M = 4.04, SD =.87) and upper-middle class students (M = 4.06, SD =.93).

Do students’ responses to the question, “I am satisfied with my experience at SC” differ among the various socioeconomic backgrounds?

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling satisfied with their experience at SC differed based on their reported socioeconomic background. This feeling satisfied variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling satisfied. Working-class students reported a 1

82 significantly lower mean score for feeling satisfied (M = 3.77, SD =1.11) compared to upper-middle class (M = 4.06, SD =.97) and middle class students (M = 4.01, SD =.96). There was no significant mean difference between the ratings of upper-middle class and middle class students.

Therefore, these data suggest that the reported mean score for feeling satisfied with one’s experience at SC is lowest for working-class students at SC.

Disability-Focused Analyses

Do students’ responses to the question, “I am satisfied with my experience at SC” differ between students with a reported disability (physical, emotional, learning) and students without a reported disability?

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling satisfied with their experience at SC differed based on the presence of a disability. This feeling satisfied variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling satisfied.

The analysis suggests that there are no significant mean difference between students who reported having a disability (M = 3.84, SD = 1.08) and students who reported not having a disability (M = 4.03, SD = .97). Thus, these data suggest that although the reported mean is lower for students who live with a disability, this mean difference is not statistically significant.

Do students’ responses to the question, “I feel as though I am a welcomed member of SC” differ between students with a reported disability (physical, emotional, learning) and those without a reported disability?

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to evaluate whether students’ responses to feeling welcomed as members of the SC community differed based on the presence of a disability. This feeling satisfied variable was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, with a high score of 5 indicating that a student strongly agreed to the statement of feeling welcomed.

The analysis suggests that was a significant mean difference between students who reported having a disability (M = 3.80, SD = .95) and students who reported not having a disability (M = 4.00, SD = .96). These data suggest that SC has some work ahead of itself in terms of finding ways to help welcome members from the community of students who live with disabilities.

2

83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 May 18, 2011

Committee on Intercultural and Global Understanding

Who we are:

CIGU is a subcommittee of the IPPC (Institutional Policy and Planning Committee). We are charged with advising the President and other college offices and bodies regarding issues related to intercultural and global understanding. We are guided by Goal II of the College’s Strategic Plan, which states:

We will challenge every Skidmore student to develop the intercultural understanding and global awareness necessary to thrive in the complex and increasingly interconnected world of the 21st Century.

The current members of CIGU include: Co-chairs, Cori Filson and Winston Grady-Willis; Rochelle Calhoun, Ginger Ertz, Meg Hegener, Herb Crossman, Peter McCarthy, Julia Routbort, Mariel Martin, Dean Mendes, Barbara Krause, Barry Pritzker, and Sulin Ngo.

CIGU sees our role as one of continuing to be involved in discussions regarding new institutional initiatives and offering support and guidance as appropriate. For example, CIGU understands that the College’s Human Resources team has been working on a comprehensive campus-wide employee educational program on diversity-related issues, and we fully support that effort.

What we do:

CIGU meets monthly to discuss agenda items related to diversity issues on campus. We invite members of the community (including faculty, staff, and students) to meetings to help us better understand current issues, including: hiring, staffing, funding, curriculum requirements, and recruitment and retention data. For the last several years, we have conducted confidential exit interviews with graduating students of color. CIGU advises college officials on policy issues, practices, and procedures related to diversity, intercultural and global understanding, intercultural literacy, issues of campus climate, and other related matters. CIGU serves as a resource to the College officials charged with coordinating and implementing Skidmore’s strategic efforts in those areas; CIGU also is authorized to introduce appropriate campus initiatives in these areas on its own accord, creating working groups or involving other offices as appropriate.

98 May 18, 2011

What we see:

CIGU understands that Goal II is an integral part of Skidmore’ Strategic Plan, and we believe that the College has worked vigorously and with integrity in the last several years to implement that goal in a systematic and sustained way.

However, we have been particularly struck and troubled by the dialogue and actions related to diversity this academic year. In particular, after the community meeting which occurred on February 18, 2011, CIGU met as a group and we collectively decided to issue this statement.

We believe that Skidmore is currently at a crucial moment in our efforts to become a diverse, inclusive, and interculturally literate campus -- a moment of considerable frustration, misunderstanding, and differences. Such moments of impasse occur when the stakes are high, when the College as a whole can either move away from the challenges that implementing Goal II involves or when we can acknowledge the real impediments that exist on campus and make changes in our daily practices—institutionally, professionally, and personally—in the interest of making Skidmore a truly diverse and welcoming place for all.

We are deeply troubled and particularly frustrated by the following three institutional dynamics that we believe impede real dialogue and hinder our collective progress in advancing Goal II. CIGU highlights them in this statement because we believe that unless we are willing to actually name these impediments, they will not change. These impediments are:

1. As a community, we do not hear or believe the stories that we do not want to hear or believe.

Over and over again, CIGU members and some other members of our community have been at open meetings and forums where students of color and/or LGBTQ students tell us in specific, detailed, and emotionally painful ways how they are marginalized on campus, in the classroom, and in the community of Saratoga Springs. In the last several years, we have also read multiple reports from the Bias Response Group about acts of violence that have targeted members of our community because of their sexual orientation and about verbal intimidation and harassment based on race, gender, sexual orientation and religion. During exit interviews with graduating students of color, CIGU and other community members have repeatedly heard themes of alienation, frustration, and disempowerment. We thank those students who have been passionate and courageous in speaking up about deeply painful

99 May 18, 2011 experiences in public forums. In being honest and clear about their experiences, these students are right to demand the same honesty and clarity from their College.

Unfortunately, these troubling accounts are often heard again and again by a relatively small group of people who attend these meetings. And even more fundamentally troubling, we have been part of numerous conversations on campus where students’ stories of alienation, frustration, and disempowerment are discounted or dismissed. We have heard “it’s not so bad” or “it is getting better” or “that is just one person’s version of reality.” These types of comments come from a status of privilege that is neither acknowledged nor understood, let alone questioned. As a historically White institution of relative wealth, Skidmore needs to acknowledge more fully and honestly our historical context of privilege and the continuing effects of institutionalized racism, as well as the current campus realities of bias and marginalization. Without this acknowledgement, change cannot occur.

2. As a community, we need a clearer understanding of the urgency of diversity-related initiatives and a clearer path for decision-making.

We understand that educational institutions typically run by committee processes that can be slow, cumbersome and inefficient. CIGU is no different, and we have noted that we have been slower in bringing crucial issues to the fore than most of us would have wished, especially during this incredibly challenging semester. Of course, CIGU is part of a relatively new structure charged with leading the implementation of Goal II; that structure intentionally reflects the conviction that responsibility for advancing diversity-related initiatives must be located throughout the College. Moreover, although the charge from IPPC to CIGU clearly states that “CIGU may introduce appropriate campus initiatives on its own accord” (after consulting as appropriate), several of us are concerned that this authority is not recognized broadly across campus.

CIGU believes that the strategic importance of Goal II must be reflected more deeply in the work of the College’s shared governance structure. We further believe that student voices reflecting their lived experiences on campus must be heard in that shared governance work.

3. As a community, we must ensure that we create real institutional capacity to sustain the changes needed to support diversity and inclusion on our campus.

100 May 18, 2011

At Skidmore, we tend to highlight initiatives and programs that represent real change and that do move us forward in terms of meeting Goal II of the Strategic Plan. But, we often fail to acknowledge that these initiatives and programs frequently lack permanent funding, institutional infrastructure, or dedicated staffing. These programs, which can be both curricular and co-curricular, are not institutionally incorporated in ways that will ensure they can survive past the presence of those committed and skilled individuals who have founded them.

This process—where we collectively point to programs and personnel who do represent progress towards meeting Goal II, without mentioning or addressing that their existence is often temporary—is deeply concerning and results in frustration and mistrust among many students, staff, and faculty who support the objectives of intercultural and global understanding. Also of great concern is that we seem content with this temporary structure and have not made progress toward significant permanent support of these initiatives.

What we suggest:

We believe that the following concrete suggestions would make a significant difference in resolving our current impasse.

1. Review the “diversity triad” structure and the supporting role of CIGU to determine whether any changes should be made. Particular questions should include budgetary support and any structural impediments to effectiveness.

2. Further institutionalization of IGR, including administrative staff support and course releases for faculty members involved in the program.

3. Further institutionalization of other programs proven to move the College forward with its diversity priorities.

4. Establish clear expectations that faculty members attend pedagogy workshops focusing on diversity-related issues in the classroom.

5. Develop selected faculty lines dedicated to diversity-related academic fields.

6. Provide tenure-line target of opportunity hires for individuals from underrepresented groups who exhibit promise in terms of teaching, scholarship and service to the College.

7. Reinstate the NYU Minority Dissertation Fellowship and Consortium for Faculty Diversity initiatives.

8. Include a full-day diversity training as part of the FYE program for both students and Scribner seminar faculty.

101 May 18, 2011

9. Review current support for international faculty members (e.g., support for visa issues, etc.) and provide an appropriate support structure that addresses issues of attraction and retention of this cohort, including a presence on the Skidmore Website.

102 103 ASSESSING THE TRIAD

We have engaged in a critical self-assessment of our work over the course of the past three years, as well as our structural relationship to the College and its leadership apparatus and culture. By and large, we believe that the Diversity Triad has been effective in identifying and illuminating key issues related to Goal II of the Strategic Plan. We have been able to work individually, collectively, and as members of still larger units, specifically CIGU and the Bias Response Group.

Arguably, the greatest obstacle that we have encountered is a set of structural impediments. One issue in this regard was the loss of the administrative support to CIGU that Idalia Sepulveda provided on a part-time basis. As part of a larger reconfiguration of administrative support in Academic Affairs necessitated by the budget crisis, Carol Lloyd took on most of Idalia’s responsibilities. Carol did a fine job in managing Winston’s calendar and in coordinating the Cornel West visit. What we missed, however, was an intangible factor: Idalia’s bedrock concern for Goal II. As a result, we lost engaged administrative support specific to issues of diversity and inclusion.

A more pressing issue is the fact that the Triad is two steps removed from the Office of the President. In other words, each of us reports directly to someone who then reports to someone else who reports directly to you. More to the point, only Winston reports directly to a member of President’s Cabinet. Initially, it appeared as if Rochelle Calhoun’s participation in our group—in essence, making us a Diversity Quartet—might ameliorate this problem to a certain extent. What the three of us have come to realize, ironically enough, is that the Quartet model is itself problematic. We began to see Rochelle as the leader of the group, a problem for a coequal collaborative model. For a period of time we even began to rely on her office to set our calendar. This is not a criticism of Rochelle; to the contrary, we have profound respect and admiration for her leadership. She almost singlehandedly brought the BRG the credibility and status it deserves, and has been a progressive voice for change at the Cabinet level. We stress, therefore, that the issue at hand is structural, not personal. Similar problems would apply if Mike West or Susan Kress were an informal member of the diversity group. Conversely, if the Triad was to meet with the Dean of Student Affairs, Vice President of Academic Affairs or Vice President for Finance and Administration (individually or collectively), that might prove productive.

The final concern in this regard stems from our work in the wake of the Compton’s incident in December 2010. In a January 2011 email to and subsequent meeting with Acting President Susan Kress and the Cabinet, the Triad recommended that Skidmore:

• secure private legal support for the students who were arrested • provide a counter-narrative in the media • embrace the arrested students as members of this community • express the position publicly that the hate crime charge be dropped • encourage Cabinet members to attend the court hearings for the students

104 Arguably, the College eventually moved forward in full support of one of the five recommendations. As the individuals charged with identifying and illuminating issues of inclusion at Skidmore, we could not help but wonder whether we had much authority during such a crisis. (It should be noted that the Black Faculty Staff Group made five recommendations of its own last semester.)

One self-criticism that we raise is that we have not consistently provided substantive follow-through on certain initiatives. Specifically, although we were the primary authors of “Assessing Diversity and Inclusion at Skidmore College,” the document endorsed by IPPC in November 2009 as a guiding instrument for measuring progress toward Goal II, we have not done enough to circle back to relevant campus offices to chart specific progress. Another initiative where follow-through has been lacking has been the New York Six consortium. Despite solid early momentum behind involvement with the diversity group of the consortium, we have not been as collectively plugged in to recent conversations, particularly around the proposal for a diversity conference of member institutions. (It should be noted that Mariel clearly has been the most engaged member of the Triad in this regard.)

MOVING FORWARD

1. Budget for CIGU: We have discussed this issue in the committee, and Rochelle has mentioned the possibility in IPPC. You have been generous in terms of PDF spending going back to the days of the IGUTF. As a structural matter, however, we believe that this shared governance subcommittee of the IPPC would benefit from a modest permanent budget line, especially to fund programming and assessment for both CIGU and the BRG.

2. Additional Staffing for the Counseling Center: Julia Routbort and the entire team at the Counseling Center do incredible work semester after semester. Given the demands placed on these mental health professionals, we recommend in the strongest possible terms that the College provide the resources for a person of color to serve as an additional fulltime staff member.

3. Additional Faculty Lines: We support the CIGU recommendation last month that target of opportunity hires be initiated to increase the number of individuals from underrepresented groups in tenure-line positions. We now call for the creation of additional faculty lines (or the conversion of existing ones due to retirement) explicitly designed for courses that will further diversify the curriculum.

4. Faculty Exchanges: Skidmore faculty who are interested in doing so should be provided with an opportunity to work for a year at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), or Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs). In turn, faculty from these institutions will work for one academic year at Skidmore. The Triad

105 encourages the College to embark on securing memorandums of understanding with such institutions as soon as possible. Furthermore, relevant shared governance committees, particularly CAPT, should explore the possibility of making such a faculty exchange part of an individual’s tenure file.

5. Curricular Reconfiguration and Expansion: In order to help diversify the curriculum and bring the College up to speed with increasingly transnational teaching and scholarship, we strongly endorse a substantive reconfiguration of certain existing interdisciplinary programs, as well as the creation of a new one. We recommend that appropriate faculty bodies research the possibility of converting Asian Studies to Asian and Asian American Studies (or Asian Diaspora Studies); likewise, we recommend a similar conversion for Latin American Studies to Latin American and Latino/a Studies. Lastly, in this regard, we recommend the creation of an Africana Studies (or Black Diaspora Studies) program.

6. Additional Staffing of OSDP: As the student body diversifies and the need for programming and support increases (at the club and individual student level), it has been more and more challenging to meet all these needs with a staff comprising one and a half positions. This is especially true given that the half-time position operates out of the Office of Residential Life and, as a result, the work of Student Diversity Programs Office is often secondary.

FINAL REMARKS

The aforementioned recommendations are ambitious. Indeed, some might even consider a few of them to be contentious. This past academic year has reminded us, however, that the responsibility for meeting institutional aspirations is inextricably bound to authority and power, especially at a place where individuals tend to be reluctant to interrogate their connections to power and privilege honestly. Although hired to shepherd along Goal II initiatives specifically, we have seen our work as instrumental to the future well being of the College in an overall holistic sense. Nevertheless, some at Skidmore have viewed us as marginal or superficial players. Such thinking could prove to be a detriment to our work.

106 107 To: Michael Ennis-McMillan and Cori Filson, Co-chairs, Committee on Intercultural and Global Understanding (CIGU), members of CIGU, and members of the Skidmore community From: Philip A. Glotzbach, President Date: 2 November 2011 Re: Response to the CIGU “Statement of Observations, Concerns, and Recommendations” (18 May 2011)

Thank you for formulating the concerns and recommendations that you addressed to the Cabinet and me, and to IPPC, in your communication dated May 18, 2011. Having reflected at length about the issues you raised and having discussed them with various groups and individuals, I write at this time to provide a response.

As you know, we acknowledged receipt of your statement last spring, and Cabinet members took up the concerns immediately. But because IPPC had already held its final meeting of the 2010- 11 academic year, we were not able to discuss your concerns in IPPC until this fall. Your statement was distributed for IPPC’s initial meeting of the year (that committee includes 6 members who are new to the group this fall), and we discussed your correspondence at IPPC’s second meeting of the year on 23 September 2011.

Let me say, first and most importantly, that I hear and take seriously your concerns, that Cabinet members hear and take seriously your concerns, and that IPPC hears and takes seriously your concerns. We all recognize that the statement comes from a place of wanting Skidmore to do better in advancing Goal II of the Strategic Plan – in other words, to have the reality of experiences on campus better match the aspirations we have articulated for ourselves.

More specific, to the concerns CIGU has raised, I agree that we have developed a body of data that reveals a number of concerns we need to address relating to the experiences of students, faculty, and staff of color at the College. Let me further acknowledge that, as your report states, we have heard many narratives in which “students of color and/or LGBTQ students tell us specifically, detailed, and emotionally painful ways how they are marginalized on campus, in the classroom, and in the community of Saratoga Springs.” We have heard these stories in reports from the Bias Response Group, in exit interviews with students of color, and in public meetings. You indicate your perspective that “as a community, we do not hear or believe the stories that we do not want to hear or believe.” I want to acknowledge here that for too long our campus community has not fully confronted the realities that these narratives and data convey. Although the underlying concerns are prominently addressed in the current Strategic Plan and we have made progress, there is still much more work for us all to do to overcome historical patterns of privilege that have prevented us from becoming the fully inclusive and welcoming community we wish to be. We need to move forward in ways that do not require those who have experienced difficult situations to continue to re-live those experiences. And all of us must continue to challenge ourselves to participate honestly in difficult dialogues regarding these

108 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 2 of 7

issues, to insure that we are actively listening to one another and that we are prepared to change our minds on the basis of what we hear. In short, we must get better as a community at hearing and understanding the information that is available to us, at acknowledging troubling patterns, and in moving to change situations that are inconsistent with our values and goals.

I also agree that we need to attend to the structures we have put in place to advance the work of Goal II and to be sure that we have – or further develop – the institutional capacity to support the work of Goal II on campus. As CIGU well knows, your committee is a key part of the structure we have created at the College to advance the work of intercultural and global understanding.

As you will note below, I look forward to further discussions with CIGU, and with the individuals who comprise the “diversity triad,” to consider whether the structures (now in place for approximately 4 years) are functioning as we envisioned them – and, if not, to consider what changes should be made.

Having acknowledged the frustrations expressed in CIGU’s opening paragraphs, I also want to acknowledge the progress the College has made with regard to Goal II of the Strategic Plan. That Goal – like any major strategic initiative articulated in any strategic plan – has been advanced in stages. When the Plan was published in 2005, most in our community recognized that our first order of business had to be increasing access for students of color. In that regard, Skidmore has made enormous progress. In the Plan’s first year, our student population included approximately 13% students of color, and international students made up less than 2% of our student body. By contrast, the class that entered in fall 2011 included 26% self-identified students of color (20% domestic students of color), 6% international students (with some overlap in students of color), and an additional 6% U.S. citizens holding a second passport – most of whom have spent most of their lives abroad.

We have made considerably less progress in increasing the numbers of faculty members of color and international faculty members. In 2005-06, ALANA faculty members represented 11% of our total faculty, since then those numbers have fluctuated between 12% and 13%. The fact that we have not been able to move beyond this plateau is deeply concerning. During this same time, the percentages of ALANA representation among the members of our staff have risen from 5% to 7% - progress, but still not sufficient in relation to our objectives. Furthermore, I must acknowledge immediately that we recently have seen the departure of several faculty members of color. In short, significant work remains to raise the diversity within our faculty and staff to levels approximating the diversity of our student body.

Let me turn now to the specific suggestions CIGU has offered. First, let me express the appreciation of Cabinet and IPPC that CIGU afforded us the courtesy of reporting the suggestions first to the Cabinet and IPPC, before sharing them more broadly with the campus community. As you know, at the September 23rd meeting of IPPC, when the group discussed your statement, IPPC expressed unanimous support for CIGU’s distributing the recommendations broadly within the community. I hope that, in addition to attaching the full statement (with recommendations) to CIGU’s 2011-12 Annual Report, CIGU also can engage the broader community in discussions – and action – regarding the important efforts outlined in Goal II of the Plan.

109 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 3 of 7

Let me also note that the preamble of the new “Strategic Action Agenda: Reaffirmation, Recommitment, and Renewal,” identifies work on diversity and inclusion as our first priority for this year. Specifically, this document – which arose from Cabinet planning discussions over the summer and was endorsed by the IPPC – reaffirms that Goal II, the priority initiatives included under it, and the related action items for this year all flow directly, first, from our historical commitment to academic excellence, second, from the Strategic Plan’s central commitment to the success of all our students, and third, from our commitment to a climate that welcomes and includes diversity. Furthermore, many action items identified in that document directly address issues relating to this theme.

I now turn to CIGU’s specific recommendations and indicate what actions have been completed, those that are under way, and areas where work remains to be initiated:

1. Review the “diversity triad” structure and the supporting role of CIGU to determine whether any changes should be made. Particular questions should include budgetary support and any structural impediments to effectiveness.

I have committed to undertake the indicated review this year, and that commitment is reflected in this year’s “Strategic Action Agenda” (item 21). Last spring, I met with Winston Grady-Willis, Herb Crossman, and Mariel Martin prior to Winston’s departure, and I also have met with you, the current co-chairs of CIGU, Michael Ennis-McMillan and Cori Filson. I certainly welcome CIGU’s input here – with regard to process and, most importantly, with regard to the substance. I am eager to hear CIGU’s sense of how the structure is working – what works well, what doesn’t, and what could be improved.

Perhaps it would be helpful for me to clarify here, as well, that the concept of the “diversity triad” as a group in and of itself is an evolution not anticipated by me at the time I created the positions of (a) Assistant Director for EEO and Workforce Diversity, (b) Director of Intercultural Studies, and (c) Director of Student Diversity Programs. My intention was to identify the three individuals holding the three different positions with responsibility for diversity and inclusion in their specific areas, and it was suggested that those three individuals might benefit from meeting together. It also was important that the individuals holding those three positions would sit on the original Intercultural and Global Understanding Task Force (IGUTF), which I created to advise me on implementing Goal II of the Strategic Plan (and which I also chaired). CIGU, the successor to the IGUTF, was also charged “to advise the President and other College offices and bodies as appropriate regarding issues related to intercultural and global understanding.” I believe it will be helpful, in reviewing the “diversity triad” and CIGU this year, to consider whether some further clarification or role and purpose would enhance the community’s understanding of the work of these individuals and bodies and, most importantly, enhance our collective ability to advance Goal II.

110 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 4 of 7

2. Further institutionalization of IGR, including administrative staff support and course releases for faculty members involved in the program.

• The faculty director of IGR has been provided with additional administrative support, two course releases to be used in support of the program, the title of Director, and a budget. Planning is ongoing regarding the goal of recruiting additional faculty into the program (as in teaching an IGR course) by the end of the academic year. In fact, the Dean of the Faculty has provided additional financial support aimed at increasing the number of faculty members who teach in this program. The Director of IGR also now sits as a member of the Academic Staff. We will encourage departments to send a representative to the January workshops. There are ongoing conversations among the Director, CEPP, and the Curriculum Committee, regarding whether IGR should be a program, a minor, etc.

3. Further institutionalization of other programs proven to move the College forward with its diversity priorities.

I understand that CIGU would like to see further institutional support for sending representatives from Skidmore to NCORE (something we have done in the past and will continue to support in the future), along with a budget to support an RFP process similar to one implemented by the former IGUTF (a request I am willing to consider, pending some further conversation about projected outcomes and budgetary details). The Cabinet and I would welcome further elaboration from CIGU as to what programs are referenced here. In the meantime, I note that the following programs are either now in place or in process:

• Individual programs sponsored by Student Affairs and the Bias Response Group, including Everyday Leadership (bystander intervention training program for student leaders) and a recent two-day visit by Frances Kendall, Consultant for Organizational Change (interrupting bias). • For several years, Academic Affairs has held diversity hiring workshops for chairs involved in hiring; those efforts have been intensified this year. The Dean of the Faculty conducted this fall’s Diversity Hiring Workshop for departments and programs currently engaged in faculty searches. This is an ongoing program. • Item 20 in the “Strategic Action Agenda” indicates continuing support for the ADA Advisory Committee. • Item 22 in the “Strategic Action Agenda” includes providing further support for IGR (see 2., above). • Item 22 also calls for developing “a program of events for faculty development.” This work will be ongoing throughout the year. • Item 24 in the “Strategic Action Agenda” indicates that we will “re-launch the Multicultural Career Alumni Network (MCAN) in collaboration with the Alumni Association” to provide additional career support directed specifically at alumni of color.

111 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 5 of 7

• Item 26 in the “Strategic Action Agenda” indicates that we will engage a consultant to provide “diversity and inclusion training” for the campus, beginning with the Cabinet. The consultant has been retained, and this work will commence later this year. • There is ongoing work with the city of Saratoga Springs, including a new community initiative aimed at creating dialogs relating to diversity and inclusion among various segments of the Saratoga Springs community. • The College has provided support for the Black Faculty-Staff Group, which hosted a community-of-color dinner last spring. • Please see the comments in item 4 below regarding support for pedagogy in the multi- cultural classroom. • In conjunction with the Consortium on Higher Education and Success (CHAS), Skidmore has taken the lead on and will host a forum in Spring 2012 focusing on recruiting and retaining faculty of color.

4. Establish clear expectations that faculty members attend pedagogy workshops focusing on diversity-related issues in the classroom.

I have identified Diversity and Inclusion as a major institutional priority for the current year – in the preamble of the “Strategic Action Agenda,” in conversation with the Academic Staff at the Academic Staff retreat in August, and again in my address to the opening Faculty Meeting on September 9th. Other members of the academic administration have voiced their strong support for this institutional priority as well. In addition, we note the following specific initiatives:

• Visiting consultant Frances Kendall met with a faculty group on Monday, 26 September 2011 for a conversation about interrupting bias in the classroom. • We will continue to implement the month-by-month pedagogy program for faculty and will include discussion of the multicultural classroom in the new Faculty Learning Community program. • Michael Ennis-McMillan is in the process of setting up a resource portal for pedagogy on the CIGU website. • The proposal for revising the culture-centered inquiry requirement is working its way through CEPP. • A group (from Student Affairs and Academic Affairs) is discussing how to disseminate and present the data we have from CHAS, NSSE, PRR, CIGU, etc.

5. Develop selected faculty lines dedicated to diversity-related academic fields.

This is a question of resources that is under ongoing consideration, but we are doing our best to encourage departments to think about their open positions and their curricula in ways that encourage the development not only of a diverse pool of applicants but also of candidates who can bring expertise relating to issues of diversity. I acknowledge that this is an area in which we need to develop further strength within our faculty.

112 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 6 of 7

6. Provide tenure-line target-of-opportunity hires for individuals from underrepresented groups who exhibit promise in terms of teaching, scholarship and service to the College.

We have made such hires in the past and we are prepared to do so again, depending on budget and opportunity. Our high bid is to encourage departments to structure their searches in such a way as to encourage rich and diverse pools of candidates. (See item 5 above as well.) Additionally, the Associate Dean of the Faculty currently is researching best practices for the retention of faculty of color. Furthermore, at our invitation, CHAS is planning to host a conference on the recruitment and retention of faculty and staff of color in spring 2012 at Skidmore.

7. Reinstate the NYU Minority Dissertation Fellowship and Consortium for Faculty Diversity (CFD) initiatives.

The NYU Fellowship and CFD initiative will be a high priority for Academic Affairs in the next budget cycle. We understand that they will need to be new initiatives from a budgetary standpoint – i.e., new funds will need to be allocated within the budget to reinstate these programs. We have continued our membership in CFD. Indeed, the Associate Dean recently participated in a CFD conference at Gettysburg College.

8. Include a full-day diversity training as part of the FYE program for both students and Scribner seminar faculty.

Student Affairs conducted a one-day training – the "Everyday Leadership" initiative – in August, and we have implemented an important diversity and inclusion module in our ID 201, Peer Mentor Training Program. This module is led by Mariel Martin and Rochelle Calhoun. We also assigned the summer reading based on these themes, continued the "Checking Privilege" program, and asked faculty to wrestle with climate issues in their Scribner Seminars.

It is important to note, however, that the Everyday Leadership program, which was offered to student leaders in all classes who returned to campus early, has the advantage of adding capacity to address issues of diversity and inclusion across the student body. There is a cogent argument for focusing such resources on upper-class students, rather than on entering students, since it is the former who largely establish the climate into which the first-year students come. In the future, we will continue our diversity and inclusion work with first- year students, but we believe that it will be most efficacious to direct much of our effort toward upper-class students.

In addition, we need to acknowledge that student leaders are with us for a limited time, and so we must continue to work with new populations of students each year. By contrast, our faculty represents a much more stable population across time, so we need to ensure that the developmental programs for faculty referenced in 4. above are both effective and ongoing.

113 Response to the CIGU Report – 18 May 2011 Page 7 of 7

9. Review current support for international faculty members (e.g., support for visa issues, etc.) and provide an appropriate support structure that addresses issues of attraction and retention of this cohort, including a presence on the Skidmore Website.

We have created a new position in Student Affairs to support international students as well as faculty with regard to visa, F1, and J1 documentation. That position has now been filled. Academic Affairs will continue to be in conversation with international faculty members to assess their needs and determine how best to assist them. The VPAA and the Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the Vice President for Finance and Administration, are exploring the implications of some of the changes we hope to implement regarding visa support for international faculty.

Beyond the initiatives described above, the Cabinet, in collaboration with the IPPC and other appropriate groups, will continue its planning efforts in support of the broad objectives of Goal II of the Strategic Plan. Special Programs has brought and will bring a number of speakers this year (e.g., Daniella Talmon-Heller, Zana Briski, Angela M. Brown, et al.) and the Tang is mounting several exhibits relevant to these issues.

Let me conclude with a paragraph taken from this year’s “Strategic Action Agenda”: “I hereby reaffirm my personal commitment, as President, to provide leadership in this area to help the College move forward toward a better future. If we are to ‘be the academic community we seek to become,’ we must continue to increase the capacity of each of us – every member of our community, including every member of the faculty, staff, and administration – to engage in meaningful dialogue about issues relating to race, class, sexual orientation, disabilities, and other markers of difference that can divide us as a campus community (and indeed that can divide our nation and the world). … I ask that everyone in the Skidmore community embrace this undertaking and seek opportunities to increase our ability to engage in these difficult conversations, always within a context of mutual respect.” Even as we direct our attention to the specific objectives we have identified for this year, we must remain focused on our long-term goal of creating a diverse and inclusive community that supports our highest aspirations for the education of our students and our interactions with one another.

114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148