A deep dive into the value of diversity for students

This week in North Philly Notes, Elizabeth Aries, author of The Impact of College Diversity, writes about the results of her findings about race and class issues at an elite college, the subject of three books and 12 years of study.

My 12-year interview study of affluent Black, affluent white, lower-income Black, and lower-income white students from Amherst College focuses on what students learned from engagement with racially and socio-economically diverse classmates during college. I interviewed students as entering first years, as graduating seniors, and for a final time at age 30. The age 30 interviews, described in The impact of College Diversity, reveal that 81% of Black and white Amherst graduates reported learning about race and racial inequality through peer interactions during college. The interviews also revealed how a racially diverse college provided a successful pathway to upward social mobility for lower-income Black and white students.

The data provide strong evidence of the educational benefits students derived from daily interactions with classmates whose racial and class backgrounds, experiences, and views differ greatly from their own. At a time when the Supreme Court is soon to decide whether to ban the use of race in college admission decisions, and diversity is very much the subject of heated national conversation, my research found huge financial and social benefits to affluent and low-income Black and white students interacting on our small, residential, racially diverse campus.

I began my study in 2005 at a time when Amherst College began recruiting and enrolling a more socio-economically and racially diverse of the student body. This change was motivated by the desire to promote equity and social mobility, and by a belief in the educational benefits for students of interacting daily with classmates whose experiences and views are different from their own.

As a professor of psychology, the presence of more racially and socioeconomically diverse students was enriching classroom discussions in my courses. Due to the differing backgrounds and life experiences students brought to the table, they offered more varied perspectives and insights on course readings. Their comments enabled me and their classmates to understand the texts we read in new ways. My best teachers have been my students. I could clearly see the benefits of learning from diversity that were occurring in my classroom, but wondered about the extent to which such learning from diversity was taking place through peer interactions outside the classroom as well.

Originally I set out to chronicle the nature and extent of what students had learned about race and class during the college years from engagement with racially and socioeconomically diverse classmates. I then grew interested in what the longer-term impact of being part of a diverse student body had been on them. For most college graduates the period of their twenties is marked by continued identity and job exploration; changes in intimate relationships, possible graduate school attendance, and a focus on self-development. So I waited to do a final set of follow-up interviews until my participants reached age 30.

The focus of The Impact of College Diversity is on the voices of the graduates as they report on their lived experiences and subjective understandings of race and class. The findings trace how hearing the lived experiences of their Black peers during college opened white graduates’ eyes to the harm of racism their classmates endured throughout their lives, deepened their understanding of stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination, and of their own racial privilege. Interviews with Black graduates revealed how being part of a diverse student body prepared them to become bi-cultural, gave them the skills to succeed in predominantly white settings and helped them cope with the challenges of a white-dominated work world. Lower-income graduates acquired new forms of cultural and social capital and higher aspirations during college, which led to greater upward social mobility in the future. Upward mobility did come at a cost, as lower-income graduates had changed in many ways while family and friends left behind had not. They faced the challenge of bridging two different worlds.

Several findings surprised me. When questioned as graduating seniors. just over half the participants reported learning from the racial diversity at the college. Yet looking back at age 30, this percentage rose to 81%. Thirty percent of the white graduates aspired to raise their potential children in a racially diverse environment because they believed in the importance of intergroup contact. And almost all the graduates, Black and white, strongly agreed that a diverse student body is essential to teaching skills to succeed and lead in the work environment.

I was also surprised by the extent of upward mobility of the lower-income graduates because many of them had struggled at Amherst both academically and socially. At the time they were at Amherst, many fewer resources existed than do today to help create an inclusive community and to provide the supports they needed to foster their success. Yet 65% percent of lower-income graduates had gone on to attain graduate degrees, the majority reporting being inspired by the ambitions of their classmates and having their own ambitions raised. Most had attained degrees that led to the highest earnings – an MBA, Ph.D. MD, or JD – and had attended top graduate schools in the country, or had gone into finance and worked for a prestigious investment bank.

The bottom line: A college experience at a diverse school is better for our society, and that can only happen by using race-conscious admission practices.

Books for the Inauguration

This week in North Philly Notes, we showcase a half dozen of our political science titles in honor of the inauguration.

We recommend Good Reasons to Run, edited by Shauna L. Shames, Rachel I. Bernhard, Mirya R. Holman, and Dawn Langan Teele, about women and political candidacy, because Kamala Harris became the first female vice president.

The editors and contributors to Good Reasons to Run, a mix of scholars and practitioners, examine the reasons why women run—and do not run—for political office. They focus on the opportunities, policies, and structures that promote women’s candidacies. How do nonprofits help recruit and finance women as candidates? And what role does money play in women’s campaigns?

We recommend The Great Migration and the Democratic Party, by Keneshia Grant, because it shows the political impact of Black migration on politics. (Grant focuses on three northern cities from 1915 to 1965)

The Great Migration and the Democratic Party frames the Great Migration as an important economic and social event that also had serious political consequences. Keneshia Grant created one of the first listings of Black elected officials that classifies them based on their status as participants in the Great Migration. She also describes some of the policy/political concerns of the migrants. Grant lays the groundwork for ways of thinking about the contemporary impact of Black migration on American politics.

We recommend We Decide! by Michael Menser for its investigation of and insights regarding participatory democracy.

We Decide! draws on liberal, feminist, anarchist, and environmental justice philosophies as well as in-depth case studies of Spanish factory workers, Japanese housewives, and Brazilian socialists to show that participatory democracy actually works. Menser concludes his study by presenting a reconstructed version of the state that is shaped not by corporations but by inclusive communities driven by municipal workers, elected officials, and ordinary citizens working together. In this era of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, the participatory democracy proposed in We Decide! is more significant than ever.

We recommend Democratic Theorizing from the Margins, by Marla Brettschneider, for its clear account of the lessons and theories of democratic culture

Democratic Theorizing from the Margins lays out the basic parameters of diversity-based politics as a still emerging form of democratic theory. Students, activists, and scholars engage in diversity politics on the ground, but generally remain unable to conceptualize a broad understanding of how “politics from the margins”—that is, political thinking and action that comes from groups often left on the outside of mainstream organizing and action—operate effectively in different contexts and environments. Brettschneider offers concrete lessons from many movements to see what they tell us about a new sort of democratic politics. She also addresses traditional democratic theories and draws on the myriad discerning practices employed by marginalized groups in their political activism to enhance the critical capacities of potential movements committed both to social change and democratic action.

We recommend Rude Democracy, by Susan Herbst, about how civility and incivility are strategic weapons on the state of American democracy, given how polarized our country has become.

Democracy is, by its very nature, often rude. But there are limits to how uncivil we should be. In the 2010 edition of Rude Democracy, Susan Herbst explored the ways we discuss public policy, how we treat each other as we do, and how we can create a more civil national culture. She used the examples of Sarah Palin and Barack Obama to illustrate her case. She also examined how young people come to form their own attitudes about civility and political argument. In a new preface for this 2020 paperback edition, the author connects her book to our current highly contentious politics and what it means for the future of democratic argument.

And we encourage readers to look for our forthcoming (in March) title, Furthering Fair Housing, edited by Justin P. Steil, Nicholas F. Kelly, Lawrence J. Vale, and Maia S. Woluchem. This book analyzes federal policy to advance racial equity in housing and neighborhoods.

Furthering Fair Housing analyzes multiple dimensions of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule, which was the most significant federal effort to increase equality of access to place-based resources and opportunities, such as high-performing schools or access to jobs, since the 1968 Fair Housing Act. The editors and contributors to this volume identify failures of past efforts to increase housing choice, explore how the AFFH Rule was crafted, measure the initial effects of the rule before its rescission, and examine its interaction with other contemporary housing issues, such as affordability, gentrification, anti-displacement, and zoning policies.

Temple University Libraries and University Press’ Diversity Statement

This week in North Philly Notes, we post the Temple University Libraries and University Press diversity statement that recently posted on the library’s website.

Introduction

In 2017, the Temple University Libraries & University Press (TULUP) Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) Committee was charged with mapping the trajectory of diversity and inclusion initiatives at TULUP. The TULUP D&I Committee facilitated the creation of a Diversity Statement in order to guide TULUP’s commitment to the range of human representations in all areas of our work. In an effort to exemplify a commitment to engaging diverse voices, all TULUP staff were invited to share their input on the statement. The TULUP D&I Committee used these suggestions to shape the Diversity Statement you see below and continues to work diligently to facilitate TULUP’s upholding of the principles within it.

Diversity Statement

The staff of Temple University Libraries and Press strive to engage, include, and serve the full diversity of the Temple academic and local communities regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religion, socioeconomic status, veteran status, culture, language, political views, citizenship status, or diverse abilities.

We are dedicated to the principles and practices of social justice, diversity, and equity among our staff, collections, and services.

While our staff is not as diverse as the communities we serve, we are working toward our commitment to the recruitment and retention of a diverse workforce.

We hope to act as a catalyst to our users to challenge their own assumptions and viewpoints, while also intentionally building collections and services that let users see themselves reflected. We strive to create safe spaces in our buildings and on our websites, and do not tolerate harassment or hate speech in any form.

We’re fully committed to eliminating barriers to learning and fostering access for our communities. The development of a diverse, inclusive, and equitable environment is a continuous process. We’re taking small steps every day towards our goals, including regular attention to these issues and calls to action from our standing Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

How could we be doing better? Let us know at asktulibrary@temple.edu.

Research Libraries, University Presses Oppose Trump’s Immigration Order

This week in North Philly Notes, we report the American Research Libraries and Association of American University Presses’ statement opposing President Trump’s Immigration Order

January 30, 2017—President Trump’s recent executive order temporarily barring entry into the US by individuals from seven countries is contrary to the values held by libraries and presses, and the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Association of American University Presses (AAUP) stand unequivocally opposed to this immigration ban.

The order blocks some members of our communities as well as students, researchers, authors, faculty, and their families from entering or returning to the United States if they are currently abroad or leave the country, even if they hold the required visas. The ban will diminish the valuable contributions made to our institutions and to society by individuals from the affected countries. This discriminatory order will deeply impact the ability of our communities to foster dialogue, promote diversity, enrich understanding, advance the progress of intellectual discovery, and ensure preservation of our cultural heritage.

The work we do—particularly the books we publish and collect—illuminates the past and sheds new light on current conversations; informed by this work we believe that the rationale for the ban both ignores history and places assumptions ahead of facts. More importantly, this decision will greatly harm some of the world’s most vulnerable populations. The United States should not turn its back on refugees who are fleeing their war-torn homes and have already endured long, extensive screening procedures in the relocation process.

Finally, while temporary, the ban will have a long-term chilling effect on free academic inquiry. This order sends a clear message to researchers, scholars, authors, and students that the United States is not an open and welcoming place in which to live and study, conduct research, write, and hold or attend conferences and symposia. The ban will disrupt and undermine international academic collaboration in the sciences, the humanities, technology, and global health.

ARL and AAUP have longstanding histories of and commitments to diversity, inclusion, equity, and social justice. As social institutions, research libraries, archives, and university presses strive to be welcoming havens for all members of our communities and work hard to be inclusive in our hiring, collections, books and publications, services, and environments. The immigration ban in its current form is antithetical to notions of intellectual freedom and free inquiry fundamental to the missions of libraries and presses. By serving as inclusive communities, research libraries, archives, and university presses have deeply benefited from the contributions of students, faculty, staff, and scholars of all backgrounds and citizenships.

ARL and AAUP support all members of their communities and all students, researchers, authors, and faculty who are impacted by this executive order. The two associations urge President Trump to rescind this order and urge Congress to intervene on behalf of those affected by the immigration ban.