Debatable Diversity: Critical Dialogues on Change in American Universities by Padilla Raymond V. Montiel Miguel & Miguel Montiel

Author:Padilla, Raymond V.,Montiel, Miguel & Miguel Montiel
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield
Published: 1998-03-14T16:00:00+00:00

The Rules of Engagement

MM: Let me take you back to another conversation that you had with a different provost, Kinsinger. He wanted to make sure that the interests of minorities were congruent with the interests of the larger university community. It is also important to point out that Kinsinger wanted to decentralize authority and shift it from the central administration to the various colleges. He wanted to accomplish this in a principled way. One principle was that he would never appoint a committee whose charge went counter to the existing mission of the university. This put us in a very difficult situation. Specifically, this meant that whatever was done relative to minorities had to be congruent with the rhythm of the university. In other words, we could not have a contentious situation. Harmony was to be pursued.

But how could such harmony be achieved in our case? This is a key question. By definition we are outsiders. So how can our interests be harmonized with the interests of the university? That was the dilemma facing the Minority Advisory Council. It was a dilemma that in retrospect placed us in a trap because there was never any interest on the part of people in power to harmonize with our interests—it was always someone else’s interests that prevailed. Nevertheless, this was the rule under which we engaged the university.

As an aside, I believe that the current provost has continued Kinsinger’s decentralization philosophy, but this time without a definitive set of principles. It seems that the university, although it talks about improving undergraduate education, enhancing minority student participation, and improving its relations with the community, does not have the power or the leadership to implement these ideas. The deans do whatever the hell they want and nobody seems to be able to stop them. It is a very complicated situation that has everything to do with the fragmentation of our society and an absence of leadership at all levels: majority and minority, faculty and administration, business and government.

RP: I don’t remember that conversation specifically, but I do remember some of those ideas. For many years my argument has been, first, that we did not get very far with the universities when we dealt with them as if they were our enemies. Second, when one looks at what universities say about themselves, as reflected in their catalogs, for example, their stated goals are in fact not antithetical to ours. We are both interested in the production of knowledge, the advancement of technology, the development of civic leaders, the critique of society, and so on.

MM: The issue is, are we included in the universities’ mission? Ultimately, we also have to question whether the universities are serious about their mission statements; more and more I believe that this is not the case, at least not here at our university. We can touch on this later, but for now let’s just stick to the question of whether we could be an integral part of the university.

RP: My point

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.