The Higher Learning Commission

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ETHNIC DIVERSITY AND MULTICULTURAL AFFAIRS
DRAFT REPORT

MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DIVERSITY:

Howard Gray, S.J., Assistant to the President for University Mission and Identity
Dr. Lauren Bowen, Ph.D., Political Science
Dr. Jason Earle, Ph.D., Center for Community Service
Sr. Mary Ann Flannery, VSC, Communications
Mr. John Gladstone, Enrollment Services
Tom Schubeck, S.J., Religious Studies
Dr. Sheri Young, Ph.D., Psychology

Background and Introduction.
Summary:

In ’94 the JCU Self Study tied much of the implementation of the institutional goals for greater diversity and multiculturalism to the work of the OMA.
In ’02-’03 these institutional goals remain in place; however, a 2001 report, mandated by the AVP, while praising much that has been accomplished by OMA, cited serious shortcomings and recommended a systemic overhaul of the OMA office and operation.
For this present report, this subcommittee has reviewed the material, surveyed both the university’s administrative and staff/faculty efforts to implement the policies designed to strengthen multiculturalism and diversity at JCU, and, in the light of these, offers a set of recommendations.

Narrative. The 1994 John Carroll University (JCU) report for the North Central Association (NCA) Self Study emphasized that an institutional commitment was to enroll students of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, that each minority student would have the opportunity for both academic and social success on campus, and that each would be prepared at graduation for further study or the job market. To attain that goal JCU put a great deal of emphasis on the work of the Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA) as a major instrument for the recruiting of minority students and for helping in the retention and in the academic and social progress of these students once they have come to JCU. In its March 21-23, 1994 visitation report the NCA external evaluation team, while lauding the efforts to implement a faith that does service works which promote justice (p. 6) and an international service center that “has provided a focus for increasing the global awareness of the undergraduate and graduate programs (p. 13),” reported little else about multiculturalism or diversity at John Carroll.

Today the institutional commitment to ethnic diversity and multicultural affairs at JCU remains an important goal. The OMA can point to a number of accomplishments. For example, the May 18, 2001 Review of the OMA, commissioned by the Office of the Academic Vice President, cited the successes of the OMA in four areas: the impact of diversity on the overall campus climate, the recruitment and retention of a growing number of minority students, a creative Cultural Awareness Series, and the notable success of the OMA’s financial aid efforts. But the Review also cited, indeed underscored, areas of notable weakness in the OMA, centering on the lack of ongoing, formal assessment of its success in achieving its goals and objectives, the need to expand its concern beyond the academic, at least in better communication with offices like Student Affairs and Campus Ministry and with the faculty, its inadequate communication with other JCU relevant structures, e.g., residence life, deans, and department chairs, the small percentage of students who attend OMA affairs, the feeling of inadequate representation in JCU events and leadership among students of color. The Review Committee then submitted 11 Recommendations to the AVP. In a final note the committee emphasized that the increase and success of diversity at JCU must become a campus-wide initiative.

In a memo dated August 3, 2001, Dr. Seaton, Associate Director of OMA, offered some clarifications and raised some objections to the Review. These centered on its historical accuracy, the committee’s criticism of the mentoring program, OMA’s rapport with the JCU faculty and its overall respect among the other JCU community members, the critique that the mission and goals of the OMA are vague, and the accuracy both of the methods used to attain data and the substance of the students’ complaints about OMA.

In a May 13, 2001 Supplemental Report, the Review Committee clarified its positions and, especially important, focused on four specific recommendations sought by the then AVP: a draft of appropriate mission and vision statements for OMA, suggestions for an appropriate staffing structure for OMA, suggested job descriptions for the Director and Associate Director, and a draft of short-term and long-term goals for the OMA. There was a fifth recommendation in this Supplemental Review, urging the restructuring of the OMA.

This subcommittee reviewed this important material. But it also realized that the OMA would continue to be in a period of transition while the search for a new director was underway. Moreover, even with the appointment of a new director there would continue to be a period of transition, all of which would be the context for our evaluation. Consequently, our committee focused on four areas of review for its report: (1) the need to think of multiculturalism in a more comprehensive way that involves all the campus at JCU, (2) the ways in which the chief JCU administrative officers have developed policies and initiated programs to further multiculturalism and ethnic diversity at JCU, (3) the awareness and response of faculty, staff, and students to the issues of and opportunities for ethnic diversity and multiculturalism at JCU, and (4) a resume of institutional strengths and weaknesses in implementing the goal of multiculturalism and diversity and, finally, our recommendations.

1. Multiculturalism at JCU.
Summary:

The longer JCU Mission Statement reflects the institutional culture of JCU vis-à-vis multiculturalism and diversity, i.e., a board-approved commitment to become more diverse in its student/staff/faculty population and more sensitive and effective in creating a community out of this diversity and multiculturalism, as these have been laid out in the JCU Strategic Plan.
The JCU community-wide acceptance of this mission, the creativity and consistency of daily efforts to make this diversity and multiculturalism a reality, and the academic and social decisions made with a sensitivity to this dimension of the mission constitute the climate of the institution vis-à-vis multiculturalism and diversity.
The major focus question that the subcommittee proposed was how well has JCU integrated its culture and its climate, its mission and its daily implementation.

Narrative. In July, 2001 Dr. Lauren Bowen, a member of this subcommittee, had submitted detailed report on her 2000-2001 ACE Fellowship to the president of JCU. In her report Dr. Bowen summarized her findings on how recruitment and retention of underrepresented populations in any institution of higher learning were linked to the culture and climate of that university. The culture of an institution looks at the “collective, mutually shaping patterns of norms, values, practices, beliefs, and assumptions that guide the behavior of individuals and groups in higher education and provide a frame of reference within which to interpret the meaning of events and actions.” The climate of an institution “examines the current perceptions, attitudes, and expectations that define the institution and its members. Whereas culture seeks to examine the organization from a holistic point of view, climate focuses on specific sections or parts” (“Editor’s Notes,” in Campus Climate: Understanding The Critical Components of Today’s Colleges and Universities, edited by Karen W. Bauer [San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998], p. 2). In the light of this distinction, then, we can say that the longer JCU Mission Statement reflects a cultural dedication to plurality and multiculturalism. That is, in its public policies and institutional governance, JCU is a place dedicated to furthering multiculturalism and diversity among its faculty, staff and students. Moreover, the JCU Board of Trustees has formally accepted the University Strategic Plan, including its fourth goal: To attract and support a more diverse university community. Institutionally, then, its mission commits JCU to multiculturalism and diversity as integral elements of its identity and educational process. However, the implementation of this commitment looks towards the climate of the institution, i.e., its daily life, operational priorities and decisions, the attitude of its community towards people of different ethnic groups, races, and religions. The deeper question, then, concerns how effectively JCU integrates its institutional mission (its culture) into its actual academic and social and life (climate).

2. Vice Presidents’ responses to multiculturalism and diversity at JCU.
Summary:

The subcommittee submitted a set of twelve questions adapted to each of the four university vice presidents, covering evaluation processes, policies on present curriculum and intervention programs, on the introduction of new programs or partnership among programs and divisions, on hiring and promotion, on the full range of funding and fund-raising activities, on public relations strategies, and on the support and guidance each receives from the president and the board.
While each vice president necessarily answered from the specific area of his responsibility, and, therefore, there is a range of answers reflected in the narrative, all the vice presidents emphasized the importance of their personal leadership and the need for cooperation from the wider university community so that multicultural and diversity programming can succeed.
The new director of the OMA will need clearer direction from the board and the university higher administration as she refashions the mission and management of that office.

Narrative. In order to assess the effectiveness of this dedication and commitment to diversity and multiculturalism, the subcommittee submitted a set of questions to the four vice presidents of the university: the Academic Vice President, the Vice President for Finance and Administrative Services, the Vice President for Student Affairs, and the Vice President for Development and Alumni Relations. In terms of the culture-climate distinction made above, this would also provide a better picture of the climate of diversity and multiculturalism at JCU. While the subcommittee adapted the specific questions to the particular areas of responsibility of each vice president, these questions addressed these common concerns:

Criteria for evaluating diversity/multicultural programs;
Existence of any narrative history of the evaluation process about JCU programs;
Curricular policies or intervention programs;
Hiring and promotion policies;
Innovative programs or policies;
Partnership with other programs/divisions;
Funds designated for multicultural affairs;
Proactive plans to generate funds from, new sources for diversity/multicultural programs;
Specific programs to target minority donors;
Involvement by different ethic/racial groups in JCU fundraising;
Public relations strategies;
Support and guidance from the administration.

The summary of the vice presidents’ responses follows. The AVP office initiated the assessment of the OMA in order to establish formal criteria and policies for the OMA. In the last five years assessments and evaluations in the form of regular meetings between the Office of the Academic Vice President and the Director of OMA have taken place. However, the OMA has not provided written reports about either its accomplishments or effectiveness; however, in all fairness, OMA was not asked to provide such written reports. While there are no curricular policies in place that give oversight to multicultural or diversity courses, there have been periodic interventions for emergency financial assistance and advising and consultation of students.

Hiring procedures in both the College of Arts and Sciences and in the Boler School of Business adhere to a fifteen-point list entitled Procedures for Recruiting Fulltime Faculty. These procedures were adopted by each division in the 1990s and were approved by the Academic Vice President. Included in this list are points that apply specifically to affirmative action. JCU also adheres to a formal and elaborate Affirmative Action Plan that covers both faculty and non-faculty positions throughout the university. Under the direction of the Office of Human Resources there have been consistent efforts to hire minority candidates for various university jobs. The search for a new Director for the OMA was an attempt to implement a new vision and mission statement and a new framework for that office.

In terms of the partnership within the university, the AVP’s office works with many offices to insure awareness of diversity and multicultural concerns. The AVP meets bi-weekly, for instance, with the Associate AVP for Enrollment Services to discuss admission and financial aid strategies including those that especially relate to diversity on the campus. The AVP and/or the Associate AVP regularly discuss issues of diversity/multiculturalism with the three academic deans, with the Director of Global Studies, the Director of Human Resources, and with various other supervisors and directors throughout the campus. The topics of these meetings filter then throughout the various departments and offices of the campus.

The VP for Finance and Administrative Services indicated a set of external and internal initiatives designed to enhance the Jesuit and Catholic ideals of the institution, especially regarding socially responsible investments, and to support the efforts to bring multi-cultural groups on the campus. There are specific financial initiatives that promote or support multicultural and diversity priorities at JCU. Among these are the following: the Multicultural Affairs Budget, the Minority Student Loan Balance, the Jesuit Community Minorities Scholarship Fund, the Minority Loan Fund, and the Minority Scholarship Fund.
The Vice President for Development and Alumni Relations reports successful appeals to the Hearst Foundations and the Target Corporation for monies. But there are too few minority alumni, and, therefore, little participation in university events and fund raising from these groups. This office feels that there has not been adequate guidance from the administration or the Board regarding diversity and multicultural issues.

The most extensive set of multicultural and diversity initiatives comes from the Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs. In assessing this area of administrative activity, the VP for Student Affairs submitted reports from: Athletics, Campus Ministry, Counseling Services, Judicial Affairs, Residential Life, Services for Students with Disabilities, and Student Activities. This was an extensive review, much of which will be repeated in the self-evaluation to be submitted by the Office of the VP for Student Affairs. For the purposes of this overview, permit the subcommittee to record the summary evaluation from the VP for Student Affairs about his departments.

“As you will see from the attached (individual reports), the responses vary widely from department to department. Everyone has worked in some way to address the issue of diversity and multiculturalism, and most everyone has struggles in his/her attempt. I believe that Residence Life has developed the most comprehensive approach to addressing diversity as witnessed in their 27 highlights. The other departments in the division all indicate a willingness to work on the issue, but are hoping for some direction and leadership outside their departments.”

The final sentence in that last quotation needs some explanation. The divisional leadership in Student Affairs needs to see their efforts at multiculturalism and diversity as part of an over-arching design, mandated by the Board, given priority by the president, and supplemented by strategies and expertise from the OMA.

In his 1998 inaugural Convocation address and then again in his 2001 convocation Address, the university president emphasized that John Carroll “shares in the worldwide mission of the Society of Jesus to promote the conversations that are necessary for successfully achieving relationships of respect and reverence between individuals, groups, cultures and religions.” Specifically he focused on a mission strengthened by multiculturalism and diversity: “I believe that we need to and are able to do a much better job of recruiting more persons of color to the faculty, administration, and staff. I also believe that increasingly, as long as we don’t do better in this area, we are doing our students a positive educational disservice.”

This is a time to regroup to achieve this kind of conversation and to effect this kind of school-wide multiculturalism and diversity. To accomplish these goals, the new Director of Multicultural Affairs will herself need both direction and support from the Board. The basic issue in this area, as in many others in the university, is whether initiatives to promote multiculturalism and diversity at JCU will become a lobby or a policy. If there is to be an effective policy, then there must be a university-wide acceptance of the Strategic Plan vis-à-vis the goal of multiculturalism and diversity. In this process, the leadership of the administration is essential.

3. Faculty and administrators response.

NOTE: The following resume contains personal statements. Sometimes the data people needed for their judgment was simply not available so there may be factual or policy inaccuracies here and there.

Summary:

In the spring of 2002, the subcommittee assembled some focus groups composed of administrators, directors, and faculty, to ask them a set of questions about multiculturalism and diversity, assessing how their respective roles foster multiculturalism and diversity at JCU, how they define or describe multiculturalism and diversity, how they gauge their effectiveness in fulfilling their roles and understanding of multiculturalism and diversity, the leadership that they have experienced in fulfilling this aspect of their mission and what further help they might need, their association with OMA, and, finally, any changes that they might suggest to further multiculturalism and diversity at JCU.
Every department head that we interviewed could cite specific areas of his/her responsibility where there was commitment to promote for multiculturalism and diversity; there is no evidence of a general disengagement from the university’s commitment; however, there is a need for some comprehensive mandate that keeps the commitment to diversity a university priority and not just the lobby of a vigorous faculty/staff minority.
Among faculty there was a somewhat different emphasis, which could be summed up as: at JCU there is a strong experience of identity but not a strong experience of diversity and multiculturalism.
While there is a willingness and even, in some instances, a strong impetus for moving towards greater diversity within the JCU community, many faculty are not sure how to effect this and what such a change would mean in their professional lives as teachers and researchers.

Narrative. In the spring of 2002, the subcommittee formulated a set of questions for key groups of faculty and administrators, addressing both the questions of the university mission and of multiculturalism and diversity at JCU. These key groups included the Directors of the Center for Community Service, the Center for Global Studies, and the Core Curriculum Committee, and two faculty and directors focus groups. The subcommittee posed the following questions about diversity and multiculturalism to the Directors:

How does your role foster diversity and multiculturalism at JCU?
What is your definition or description of multiculturalism?
How does your office assess its effectiveness at fostering diversity/multiculturalism?
Please describe what you perceive as the administration’s leadership vision for diversity/multiculturalism at JCU.
Are there any structural links between your department and the Office of Multicultural Affairs? Has any communication, formal or informal, occurred in recent years between OMA and your department?
Please describe the ways the administration leadership helps or hinders your department in promoting an appreciation for diversity/multiculturalism among students and faculty.
How do the goals of your office foster diversity and multiculturalism at JCU? Please describe the ways that your department’s current programming promotes an appreciation for diversity/multiculturalism among the student body and faculty at JCU.
If you had the power to change anything at John Carroll in order to enable our organization to embrace more completely diversity/multiculturalism, what would it be? Why this particular change?

A summary of the responses follows. Global education has the potential for supporting the role of diversity at JCU, but it is not currently meeting that potential. Global Education and OMA ought to work together to do some creative things, to hire more international faculty, and to foster a relationship with historically black colleges. Funding and faculty mobility are necessary for international study and travel. Global Education needs to work more closely with Student Life to integrate international students into the wider university population.

The University core seeks to increase students’ awareness of alternative world views and life ways that form the basis of social life for an identifiable population. The Core thus requires that students take at least one course reflecting diversity within a society so as to increase tolerance and discourage stereotyping. Such courses include, but are not limited to, those dealing to a large extent with minority or marginalized populations. Such courses will seek to encourage academic understanding of these alternative views and life ways through a variety of approaches. These include description, analysis of the issues and processes of marginalization, analysis of status in the larger society, and/or comparison with other populations. They will seek to examine not only differences between these populations and others, but also diversity within these populations.

Community service is a concrete social laboratory for diversity because the office
maintains numerous connections with service organizations and agencies in the greater Cleveland area. Most of these organizations are in economically poor neighborhoods, serve the poor, and serve vulnerable populations. Often the people in these areas come from diverse backgrounds (racial and ethnic, age, economic, disability, recent immigrants or migrant, etc.).

The Center for Global Education is dependent on the students who come to JCU. It does not recruit students. However, it feels that as foreign students increase in numbers at JCU and as USA undergrads with an experience of international education or a desire for such choose JCU, then there will be an incentive to recruit a more international faculty. What the Office of Global Education can testify to is that given the opportunity to recognize their differences and similarities and to learn how to mix with one another, students come to appreciate both the richness of diversity and their own ethnicity. In other words, they experience diversity and multiculturalism as something that is part of their life at JCU.

The Core Curriculum has a syllabi review every three years, the students’ assessments of Core every two years, and a senior survey. 84% of the students respond favorably to the diversity content in the Core.

The Center for Community Service is in the process of improving its assessment process, developing assessment instruments and methods to gauge a wide range of impacts. The present assessment process includes periodic phone calls with the community-based partners, an annual Student Volunteer and Community Service survey during freshman first days, oral interviews of students returning forms and keys.

Vis-à-vis questions about the administration’s support and leadership, there were these somewhat diverse reflections.

“There has been no clear vision. It would be good to see the administration proactively decide where the university is going in regard to diversity and multiculturalism. There is no center for multicultural studies. It would be nice to see something in writing re funding, programs, faculty, and students.”
“In the past the vision was sort of a 1960s civil rights vision, which produced polar tensions (equal rights, equal access, recruiting African-American students and on not planning on changing the university). There hasn’t been much structural change. While Fr. Glynn has a missionary vision to bring more diversity to JCU, that vision is not clear. The new OMA will be the conveyer of that vision and that is why this appointment is so crucial.”
“The university is making an attempt to make diversity and multiculturalism a major part of the curriculum and programs, but the administration needs to enforce this university-wide. The lack of an open search for the AVP is a good example. Although the current AVP is a well-qualified candidate for the position, an open search would have shown an attempt to improve a diversity presence in leadership roles on this campus. There is no action principle. When we hire, we look at other Jesuit universities. We need to open searches up nationally.” [Note: In fact, there had been a year-long search for a new AVP, which failed to offer an acceptable candidate.]
“The First Year Seminar and Core would appreciate having space and fulltime secretary support.”
“There is need for administrative leadership to pull the centers together.”
“We lack a specific vision/language of diversity/multiculturalism.”
Concerning the links between these departments and the OMA, the following evaluative comments were offered.
“There are some informal contacts between the Core and OMA but these are inconsistent.”
“The AVP’s understanding of the relationship between OMA and Global Education is unclear. Originally, these were meant to merge but this has never happened. While these two offices share space, there is little communication, boundary issues (e.g., African studies), and scant program collaboration. Global education is perceived to be more tied to curriculum than is OMA. Both offices will grow and it is unclear how both can continue to remain in the same space."

It is clear that all these departments have articulated a good sense of their relationship to some dimension of multiculturalism and diversity. However, it is also clear that they feel keenly the need for leadership that transcends departments and offers a more comprehensive and bold vision of where the university wants to go in developing and implementing a more integral program for diversity and multiculturalism. For some of these directors, this vision would embrace the faculty, staff, and students, but also the trustees themselves and upper administration. It was suggested, too, that the integration of the Board and upper administration into a proactive role in the promotion of multiculturalism and diversity would, ideally, include their immersion in a Spanish-speaking experience.

The two faculty focus groups had somewhat different responses to the questions about diversity. They were asked to define or describe diversity, to offer an opinion about promoting diversity on campus, about students and diversity, about the OMA, and about leadership and diversity. The following is a summary of their reflections.

While there was a range of descriptions about what diversity means, there was an agreement that the terms include racial, sexual orientation, socioeconomic, and linguistic differences. A common theme was the recognition that JCU has a strong identity but lacks real diversity and that this is a trade off. In other universities there might be greater diversity but less unity.

When it came to the issue of promoting diversity on campus there was, again, a wide range of responses. Theoretically, people saw the need to reach out to bring underrepresented students into the campus; but, practically, they also seemed unsure about how to effect this, what a major shift in the student population would mean in terms of teaching techniques, standards, curriculum.

There was even more uncertainty about hiring in order to promote diversity among the faculty. Perhaps the summary statement that caught to mood of one group was this: Somebody should do an analysis of the hiring process and government guidelines so that the university can proceed with the hiring process legally. But no one should be hired simply to represent a certain race. The best candidate for the position should be hired.

Concerning students and diversity, there was both the realization that it can be a struggle to get minority students on campus and that many who come to JCU do not remain at JCU. A significant number of the faculty focus groups expressed concern that the institution meet these students’ needs (culturally) in the way of food, music, and events in order to attract these students and to keep them here. There was the realization that a strong impetus to recruit international and minority USA students would also mean more work for the faculty, a change in the school environment, and more financial help. To get at all this there must be more conversation about diversity and multiculturalism on campus and among the faculty. Finally, people thought that if multiculturalism and diversity became truly a practical reality among the student body at JCU, then faculty development would also be needed both in terms of classroom teaching and in developing strategies for environmental support.

In assessing their relationship to the OMA, some faculty expressed appreciation for what the office had been able to accomplish in the past ten years. However, generally, people either did not know much about the office or had participated as mentors or in other programs, but were critical or frustrated by the one or other aspect of the office. There were some positive suggestions made to improve the work of the OMA:

Child care on campus for students so that they can come to class on time and be attentive
The bad public transportation system to/from JCU—could JCU authorities intervene?
Students applying for financial aid are the last able to register, which puts them at an automatic disadvantage for class selection. Maybe students could be allowed to register before financial aid approval and deregister if they do not get funding. (Editorial Note: In actuality, students unable to register for classes are most often those who have an outstanding account balance with the business office. Typically the vast majority of those in arrears have already filled the required financial aide papers.)
The university should recruit a more diverse ethnic population outside Cleveland, from Cleveland Heights and Shaker Heights to get a better socio-economic mix
The University should find opportunities for students to live on campus, being a commuter can prove alienating.

The faculty interpreted the leadership issue less as something the upper administration should do and more as something that involved the new director of OMA. But there was also fairly wide expression of concern that the school not ask one person to do what, in fact, the entire school community must be willing to do. To that end there was a variety of suggestions about how to engage the entire faculty community to look at what it means to teach in a multicultural environment, at resident hall living, at ecumenical services that include all the members of the JCU community, and, especially, at an overhaul of the mentoring program.

From both the directors of key programs and the faculty focus groups there seems to be a consensus that administrative, faculty, and professional staff need to know especially how to engage multiculturalism and diversity within their respective areas of responsibility and influence. Such engagement needs clearer directives from the president and the Board. While the OMA is an important component in this process, the task is too demanding and too extensive to be the ultimate responsibility of one person and one office. The institutional commitment in Goal 4 of The Strategic Plan represents an institutional will, but there needs to be some central and authoritative voice and energy that can coordinate the implementation of the university’s efforts to bring this will into operation. Finally, there is a quiet recognition among faculty, directors, and administrators that right now we are all involved in issues of diversity and multiculturalism at JCU. Perhaps we do not reflect enough on our own diversity as a creative force in the life of this community, harnessing our differences so that we move beyond lobbies of self-interest and negotiations to imaginative ways to discuss the richness differences can bring to how we think and act as a community of teachers and learners.

4. Resume. The purpose of this self-evaluation is to present a synoptic view of the strengths and weakness of JCU in the areas of multiculturalism and diversity. To that end, we suggest the following.

Major Strengths: There is a clear institutional commitment to multiculturalism and diversity. The diversity requirement in the JCU curriculum is strong. There is a healthy climate of concern among many faculty, staff, and administrators that JCU ought to be more proactive and creative in a comprehensive effort to diversify the population of the JCU community—faculty, staff, administrators as well as students. The OMA has a detailed critique of its operation and a new director so there is a certain impetus and direction for renewal. There are programmatic efforts to meet minority students’ needs in the Residence Halls. Many of the service and volunteer programs are oriented towards introducing JCU students to people of different races, economic groups, and cultures. While still modest, there is a growing endowment for minority student recruitment.

Major Weaknesses. There is need for a clear and sustained voice of authority to keep the commitment to diversity and multiculturalism before the collective consciousness of the university community. The rhetoric of commitment is there but operationally there seems to be no unified action that draws the individual efforts of faculty, staff, directors, and students together into a more integrated whole. Clearly, it is unfair and unwise to place the major responsibility on the new director of OMA. The community itself needs education in and a chance to talk about its own diversity and multiculturalism. Clearly there are other actions that the above report suggests; however, the fundamental weakness is the apprehension that we have no clear operational direction about what we want to do in the area of multiculturalism and diversity.

5. Recommendations from the Subcommittee.

The Committee recommends to the President of the University that he draft a statement, expressing the university vision and goals of multiculturalism and diversity as well as concrete policies vis-à-vis multiculturalism that would flow from the vision and goal (Such a statement might be related to the cultural dimension of multiculturalism).
The Committee recommends that the president appoint a representative from OMA to serve both on the University budget and planning committees.
The committee recommends the establishment of a consensus building activity undertaken by the board and senior administrative staff to articulate detailed action plans and timelines to achieve specific, significant, measurable multicultural/diversity outcomes (e.g.. Increase the diversity of faculty 10% per year, Increase the diversity of the student body 2% per year, etc.)
The committee recommends the establishment of professional activities among administrators, faculty, and staff to develop a common language for discussing and grappling with multicultural/diversity issues.
The committee recommends the development of an upper central administrative position (e.g. Additional Assistant Vice President) that would oversee and coordinate multicultural/diversity efforts at the university. If this recommendation isn’t followed, the committee recommends a central committee, reporting to the president, deans, and the board that would oversee and coordinate multicultural/diversity efforts at the university.
The Committee recommends that the University give high priority to hiring minority faculty and staff.
The Committee recommends that the OMA have an advisory board with high level representatives (e.g. from student affairs, academics, and administration at JCU, and from the wider non-JCU community).
The committee recommends that OMA provides an annual written evaluation of all its personnel and programs.
The committee recommends that OMA provides a formal review every five years of the office’s commitment to mission obtainment, of goals, and objectives success of programs, etc.
The committee recommends OMA’s involvement in the Faculty Forum to generate a greater faculty connection to OMA.
The committee recommends the review of increased staffing needs for OMA in light of the increased expectations and responsibilities of the office.

For comments or questions, please contact Dr. Elizabeth Swenson.