Site Links


Home

 


Search for ERIC Digests

 


About This Site and Copyright

 


Privacy Policy

 
 
Resources for Library Instruction

 


Information Literacy Blog

ERIC Identifier: ED317145
Publication Date: 1989-00-00
Author: Smith, Daryl G.
Source: Association for the Study of Higher Education.| ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education Washington DC.

The Challenge of Diversity: Involvement or Alienation in the Academy? ERIC Digest.

For years, researchers have forecast the increasing diversification of students in higher education as a result of changing demographics and a variety of other social and economic shifts. The diverse elements of todays student body include age, gender, ethnic and racial backgrounds, and increasing numbers of differently abled and part-time students. Despite the difficulties inherent in generalizing across such disparate groups and individuals, the issues higher education faces fundamentally relate to the capacity of institutions to function in a pluralistic environment. While it is unrealistic to assume that higher education will solve all these challenges independent of the rest of society, it is clear that the successful involvement of diverse populations has significant implications for education and for the nation.

WHAT IS THE CURRENT STATUS OF ENROLLMENTS, GRADUATION RATES, AND THE CAMPUS CLIMATE?

Although the makeup of todays student bodies is more diverse than 20 years ago, current enrollments suggest that this trend has reversed itself for some groups. Moreover, many students are clustered not only in segments of the post-secondary system but also in various levels and fields. Several recent national reports have sounded an alarm that the progress with respect to enrollments is not sufficient. Observers generally agree that retention overall and the retention rate for certain specific populations are critical problems for many institutions, even though surprisingly little is known about retention for most minority populations and for other nontraditional groups. One of the more troubling themes to emerge is that many campuses do not effectively involve students who are different. Students must confront stereotypic attitudes, unfamiliar values, ineffective teaching methods, and an organizational approach that may not support their efforts to succeed. While such concerns are prominent in the experience of minority students, issues of stereotyping, social isolation, and alienation are found in each of the literatures on women, disabled students, and adult learners as well. Indeed, in contemporary higher education, the condition of diversity is all too often a condition of alienation.

WHAT ARE THE PATTERNS IN INSTITUTIONS LABELED SUCCESSFUL?

Five major themes emerge from a variety of studies looking at successful institutions. These institutions:

1. Focus on students success and provide the tools for success;

2. Have begun to develop programs for increased coordination with elementary and secondary grades and for enhanced articulation between community colleges and four-year colleges and universities;

3. Dedicate energy and resources to creating an accepting environment that nourishes and encourages success;

4. Have access to good information that focuses on the institution and students;

5. Include leaders in the faculty and administration who provide strong direction for these efforts.

In addition to the insights that can be developed from successful institutions, lessons can be learned from women's colleges and from historically black institutions. Central to their success is the presence of many African-American and female faculty and administrators.

WHAT ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES OF ORGANIZING FOR DIVERSITY?

The basic conceptual framework for many of the more traditional responses to diversity has focused essentially on student assistance. These approaches address the particular needs or problems felt to be barriers to students success. Many institutions have broadened these efforts to include institutional accommodations, which acknowledges that some of the barriers to success rest with the institution itself. While these accommodations are steps in the right direction, they are not sufficient in themselves. They should be viewed as part of a broader effort included in the capacity of institutions to organize for diversity. At the core of this effort will be an organizations ability to educate in a pluralistic society for a pluralistic world. To reach such a place requires a shift not only in thinking but also in framing the questions we ask. The challenges of such fundamental transformation mean grappling with a number of complex issues:

* Diversity of faculty and staff. Diverse perspectives are

required to develop organizations sensitive to pluralism.

* Mission and values. The issue of values emerges at a

number of levels. Perhaps the most challenging has to do

with the ways in which students perceive that the values

and perspectives they bring are not appreciated and may

even put them in conflict with the institutions norms and

behaviors.

* Educating for diversity. The content of the curriculum,

styles of teaching, and modes of assessment are three

elements in this effort.

* Dealing with conflict. The conditions for conflict are

present on many campuses. Indeed, conflict may be an

essential part of the process institutions will experience

to clarify the many complex issues involved in creating

pluralistic communities. Conflict may be part of the

institutional learning process.

* The quality of interaction. A growing body of research

evidence reflects the importance of students involvement

with the institution and peers and between students and

faculty.

* The perceived conflict between quality and diversity. The

continuing message that a fundamental conflict exists

between diversity and quality is perhaps the most

compelling argument for reshaping the questions and the

discourse about this topic. We can broaden our

understanding about quality without diluting expectations

for learning or for the curriculum, but to do so will

require reframing our understanding about the meaning

of quality, the definition of standards, performance

criteria, and assessment.

WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE CHALLENGE OF DIVERSITY?

The challenge of diversity is national in scope. Given the complexities involved, no recipes are available to create truly pluralistic organizations. Institutions and policy makers can take some steps, however, to facilitate the process of adequately responding to diversity.

1. A comprehensive institutional assessment can provide important data from which priorities can be identified.

2. Cross-institutional research can identify successful institutions, identify ways in which involvement can be promoted, and clarify often conflicting material in the literature.

3. Coordination among the educational sectors can improve articulation and movement between levels and types of institutions.

4. Developing programs and funds can increase the number of students who enter teaching at all levels.

5. Organizations that succeed in meeting this challenge can also play a significant role in educating all future teachers and citizens to function in a diverse culture.

6. Providing increased local, state, and national financial aid will make access more possible for virtually every population of students.

7. Sustained commitment and effort rather than episodic interest will be required.

8. Leadership plays a central role, not only in setting goals and providing resources but also in framing the questions and setting the tone for deliberations.

If a single lesson is to be learned from the literature on diversity, it is that we cannot simply add and stir. The challenges are many, but it is clear that the process of meeting them will bring great benefits to all members of the community and to the institution itself. The resources of diversity within an organization are more likely to prepare it for the future than any other resource.

SELECTED REFERENCES

McKenna, T. & Ortiz, F.I., eds. 1987. THE BROKEN WEB. Encino, CA: Floricanto Press.

Morris, L. 1979. ELUSIVE EQUALITY. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.

Nettles, M. 1988. TOWARD BLACK UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT EQUALITY IN AMERICAN HIGHER EDUCATION. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Olivas, M.A. Ed. 1986. LATINO COLLEGE STUDENTS. NY: Teachers College Press.

Pearson, C., Shavlik, D. & Touchton, J. 1988. EDUCATING THE MAJORITY: WOMEN CHALLENGE TRADITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION. Washington, D.C.: ACE/Macmillan.

Richardson, R.C. & Bender, L.W. 1987. FOSTERING MINORITY ACCESS AND ACHIEVEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Richardson, R. & de los Santos, A., eds. 1988, "Summer. From Access to Achievement: Fulfilling the Promise." THE REVIEW OF HIGHER EDUCATION, 110, 4.

State Higher Education Executive Officers. 1987. A DIFFERENCE OF DEGREES: STATE INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE MINORITY STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. Denver: Author.

Tajfel, H. 1982. "Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations." ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, 33, 1-39.

Tinto, V. 1987. LEAVING COLLEGE. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

This ERIC digest is based on a new full-length report in the ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report series, prepared by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education in cooperation with the Association for the Study of Higher Education, and published by the School of Education at the George Washington University.


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Library Reference Search
 

Please note that this site is privately owned and is in no way related to any Federal agency or ERIC unit.  Further, this site is using a privately owned and located server. This is NOT a government sponsored or government sanctioned site. ERIC is a Service Mark of the U.S. Government. This site exists to provide the text of the public domain ERIC Documents previously produced by ERIC.  No new content will ever appear here that would in any way challenge the ERIC Service Mark of the U.S. Government.

 
| privacy