Nicolas Rodriquez: In need of a new approach to diversity

What path have we taken since the 1960s at Penn? It is hard to understand where Penn was then, and today, we are trying to figure out where we are going. Our school celebrates diversity, but when a handful of student leaders presented a list of demands for addressing diversity at Penn to the administration last week, the reality of student life here clashed with the image of life at Penn.

When addressing diversity issues, the American consciousness seems to numb in mid-thought. It's as if these issues had been resolved with the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the lament looming over our collective memories of great martyrs like Martin Luther King Jr. and Cesar Chavez taints our imagination.

We as a nation are not comfortable revisiting the past or reconciling with what's come and gone. Instead, we seek to move ahead, forging new paths and conquering new territories.

Contemporary narratives confronting issues of diversity are subsumed by the fabrication of equal opportunity and affirmative action programs. These images and words are in the collective conscious of popular American dialogue. But these terms -- diversity, minority and others -- are being remanufactured with new meanings, turning pain and violence into frustration and ambivalence.

The underlying pain still exists for a large portion of America. The fear of being stopped by police, mistaken for a criminal. Fears of not only achieving a degree but of being alone, not accepted, and trying to make this place better.

When looking at diversity at Penn, how does this reality translate?

According to the school's Agenda for Excellence: "Tapping our diversity to strengthen ties across all these boundaries enriches the intellectual climate and creates a more vibrant community. Fostering and nourishing this diversity, especially among students, faculty, staff and trustees, must remain central to the core mission of the University."

The Student Movement for Change, a coalition of students from various communities at Penn, sent a few representatives to meet with the administration last week. As our mission statement says, "The movement consists of a diverse group of concerned students who aim to create a sense of belonging for all Penn students, especially for communities of color.

At last week's meeting with President Rodin and Provost Barchi, demands were presented to them by representatives from SMC. The anger expressed from the administration and discussion that ensued showed a great divide between the concerns and goals of the administration and the concerns and goals of students at Penn.

Why did these students list demands addressing recruitment and retention, resource centers, ethnic studies and the Division of Public Safety? Was it rash to demand more resources for Penn's cultural centers or for more efforts on the recruitment and retention of students of diverse backgrounds?

President Rodin once said, "If Penn intends to educate leaders, as we frequently proclaim, then we must recognize and accommodate the diversity of the society we expect our graduates to lead."

If our Penn community is feeling unaccommodated, is Penn's plan for addressing diversity working?

The fact is that the consciousness of Penn, like that of America, is starting to divide into factions. There is a divide among a) the institution's current approach to diversity, b) a large body of students who feel neglected and c) those still unfamiliar with or ambivalent to the situation. This shows that current methods of accommodation may be failing.

Where the difference of opinion last week came was in the nature of the demands. Were these requests intended as a plan for the University or were they intended to be a personal attack on administrators, as the president and provost perceived?

When a representative of SMC was told by the president, "I'm talking now, this is my office, you can leave," then perhaps what was once the business of the University became personal.

Why complain or demand? Perhaps what we are seeing here is that while in many ways complacency has begun to set in, a new consciousness is emerging to challenge the culture of institutions. People are seeking to challenge the progress of an institution that does not hear their pleas for support.

Though these demands were not personal attacks or meant to be, perhaps these students feel that they have to resort to demands. The fact that administrators have been defensive about their own plans shows that students' efforts to provide assistance and encourage dialogue with the administration has been unfruitful.

Dialogue is important, but it has to be on an honest and real level. Sentiment appears to be changing here at Penn -- what is emerging, I don't think many can truly say. But what seems to be true is this: frustration with complacency is beginning to change from emotion into action.

If we intend to educate ourselves, as we often proclaim, then all of us -- students, faculty and especially administrators -- must recognize that Penn's efforts at accommodating diversity have to change. Nicolas Rodriquez is a senior Political Science major from Sanger, Calif. and spokesman for the Latino Coalition.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.