 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
About the Author
Mark Bauerlein is professor of English at Emory University. His books include Literary Criticism: An Autopsy (1997) and Negrophobia: A Race Riot in Atlanta, 1906 (2001). His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, The Weekly Standard, TLS, Yale Review, Partisan Review, Reason Magazine, and many other national periodicals. Topics he will cover include the ideological climate of the campus, knowledge and skill levels of U.S. students, and technology in the classroom.
About Brainstorm
Mark Bauerlein
Marc Bousquet
Laurie Fendrich
Dan Greenberg
John L. Jackson Jr.
Stan Katz
Michael Nelson, guest blogger
Stephen Joel Trachtenberg
Brainstorm Alumni
Marty Nemko, guest bloggerBob Zemsky
Recent Posts
How Adjunct-ing Helps--and Harms--the Humanities Profs | Comment [9]
Against Adjuncting | Comment [28]
Chronicle Almanac Data | Comment [3]
The Labor Problem | Comment [52]
Web Reactionaries | Comment [26]
Featured Articles By the Author
A Statement About Diversity Research
Two weeks ago, Chronicle reporter Peter Schmidt penned an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that is one of the strongest statements you can find about the benefits of diversity in the college classroom. It’s entitled “America’s Universities Are Living a Diversity Lie,” but Schmidt doesn’t argue against the basic human good of diversity. Instead, he targets the most popular defense of race-based admissions in higher education: namely, that a multi-racial classroom produces better academic outcomes for students. Proponents of affirmative action in college admissions affirm the learning advantages of a diverse classroom as if it were patently true, and a small industry of “diversity research” has developed to back them up.
It wasn’t always so, though. Back in the 1970s, when affirmative action hit the courts, the educational rationale for diversity was a minor one. Schmidt writes: “In the mid-1970s, when colleges talked about the educational benefits of race-conscious admissions, what they had in mind were the benefits reaped by minority students. And tellingly, the University of California had said nothing about the educational benefits of diversity in defending the UC-Davis medical school’s strict racial quotas against the lawsuit brought by Allan P. Bakke, a rejected white applicant.”
Several schools weighed in on that case, and “Justice Powell would come to rely heavily on one of those briefs, in which Columbia, Harvard, Stanford and the University of Pennsylvania joined in arguing, without any empirical evidence, that diversity ‘makes the university a better learning environment.’” Accepting the “learning environment” position, Powell provided an opening for admissions policies. It was left to researchers to ground it in science. Schmidt: “Over the next several years, education researchers scrambled to find such proof and repeatedly met with college leaders to discuss their progress. Their work took on a sense of urgency, on the expectation the Supreme Court would soon be revisiting Bakke. Yet again and again, their studies were shown to have gaping holes and deemed too weak to hold up in the courts.” They could not demonstrate that kids in a multi-racial classroom learn math, reading, science, or French better than kids in an all-white or all-black classroom. Racial and social attitudes might have improved, and we should hail that result, but knowledge and skill levels couldn’t be tied to diversity.
Nevertheless, it’s a central assertion reiterated all the time, nowhere more significantly than in the Supreme Court case in 2003, Grutter v. Bollinger. There, “The opinions revealed that the majority of justices had been swayed by a barrage of friend-of-the-court briefs spinning and exaggerating what the research said about the alleged educational benefits of diversity.”
That’s the “lie” Schmidt identifies. We have a solemn discourse about the learning benefits of diversity that simply doesn’t have a foundation in solid inquiry. If it did, then we would have to say that Spelman College, which is all women and in 2003 reported 1 white and 1 Hispanic student in a population of 2,121, and Morehouse College, which tallied 4 Asians, 8 Hispanics, and 3 whites in a student body of 2,770, operate at a disadvantage — which certainly isn’t the case from what I’ve seen on visits there.
Posted at 10:03:27 AM on July 14, 2008 | All postings by Mark BauerleinComments
Commenting is closed for this article.
I hereby challenge all to help bury this tired topic by not waging in on this issue.
— Smokenmirrors · Jul 14, 10:47 AM · #
I suspect that most of the educational consequences of substantial diversity have to do with freeing people of stereotyping people with regard to gender, ethnicity, religious preference, sexual orientation, etc., rather than improving math and reading skills or learning better French. And in some settings, diversity has helped to even the quality of instruction available to some of the students. This feeling is informed by my children’s experiences in Nashville, more than 30 years ago, where our daughter attended an integrated school that had previously been all white, and our son attended an integrated school that had previously been all black. The previously all-white school looked like a college campus. The previously all-black school was a depressing dump. I have the impression that the quality of the teaching differed much less than did the physical environment, but one could certainly see the vestige of pre-integration differences. At that time, it was difficult to escape the impression that Christian churches were setting up private schools mainly to avoid integration.
— Joe Erwin · Jul 14, 11:25 AM · #
It’s pretty obvious that the argument that “diversity” betters the educational environment for all students falls into the category of “Noble Lie.” The whole business is driven by the desire, quite creditale in itself, to help black students. But this runs afoul of meritocratic counterarguments that the general population, as well as jurists, finds persuasive. Thus arises the “rising tide of diversity lifts all boats” fantasy to which administrators now invariably resort to keep racial preferences in play legally. The motives may be noble, but the endless fudging and dissimulation is shameful.
— Fossil · Jul 14, 12:34 PM · #
Beautifully written, Fossil.
— TolkienFan · Jul 14, 12:58 PM · #
It all depends on what you want people to learn. If you want white folks to learn that they are different from other folks and are somehow entitled to better resources, of course, you can keep them separate. I remember very well the integration of the elementary school I attended—yes, it was a private Christian school that had been nearly all white. Our first black student was the son of a missionary. He had been raised in Ghana and spoke English with a British accent. He was smart and athletic and he won our respect. He did not fit the stereotype nearly all of us previously held. I do not think the notion that exposure to diversity is enlightening qualifies as a “noble lie.” I do think it is pretty important for people to be imersed in cultures other than those in which they are raised. I suspect we can all benefit from experiencing what it is like to be in the minority. Anyway, I don’t think one can or should glibly dismiss diversity as an important aspect of education—as much as some people would love to embrace and enforce xenophobia.
— Joe Erwin · Jul 14, 01:25 PM · #
The attitude may spring from a viewpoint grounded in identity politics. Diversity = the contribution of a unique perspective, grounded in racial (or some other) experience. The more unique perspectives we have in the classroom, the better it is. Of course, we don’t want the unique perspectives of racists, anti-semites, klansmen, etc. Some of my best students have been black, but they have contributed to the class by studying the material carefully, thinking about it at length, and offering greater insights as a result of their labors. That is not to say that special experience is not valuable; it is. However, if we want students with special experiences in our applicant pools we should be explicit in saying what that means. It could mean students who have run businesses, served in the military, lived abroad for extensive periods of time, are fluent in foreign languages, etc. etc. One of the problems with the veiled-affirmative-action-diversity approach is that it purports to attract minority students with, e.g., ghetto experience, but as Skip Gates and other prominent black faculty have noted, the principal beneficiaries of affirmative action have been middle class minority students. The students in the ghetto have largely been overlooked and what may be best for them at this particular moment in time would be those actions which could materially improve their experience in grammar school and high school, not admission to top twenty private schools but safety, nutrition, and, yes, school choice.
— BeenThereDoneThat · Jul 14, 01:27 PM · #
I have taught both undergrad and grad classes of students with the same and varying ethnicities and cultures. Anecdotally speaking, in terms of ability to learn I have found no differences. However, I do attribute some of the differences in performance to roles that have been accepted as societal norms. Few will argue that accessibility to higher education has not been equitable for all desiring or deserving of it. Unfortunately, the residual sediment of this inequity clouds the real benefit of diversity in the classroom, which I believe is cultural exchange. Another observation is that foreign students generally work harder at their education than do American students regardless of their ethnicity. If so, this may be because they see the life changing advantages more clearly than do our own.
— Dr. D · Jul 14, 01:30 PM · #
I think diversity in the classroom benefits the professors, which in turn benefits academia. Observers cannot go on critiquing the role of minorities on PWUs without considering the work that they (profs) have to do when there is a minority student (or students) in their PWU classrooms.
Some, if not many, professors have to readjust their language because their jokes, etc,may not be funny when a latino, AA, gay, Arab, etc..student is in the room.
And the above scenario is beneficial to all, and in my opinion makes the quest for diversity in the classroom necessary.
I have never had the luxury of attending an HBCU. All of the African and African American lit and studies I have done, however, has been done with the encouragement of all my (white male) professors no matter how ill informed (or blind) they are on the dynamics and motivations of the African slave trade.
— Drew · Jul 14, 02:01 PM · #
Drew – Having to adjust one’s language because someone else might be offended seems more stifiling than not. That’s how Huck Finn gets banned from public schools…
— Marcus · Jul 14, 03:00 PM · #
Watching one’s language in the classroom . . .
Keep in mind the Wisconsin Shakespeare professor who used the word ‘niggardly’ in the classroom. It offended a student. He explained the meaning of the word and the student said she was even more offended. He was dragged before a campus kangaroo court and was eventually exonerated. What’s the message here? Stop thinking of yourself as an educator whose job it is to combat ignorance. Your job is to make people feel good about themselves, even if you have to forget the truth to do so.
Self-censorship is the basic reason why some books become ‘banned’—the librarians don’t order them because they know that it will upset someone. The major examples: Catcher in the Rye, Huckleberry Finn, and In the Night Kitchen.
— BeenThereDoneThat · Jul 14, 03:37 PM · #
Isn’t the American educational system one of the worst in the developed world? Don’t our students perform the least well in math and science? Don’t countries with homogeneous student populations perform to the highest level, such as Korea? What does having black kids, or Latino kids in a classroom that was once white do to enhance learning I wonder. The absurdity of liberals is astounding.
— Jay · Jul 14, 05:37 PM · #
Note to Jay: Actually, if you look at such things as PISA scores, top performers include both countries like Finland, South Korea, and Japan (not highly mixed), and top immigration countries like Australia and Canada. The U.S. can often be found way down the list, flirting with countries like Bulgaria, Hungary, Serbia or Turkey (all rather homogeneous). The variable is not the students, it seems, but the systems.
— JL Trudel · Jul 14, 06:28 PM · #
Marcus, does the Huck Finn argument really hold water when “Native Son” is high school reading today?
There is a difference between using offensive epitaths in classroom conversation vs reading them in a book, and referencing them from a book.
A professor who uses racial epitaths or makes gender biased jokes for the sake of classroom banter and discussion goes too far. A professor who refers to American Indians with gestures and vocals ie..“whoooohoooo” with a hand tapping at the lips has not considered the American heritage and diversity of his or her minority students.
This insensitivity must be brought to light (this does not mean punished). This is not about being liberal, (imho) it is about improving and increasing the stasis of diverse students in higher ed.
Victims of perceived language bias are less likely to graduate, graduate on time, and more likely to receive lower grades, failing grades, or drop out because the victims are often conservative and would rather not confront a professor who uses exclusionary language.
(Some) Institutes of Higher Ed embrace diversity and integration in spirit of the law, not just in fact or simple recognition of the law.
Many blacks and whites did not agree with the integration of public schools because they believed that the intermingling would contribute to devaluing the minority student’s sense of self worth.
It is everyone’s duty to be educated on the benefits and effects of diversity in the classroom and workplace, (and oh, what’s next? upper- middle class neighborhoods, Christian churches?).
And of course, we can start by being good citizens and rejecting counter productive classroom conversation that marginalizes citizens and students sitting inside of it.
— Drew · Jul 14, 06:57 PM · #
Yeah, I think Huck holds up. Let’s of things get banned because the language is deemed offensive; other things don’t. Harry Potter gets the can because someone thinks JK Rowling has it in for Jesus. Pretty much the same principle in action.
I agree this isn’t a liberal/conservative issue (or at least shouldn’t be). My point wasn’t about diversity either, it was about language. People should be protected from abuse and discrimination. No one has the right to not be offended and that is what we have come down to. George Carlin would call them ‘soft words’; language that has been so diluted as to not only be inoffensive, but meaningless. It’s a problem regardless of race, religion, SES, or political ideology. Of course, I might be wrong.
— Marcus · Jul 14, 08:31 PM · #
It doesn’t really matter if whites benefit or not. What matters is that people of color deserve a fair chance in a society that is structurally unjust. There really isn’t any other argument that matters.
— Ricky Lee · Jul 14, 11:20 PM · #
Having a variety of biological or chemical specimens in a science laboratory doesn’t improve the study of German or music, therefore why have a diversity of specimens/chemicals in a bio or chem lab?
In other words, assembling a diverse population of students doesn’t necessarily improve the learning of all disciplines but rather of some; additionally, universities create various smaller “learning communities” (all puns intended) whose value has been delineated in much research on student retention.
Thus, the test isn’t whether diversity improves all forms of learning but rather whether it improves any forms of learning at all. It does (e.g., sociology, social relations, etc.), ergo, it is positive and meets the criteria deemed relevant by the courts.
— Anti-hypocrisy advocate · Jul 14, 11:21 PM · #
Persons who oppose affiirmative action and diversity in all areas of American society are inherently ignorant and racist. That’s the bottom line!
— Donald Ray Jenkins · Jul 15, 12:55 AM · #
On classroom jokes and delicte sensibilities;
I’ve been trying to remember the last time I perpetrated a joke while teaching a class. It’s tough to do in a math class, especially when there is more curriculum than time to cover it. But one instance does come to mind.
I was teaching a diff. eq. course and my people seemed to be struggling with one particular technique (series methods for linear eq.‘s, as I recall). By way of encouragement, I said, “C’mon folks. You can do this. It’s not as though you were George W. Bush!”
Weak joke, of course, but some of the frat boys seemed to be irritated.
Did I impermissibly violate their ethnic sensibilities?
— Fossil · Jul 15, 07:12 AM · #
Fossil, violate is harsh isn’t it? Perhaps you were a little oblivious to their (or more likely their parents’) political sensibilities at that moment.
— Drew · Jul 15, 07:47 AM · #
Fossil, you didn’t violate their ethnic sensibilities. You reconfirmed the public impression that faculties are biased toward democrats. John Kerry had poorer grades at Yale than George Bush. Why didn’t you say “It’s not as though you were John Kerry”? Bush frequently misspeaks and can’t pronounce the word nuclear; that’s not necessarily a sign of intelligence. Americans are enamored of articulate speakers. (See Blair, Tony). By that measure, Alan Keyes should be president.
To #17, is the NBA racist because it chooses the best players, who happen to be black? Is MLB racist because it chooses so many players from the Dominican Republic? Are nursing schools racist and ignorant because they primarily consist of women? People may oppose affirmative action because they believe, honestly, that it does not get at the real problems and ultimately demeans its beneficiaries. Some use the latter argument to keep us in a holding pattern, perhaps, but some honestly believe that affirmative action puts a cloud or an asterick over the accomplishments of blacks and, while it makes a few successful, neglects the bedrock problems in neighborhoods, families, elementary and secondary schools. There is room for honest disagreement here; name calling does not help solve the problem. Some believe that it is essential for blacks to retain and celebrate their own culture. Others see problems within that current culture (illegitimacy, a suspicion of ‘acting white’, i.e. studying hard, etc.). All people of good will want the best for our fellow citizens. They disagree on the best methods for attaining it. The only way to find solutions is to discuss the situation honestly and be open to multiple solutions, embracing those that prove to be successful. School choice is embraced by the black community, e.g., but the teachers’ unions oppose it. Something’s got to give.
— BeenThereDoneThat · Jul 15, 09:20 AM · #
Just a clarification to Donald’s comment in #17 about opposing all forms of affirmative action in American society. There are, in fact, many people who oppose affirmative action in college admissions but who favor affirmative action in other areas, for instance, the distribution of resources in a school system (specifically, they argue that teachers working in schools with disadvantaged students be paid more than teachers working in schools with advantaged students). Or, they might argue that affirmative action on economic grounds is fine, while affirmative action on racial grounds is wrong. It is important not to let college admissions overshadow the many other forms, and to recognize, too, that colleges have an interest in underscoring the significance of their affirmative action commitments.
— Mark Bauerlein · Jul 15, 02:29 PM · #
I grew up white in a very remote area where the only people of color were American Indians, and they lived on reservations. One of the most eye-opening and gratifying experiences of my life as an undergrad at the U of Michigan was being amongst an ethnically and racially diverse population. I enjoyed it immensely, and it is one of the things I consciously miss when I spend time in places that do not have such diversity. I learned something important about diversity from my years in the U of Michigan classrooms that I have carried with me ever since. So, I am always surprised when I find someone still questioning the benefits of diversity in the academic setting – elementary, middle, high school, college, grad school, law school and medical schools – for all students, teachers and society in general.
— Lois · Jul 21, 07:51 AM · #
I didn’t have time to read through all of the comments, but I did see Lois’ here at #22. I’m so glad to see a former Michigan student recognize the benefits of a diverse learning environment. I’ve always been blessed by learning in diverse environments (some more so than U of M), but not until my time at Michigan have I really appreciated it, as awareness about diversity at the school rose during the proposition 2 vote (the state voted against allowing any form of affirmative action in 2006). I also got to know Patricia Gurin and became involved with her research on undergraduate “intergroup dialogue” courses. In these courses students confront stereotypes head-on, as they are placed in an environment where half belong to one social identity group (like “white” or “male”) and half to another (like “people of color” or “female”). Her research is very rigorous and unequivocal — such environments do help learning. It is also clear to me whenever I meet a student who has taken one of these courses. They are far more mature, respectful, and thoughtful about many dimensions of life, and are particularly good communicators and listeners. It’s sad that people fight these clear benefits to diversity in the classroom.
— Michigan grad student · Jul 21, 09:34 AM · #
Diversity is like words or soap, in the hands of competent decent inspiring people it is interesting and useful, in the hands of dolts, it is a waste or worse, harmful. Page’s new book distinguishes kinds of diversity and kinds of task and maps between them showing, duh, that some kinds of diversity help some kinds of task and hurt other kinds of task.
So the question is does diversity of ethnic group or race or SES help or hurt some particular learning or classroom or academic task. Page points out that diversity of framework greatly helps prediction tasks and somewhat helps production tasks but diversity of fundamental values/paradigms hurts all task types. There is very little actual research about this so we can expect a few dozen phd theses from now to know exactly what we now know as phd dissertations are largely worthless exercises in reducing topic scope to microscopic size, where correlations of 0.99 mean nothing because the research questions are petty (along with the faculty advisors on the respective dissertation committee).
In terms of “diverse environment“s of several sorts—this is a matter of tools and motives, not just therenesses of environments. Fools in diverse environments manage to get nothing at all from them. Smarties in them get nothing as well unless furnished useful tools or powerful motives to search out or invent tools. It is all not as simple as “furnish the dummies with a diverse environment and watch the little cuties flourish”.
— Richard Tabor Greene · Jul 21, 10:28 AM · #
Diversity: change, difference,disagreement,dissent, dissimilarity, and multiformity. (Roget’s Int. Thesaurus).
Diversity raises peoples’ social and political consciousness. It doesn’t raise our knowledge quotient . It does not improve the quality of instruction. It informs us on the need to power share, and change politcal discourse to include respect for more than one race. Diversity can inspire discourse. When we lead students to respect differences we lead ourselves to co-existence. Power is the key word here. Access to resources for those who have not otherwise attained them. The “Need for Diversity” comes from our need to understand and relate to others humanely, and with dignity. Maybe the reason our country is experiencing a dirth in diplomacy now more than any other time, is due to the lack of respect for different nations and our desire to attain much needed resources for our future. With respect to our responsibility to ourselves: are we only for ourselves? Have we no responsibility to those who come after us? With less than us?
— California Student · Jul 21, 12:32 PM · #