Newly-formed committee grapples with topics, definition of ‘diversity’
Jyotsna Shivanandan, Will Canine, Nani Gilkerson, Veronica Prout, Amanda Roberts, Cirila Estela Vastuez Guzan and Jaspreet Gill were confirmed last Sunday by ASWC to sit on an all-student Diversity Committee. Nominations Chair John Stewart was surprised at the number of qualified applicants who stepped forward. The Nominations Committee completed three rounds of interviews before finally choosing nominees. The student body has shown definite interest in the committee.
Gilkerson explained that the committee will seek out student input on diversity for this year’s Symposium planning process. They want to “make sure [the Symposium] is something staff and students want. It should be as transparent as possible.” The Diversity Committee is not, however, responsible for actually planning the Symposium. That job belongs to a committee of faculty, staff and students appointed by George Bridges and Jed Schwendiman. Three students from the Diversity Committee will also sit on the Symposium Planning Committee, acting as liaisons.
Perhaps the biggest question for members right now is how they want to define diversity. Last year’s Symposium focused on race relations and community; Gilkerson would like to keep the theme narrow because race is, he said, “topical, not pedagogical. Other topics might disclude certain departments or individuals, but race is about everybody.” Shivanandan and Symposium Planning Committee member Bryce McKay hope to expand the discussion to other definitions of diversity.
As passionate as some students are toward the new committee, others are skeptical. George Bridges is well-known on campus for keywords like “sports funding” and “diversity.” Some students worry that we’re spending inordinate amounts of resources while ignoring other important issues. “Maybe instead of adding a Diversity Committee,” said a student who wished to remain anonymous, “we should lower the tuition.”
Shivanandan seconded the wariness toward the college’s treatment of diversity. Coming to Whitman from Mumbai, India, she makes up part of the school’s international student body. She recognizes that the admissions team has been making efforts. The class of 2011 includes 5.4 percent international students, as opposed to 2004’s 3.9 percent. Of this year’s first-years, 19.4 percent come from “ethnically and racially diverse background”: meaning African-, Latin-, Asian- or Native American. But the statistics reflect what students intuit: Money does matter. Of 310 international 2007 applicants, 42 (12 percent) were admitted, much fewer than the school’s 47 percent overall admission rate.
Dean of Admissions Tony Cabasco confirms that his admissions team has limited international student scholarships available. “We admitted the best and brightest…we could’ve easily admitted twice that number.”
It has been suggested that the college neglects other types of diversity in its quest for exotic faces. Shivanandan has been featured in much Admissions publicity because of her status as a diversity student. “I’m tired of being exploited,” she said.
International student orientation policies may need improvement as well. “People ask why I’m only friends with international students. Those are the first people you have to spend time with on campus. It’s not some black sisterhood thing we have. It’s like a Scramble.”
Whitman has had diversity on the mind since at least the late 1980s when Cabasco was here as a student, as evidenced by statistics and Pioneer articles. Cabasco says the admissions office, like some of the new Diversity Committee members, tries to define diversity broadly. Cabasco lists geography, ethnicity, sexual orientation, talents and interests among diversity criteria. It’s easy to see why photos target racial and ethnic diversity: Other types are difficult to show. As Cabasco says, “You don’t have students walking around with signs: I’m poor.”
This complexity is exactly what has given students incentive to join the Diversity Committee. They want to discuss diversity in a tactful way while we have a good context to do it. “The ‘real world’ is a lot less tolerant,” said McKay. “While we’re here, we have this one chance to develop a willingness to learn. We’re gonna enter the world more prepared.”