MSU's race disparity issue

I thought this was interesting and I wonder what the graduation rates are more telling of- poor admin or too lenient of an admission process???

"New" affirmative action

I'm not sure if anyone still checks this, but I found an interesting article on the Chronicle's website. It talks about using class or socio-economic status considerations in admissions. I also recommend reading the "comments" section for more food for thought.
Click here for the link.

MSU- we have a problem...

MSU is respected as a one of the leading U.S. institutions, in study abroad course offerings and participation. Approximately three thousand MSU students participate in study abroad programs annually. President Simon recognizes the importance of international experiences for students within our domestic borders and throughout the world. Global initiatives have become a priority in higher education and MSU is actively positioning itself as a global land grant institution. Given the global importance, one may assume the opportunities to participate in global initiatives, such as study abroad, are relatively inclusive, but unfortunately they are not. Money is a determining factor for participation. With the raising cost of college tuition, the dream of having 30% of our student body studying abroad is highly unlikely, but there are ways to move toward that goal. Federal Stafford loan limits are not enough to cover the costs. Many students are not able to participate because of the costs and the sheer lack of institutional funding put forth to support diverse participation, with diverse participation meaning students whom are historically underrepresented and from a lower socioeconomic background. Without further financial support from the university, our reputation and claim as an institution which is inclusive and determined to build global citizens is unfounded.

Generally, summer is the peak time for study abroad programs to occur. The summer sessions are shorter than and not as expensive as an entire fall or spring semester. However, summer is also the time when federal grant monies and institutional funding is at its lowest. Seventy percent of the MSU’s student body uses federal financial aid in combination with parent and alternative loans. Although, some may feel studying abroad is a luxury and not a necessity for a college degree, I would say that may true however, learning outcomes and interpersonal development has been found to be more positive and impactful to the study abroad student than when compared to the experience of the domestic student in the equivalent course. Some benefits believed to be attributed to studying abroad: self reliance, confidence, leadership and critical thinking. So, who should be able to have these international experiences? What image does the lack of university funding portray to the students? We plaster pictures of study abroad experiences in most of our recruitment materials and heavily market study abroad as an amazing experience, but for whom? It is slowly becoming the understanding that studying abroad is for privileged middle class and often white students.

I propose creating an endowment for the purpose of international study for our students whom demonstrate need and have proven to perform well academically with perhaps a 2.9 GPA minimum. I know we can now have the conversation on merit based scholarship versus need based, but with this design we would be using both to determine who gets the funding. A fund of this nature is necessary to ensure the door of opportunity is open to our students with demonstrated financial need. MSU currently has millions in donor funds and the money is generally used to fund our institutional grants like, like Spartan Academic Grant (SAG) and Spartan Advantage (SPAD). However, there are funds without designation used to help students in extreme circumstances, and hopefully creating more opportunities for financially needy students to study abroad is a valid circumstance. Creating more opportunities for our students is a direct benefit to institution in terms of recruitment and retention. Without new funding sources for underprivileged and underrepresented students, study abroad will likely become more racially segregated than how it appears today.

Facebook in the frontstage and backstage

I just read an article on insidehighered.com that discusses a racist exchange between two white students regarding a black student that took place over facebook chat. You can read the brief here.
The two white women were discussing the black woman who had just walked into a study lounge. Technology has allowed front- and backstage racism to expand in new and innovative ways!

Neighborhoods or Yayhborhoods? Who Knows?!

Graciously posted on behalf of Chris Scanlon by Reese Havlatka

It’s been an interesting transition for me to Michigan State. It’s strange to know I have both a cornfield and hockey rink on the same grounds, that the student section at Spartan Stadium can hold almost the entire undergrad population of where I went to school, and that said “where I went to school” could fit 104 times within the 5200 acres of MSU. It is nice, though, to finally have a fight song to call my own.

So this campus, which has it’s own two zip codes (for academic buildings and residence halls), is rather large. I say this in case my examples above didn’t give you that sense already. So the University is considering implementing this neighborhood concept to, in sense, provide services to students within pockets of campus in an effort to be more engaging, to “horizontally integrate” academic and student support systems, and be located in areas to become more accessible. Others may argue that this system further segregates this campus and attempts to mask budget cuts to identity-based services. This system is a hot topic of conversation in some of the professional circles around MSU.

My question is, who cares?

I’m not asking for who is being held down and who is pushed away. I’m not asking whose voices are being heard, rather, whose ears are even hearing what’s being said? Maybe I’m still just a tall fish in a big pond, but as someone who lives and works in the residence halls, and a Masters student in student affairs, I thought maybe I’d hear about ways to be a part of giving my two cents on the ideas of the concept after reading about it from afar. However, I only recently found out that on 2/15/2010 there was a town hall meeting in the Union for students to speak out on their thoughts concerning the neighborhood concept. I should have seen a flyer while walking around Erickson, the International Center, or Wonders Hall. Or, (I would think) the students I work with would have heard something and asked me about the meeting. But it didn’t happen

The State News reported that 40 students showed up at this summit at the Union to give their feedback. That is approx. 0.001% of the undergraduate population. I’m sure some students may have had class or maybe had a really interesting facebook conversation happening, but that can’t account for the lack of representation at the event. My thoughts? While lacking statistical significance, I contend that students are not aware of what is going on and don’t entirely know that they have the opportunity to be more involved.

What good does having meetings, a web site (where you can give your thoughts!), and powerpoint slides detailing meeting agendas actually do when students don’t know what’s going on. I realize this may be a sweeping generalization, so I understand I may be taking some liberties in this point, but I feel that 40 students and a few State News articles are a poor representation of the collective voice of the students. Those who feel that this movement with groupings and budget cuts are most affecting identity-based organizations need to be aware of what is happening to help impact the future of their community (or, communities- wherever they stand on the issue). We administrators, seasoned or emerging, have a duty to be sure that our students are well informed to create their beliefs and challenge ideas. Without properly including our students, we are doing a disservice to the future of Michigan State.

Shattering the Stained-Glass Ceiling

At the International Forum on Christian Higher Education in February, a presentation was made regarding gender equity within Christian higher education institutions. The presentation cited a 2007 survey of 1,900 faculty at institutions affiliated with the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). The CCCU is an international association of Christian colleges and universities made up of 109 member institutions in North America and 75 affiliates in 24 countries. CCCU schools have experienced rapid growth in recent years, with enrollment increasing by 70 percent since 1990.

This survey noted that of professors teaching at CCCU member institutions, the majority (62 percent) were male. When asked to respond to the statement, “Female faculty at my college/university are treated equally to male faculty,” 24 percent of female faculty strongly agreed with the statement as opposed to 47 percent of male faculty.

In addition, according to the American Council on Education, women held 23 percent of college presidencies and 38 percent of chief academic officer positions in 2007. In 2009, five percent of CCCU school presidents were women and 17 percent were chief academic officers. This is a striking disparity – one that should be of concern to anyone working at a Christian college or university.

To address this concern, one must first understand the context and likely reasons for this disparity. While I believe there are many possible explanations for the difference, I would like to suggest three that are most pertinent and then offer recommendations for tackling the issue.

First, one must consider the role traditionally assigned to women within theologically conservative Christian denominations. Many of these denominations have historically discouraged, even excluded, women from leadership positions in the church. This belief has carried over into Christian higher education, and according to a 2005 article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, “. . . at conservative religious institutions, women face a stained-glass ceiling, with the Bible and church tradition routinely used to justify gender discrimination.”

The second reason for gender inequity is a lack of institutional will to make significant changes. Because men hold the majority of leadership positions in most of these institutions, frustrations among women on campus are often misunderstood, or go unnoticed. And because many women choose not to make “waves,” administration can easily sweep the issue under the rug.

The third reason for the dearth of women in senior leadership positions is that those who desire to serve in top positions often get frustrated by the impediments to doing so, and they choose to disengage, often finding a more welcoming climate at less conservative institutions, or even outside of academia. Clearly, this only perpetuates the problem.

To effectively address gender inequity in Christian higher education, administrators and board members must take a hard look at historic beliefs pertaining to leadership and decide whether doctrine meant to guide church governance should carry into the workplace. Christian institutions must be willing to intentionally address the issue of women in leadership. They must look inward at a culture that in many cases allows individuals and/or campus groups to discriminate against women through actions or words. They must address the reasons for gender inequity at its roots, not simply through one-time training sessions that serve as a Band-Aid for a much larger problem, but by encouraging sustained and open conversations across campus. The bottom line is that if women are to make inroads in leadership positions, administrators must address the role of women on their campuses and intentionally prioritize the development, support and retention of young women leaders at their institutions. This will be a small, but necessary, step in the right direction.

Powerful Blog to Read

http://www.leimertparkbeat.com/forum/topics/andrew-m-manis-when-are-we