Running head: RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 1

Presidential Leadership: Institutional Tension in Racial Campus Climate Unrest

Ashley Baird, Rose Ann E. Gutierrez, Eva Long, and Yassaman Raouf

Seattle University
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 2

Introduction

Despite popular notions that we are in a post-racial era, research demonstrates that

racially hostile climates continue to be a prominent issue on college campuses across the United

States (Hurtado, Alvarado, & Guillermo-Wann, 2015). Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, and

Allen (1998) discuss the lack of a common framework in understanding campus racial climates

for developing appropriate practices to enhance campus climate for students of color. According

to Kezar, Eckel, Contreras-McGavin, and Quaye (2008), institutions have fallen short in

addressing diversity issues such as creating and maintaining an inclusive campus climate for

students of color on their college campuses. Hurtado et al., (2015) explain that an overwhelming

majority of students who identify as Asian American, African American, Latina/o, multiracial,

and Arab Americans reported incidents of racial discrimination and bias. The complexity of a

racially hostile climate and presidential challenges in addressing them has continued to increase

in recent years (Inside Higher Ed, 2016).

College leadership, specifically college presidents, have a critical role in accelerating

diversity agendas to create more inclusive campus communities that contributes to the success of

students of color (Kezar et al., 2008). As racial tensions and campus protests continue to raise

nationally, college presidents need to take into consideration how to better address and manage

racial protests at their institutions; while the decision making process at institutions may be a

gradual process, recent racially heightened events led by students demand for an expedited

process.

Understanding that presidents provide the administrative, political, symbolic and

entrepreneurial leadership to make functions, this paper will examine the unique position of

college presidents in addressing and managing campus racial climate (Kezar, 2005). We identify
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 3

three themes that presidents should consider to advance diversity on their campus: understanding

the racial salience of students of color as it relates to campus climate, bringing to light the history

of exclusion on their college campus, and analyzing the impact of structural diversity.

Furthermore, recommendations for leadership strategies and institutional transformation in

creating more inclusive communities will be provided for college presidents based on the

literature (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Kezar & Eckel, 2005). Limitations in the research in

addition to implications for student affairs professionals will also be discussed.

Defining Racial Salience and its Relation to Campus Climate

In the article titled Thinking about race: The salience of racial identity at two and four

year colleges, Hurtado et al., (2015) explain racial identity development for college students

constitute multiple stages ranging from lack of awareness to internalized racism and confusion.

Advancing ones understanding of racial identity development is a critical component of healthy

psychological development. Hurtado et al., (2015) assert without proper structures to understand

and reflect on ones identity, students become ill-equipped to make academic and personal goals.

They explain that because the early stages in the models reflect an unquestioned acceptance of

dominant culture, rather than being colorblind, it is necessary for individuals to become color

conscious in order to critically engage in a diverse society marked by unequal power relations

and status differences (Hurtado et al., 2015, p. 131). The salience of race and racial

development are more pronounced for students that are not of the dominant culture because their

experiences are marked by social stratifications that put them at a disadvantage for

socioeconomic mobility. Research shows African Americans, Arab Americans, and Asian

Americans think about race much more often than their White counterparts (Steck, Heckert, &

Heckert, 2003). Hurtado et al.,s (2015) findings reveal that in our so-called post-racial era, Arab
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 4

Americans reported highest rate of thinking about race, followed by Asian Americans, Latino/a,,

and Black students (p.140). In order for individuals to advance their identity development and

critically engage in a diverse society, campus structures have to be in place to support this

development. A hostile racial campus climate creates challenges for students of color to feel

welcome and engage in healthy critical reflection about their racial history and identity. Since

racial salience is intimately connected with how one perceives the climate of their campus,

campus leaders are also challenged with creating opportunities for healthy identity development

given limited resources and structural politics. College presidents play an integral part of the

campus climate as their strategic plans set the tone for the importance of diversity to their

campus culture.

Racial Salience, Campus Climate, and Presidential Leadership

The preceding paragraphs established the relationship between racial salience and its

impact in shaping a campus culture where, depending on the campus environment, students feel

a supportive or hostile environment for their development. Presidential leadership in setting an

institutional agenda and strategic directions play a critical role in creating a welcoming campus

climate (Kezar & Eckel, 2007). Presidential involvement in advancing campus climate is critical

because college presidents oversee the campus mission, set the tone for the colleges direction,

are responsible to key stakeholders, and are charged with key campus decisions (Kezar & Eckel,

2007). Several studies examine presidential strategies for improving the campus climate such as

appointing diversity task forces, incorporating diversity-related terms in the mission statement,

and consensus building through institutional buy-in (Kezar, Eckel, Contreras-McGavin, &

Quaye, 2008). Richardson and Skinner (1990) cite University of California, Los Angeles

(UCLA), Memphis State University, and Wayne University as schools used in their research to
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 5

determine their effectiveness in recruiting and retaining minority students. They note that

successful institutions exhibit organizational cultures that prioritize diversity recruitment in their

institutional agenda. UCLA noted the commitment of their chancellor as one of the main reasons

that minority-student achievement continued to be a high institutional priority. Leadership

commitment was measured through improved persistence and recruitment of diverse student

groups. These examples demonstrate the relationship between leadership commitments in

building an organizational culture that creates a supportive climate for students of color. These

strategies alone, however, do not adequately address the concern for understanding racial

salience for students of color. When creating an institutional diversity agenda, a personal

commitment from presidents is an important element for recognizing the salience of race to

students lives. Co-curricular activities are one way in which students of color experience a

welcoming campus climate (Hurtado et. al, 2005, p. 144). Following this suggestion, presidents

can engage with students to provide meaningful opportunities for students of color to reflect and

voice their campus experiences. This is a two-pronged approach where students can engage in

dialogue with key campus figures and thereby signaling that their identities are important and

presidents have an opportunity to become better informed about student issues.

Presidents need to have a deep and well-informed understanding of student identities in

order to develop strategies that adequately address challenges and concerns for students of color.

One challenge for presidents is that they tend to be externally focused on fundraising and

establishing key external partnerships; therefore, they delegate a variety of tasks to committees to

do the diversity work (Kezar et al., 2008). This powerful statement attests to how presidents

can gain better understanding into the students racial backgrounds. Perhaps most surprising is

the direct involvement of presidents with students. Every president mentioned the pivotal role of
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 6

their relationship with students as a way for them to help support students of color by checking

their assumptions, reminding them of their passion, and asking for input in guiding their work

(Kezar et al., 2008, p. 88). In this connection, a presidents own awareness and engagement is

the first step towards setting a tone for a critically-engaged campus environment. In another

research article with 30 presidents interviewed, one interviewee noted that [presidents] need to

examine their own commitment to diversity. If you have it, fine-tune your values and vision and

make it known (Kezar & Eckel, 2007, p. 7). Having a personal commitment and connection to

student identities is a critical asset to authentic relationship with students that allow welcoming

and inclusive climate for students of color.

History of Exclusion

In addition to salience of racial identity, Hurtado et al., (1998) identify institutional

history of inclusion or exclusion as one of four key dimensions of campus context in advancing

racial and ethnic diversity, asserting that most predominantly white institutions have a history of

exclusion that can have a significant impact on the their contemporary climate and practices

(Hurtado et al., 1998). A significant amount of research would seem to support the impact of

history of exclusion on the experiences of students of color, particularly African American

students, leading to increased salience of racial identity in historically white spaces. This

includes behaviors like thinking of race or racial identity more frequently or being more likely to

report race on demographic and enrollment form (McDonald, 2011; Sanders-Thompson, 1999;

Steck, Heckert, & Heckert, 2003). Additionally, the climate of microaggressions, lowered

expectations, and individualizing experiences of students of color in predominantly white

environments can lead to what psychologists call Mundane Extreme Environmental Stress or

MEES (Smith, Hung, & Franklin, 2003). College presidents cannot rewrite their institution's
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 7

histories, "nor should they deny that they exist" (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 283). Kezar and Eckel

(2005) quote a participant in their study advising incoming presidents to take stock of

institutional context, saying "every president has to assess his or her own setting" (p. 5).

Certainly, this includes knowing faculty research, funding considerations, enrollments and the

external forces driving them, and other traditional areas of governance. However, in addition to

these considerations, many predominantly white institutions have their own unique, painful, and

still unresolved history of exclusion and racism on campus, and this is an important element of

the institutional setting that an incoming president inherits and must work to address.

Kezar and Eckel (2005) note diversity efforts tend to be "fractured", such as an initiative

to increase students of color enrolled in STEM fields, a scholarships for students of color in a

specific field, identity-specific programming within the realm of student affairs, or through

actual coursework in Ethnic Studies departments. The urge incoming presidents to combat

siloed efforts by making campus-wide agendas, and in doing so, showing an institutional

commitment to inclusion and ongoing diversity efforts. Findings from an earlier study on

campus diversity using data from The American Council on Education urge "robust" and "visible

action" on campus-wide systemic change (Kezar & Eckel, 1999). How, then, might college

presidents meaningfully acknowledge their institution's history of exclusion as they "[move]

from commitment and rhetoric to action (Kezar & Eckel, 2005, p. 6) on diversity initiatives?

One approach is through the curriculum itself. Research by Kezar et al., (2008) indicates an

"interrelated" rather than linear approach to diversity, relying on a "human resource frame of

leadership" to build a network of support for diversity efforts with allies in the administrative,

programming, teaching, and governance realms to engage stakeholders across campus and

identify key spaces where diversity initiatives are enacted.

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 8

Curriculum

Curriculum is one of these spaces, requiring presidents to engage and partner with

faculty. Hurtado et al., (1998) warn college leadership that they should not assume that

incoming students or other constituents know their institution's history, "nor should they assume

that teaching about these histories will lead to dissatisfaction" (p. 284). While curriculum and

learning environment are traditionally the realm of faculty, a participant in Kezar et al., (2005)s

research countered "it is just too important, it is the core of the institution" (p. 17). One area

where a president might work to mitigate the impact of an institution's history of exclusion

include assessment and evaluation of curriculum and learning environment on meeting the needs

of historically excluded students (Kezar et al., 2008). Another is facilitating dialogues among

faculty on facilitating learning (Kezar et al., 2008) or providing "faculty support and guidance in

becoming aware of their biases and the effect of these biases on their students" (Hurtado et al.,

1998, p. 293). Just as the president as an individual must reflect on and commit to his or her own

commitment to inclusion (Kezar & Eckel, 2005), a participant in this study warns that without

meaningful buy-in and "true partnership" with faculty, diversity initiatives will not succeed

(Kezar et al., 2008).

Physical and Intellectual Acknowledgement

Another institutional approach to addressing history of exclusion through co-curricular

programming and spaces is engaging student affairs staff. One such strategy is the

implementation of "safe spaces" for historically excluded identities such as students of color "to

congregate to feel comfortable, candidly air their frustrations, and discuss necessary

interventions for making their experiences more meaningful on campus" (Kezar et al., 2008, p.

83). Safe spaces might implicitly acknowledge a history of exclusion, but institutions can also
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 9

use campus space more explicitly to engage with their histories of exclusion and racism. In

early 2016, popular Black History blog Black Then compiled a list of college campuses that have

publicly acknowledged their history with slavery (Cunningham, 2016). University of Virginia,

Brown University, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have all constructed

memorials to honor slaves who worked on their campuses (Cunningham, 2016). Washington

and Lee university removed the confederate flag, an artifact of slavery, from their campus in

2014 (Cunningham, 2016). Additionally, university presidents can use intellectual and academic

space to acknowledge their campuses' histories of exclusion through the form of statements,

apologies, and research. In some cases, such as at Brown University, Harvard University, and

Princeton University (Cunningham, 2016), these efforts might be spearheaded by faculty

research, and because of this, they pose an opportunity for presidents to partner with faculty as

part of a campus-wide initiative and "garner broader support for their efforts to become more

diverse" (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 284). Finally, presidents themselves can issue statements in an

effort to be "clear about an institution's past history of exclusion and the detrimental impact that

this history has had on the campus" (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 283). The University of Virginia

and Emory University have both issued statements of apology for their historical involvement

with slavery, and Princeton University has issued a public statement (Cunningham, 2016).

While these efforts cannot erase history of racism and exclusion on campus, they can convey the

commitment and values of presidential diversity initiatives.

Impact of Structural Diversity

The relationship between racial saliency, history of exclusion, and structural diversity are

interconnected elements that influence the climate for racial and ethnic diversity. The

institutional context is made up of the pull from government and policies to social and historic
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 10

aspects. As defined by Hurtado et al., (1998), structural diversity refers primarily to the

numerical representation of various groups as a method of achieving equity, often in response to

goals for affirmative action and plans for desegregation (p. 31). Historically, populations were

excluded from some institutions of higher education based on race and gender, so affirmative

action policies were designed and put in place to level the playing field for those populations

that have historically been discriminated against (Davis, 2012). Research was conducted to

examine 17 selective schools in the nation and found support for the dominant theory that

suggest adoption of policies such as affirmative action was precipitated by urban and campus

unrest in the North during the late 1960s (Stulberg & Chen, 2014). This was the beginning of

how institutions addressed racial unrests on colleges. According to research done by Stulberg &

Chen (2014):

campus protests and urban riots in the North posed a powerful new threat to the

symbolic legitimacy of the social order. College administrators resolved the problem by

incorporating racial considerations into the admissions process. Under this theory, race-

conscious affirmative action was prompted by social upheavals in the late 1960s that

precipitated a cultural shift in the permissibility of race-sensitive policies. (p. 36)

The role of urban riots and campus protests has led to the adoption of affirmative action in race-

conscious admissions process. Disruption is what led to examining how institutions are creating

spaces of exclusivity. Understanding what had happened in the late 1960s, we see a relationship

between what has happened in the past and how it has translated into the present. Racial campus

unrests which are movements that are initiated by students of color across the nation are

challenging the ways in which institutions are perpetuating practices that exclude the narratives
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 11

of those who exist on the margins. Students are doing the disrupting for campus stakeholders

who should be engaged in creating spaces for inclusivity.

Although good intentions were explored to increase diversity quotas for access and equity

for students of color, and enhance the experiences of white counterparts for shaping dynamic

social interactions and maintain a multicultural environment as a high institutional priority, there

are negative impacts that affect students when there is a lack of structural diversity (Hurtado et

al., 1998). With a significant growth in diverse populations, the institution must parallel services

and support to make sure that they are recruited, retained and persist.

Structurally, when a collegiate racial climate is positive, there are four elements that are

being met: the inclusion of students, faculty, and administrators of color, a curriculum that

reflects the historical and contemporary experiences of people of color; programs to support the

recruitment, retention, and graduation of students of color; and a college mission that reinforces

the institutions commitment to pluralism (Solorzano, Ceja, & Yosso, 2000). Across the

demands that students are asking for in their activism, thematically, these elements are not being

met to advance their educational attainment within the current practices of their institutions.

Incongruence of Mission and Lived Experiences

Similarities across institutional missions show that there is a strong support for diversity

and access for all individuals who wish to advance in academia. It is clear that institutional

hypocrisy is in play where there is an institutional negligence in supporting that initiative.

Racial/ethnic minorities and white students have expressed frustration with the incongruence of

espoused and enacted institutional values concerning diversity (Harper et al., 2007, p. 16).

Colleges and universities set the expectation for cross-racial interaction as a way to broaden

experiences and acknowledge cultural differences. Many students have expressed

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 12

disappointment at how institutions acknowledge or avoid the topic of race and come ill-

prepared to engage in cross-racial interactions in a meaningful way (Harper et al., 2007).

Consequently, that leads to negligence in administering racial differences inside and outside of

the classroom.

To portray an institutional mission that prioritizes diversity, tokenism is inevitable. As an

individual of color situated within an institution that lacks structural diversity, members

underrepresented groups are regarded as symbols rather than individuals. Tokenism contributes

to the heightened visibility of underrepresented groups, and the distortion of individuals images

to fit existing stereotypes (Hurtado et al., 2007, p. 31). Often at times, when there is a small

percentage of students of color, faculty or staff at an institution, these individuals are constantly

asked to be the public figure to address the universitys commitment to diversity, educate others

on their marginalized experience, or share their narrative in order to convince large donors to

contribute to a funding campaign. Short term marketing efforts are made and individuals of

color continue to be cycled in and out of publicity.

Complexity of Increase in Diverse Student Enrollment

Affirmative action has pushed greater accountability on institutions to destigmatize its

role and responsibility of educating the elite in the society. Increasing the enrollment of students

of color does not come without a complexity of issues. Although there has been an increase in

students of color enrolled in postsecondary education, minority students continue to feel

alienated as long as there continues to be inadequate resources and means to support their

educational attainment. These resources may include the development of ethnic studies

programs, diverse student organizations, culturally-sensitive academic support programs, and

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 13

multicultural programming (Hurtado et al., 1998). There is an outcry for institutional self-

examination and restructuring to be more responsive to racial campus climate unrest.

Research shows the effects of diverse student enrollments on a variety of student

outcomes suggesting that greater structural diversity may be beneficial for students (Hurtado et

al., 1999; Hurtado et al., 1998). Structural diversity considers the representation amongst the

organizational makeup of the institution from faculty, staff, board of trustees, and university

president. Internal and external commitment to diversity and inclusion will impact current

structures to enhance the racial campus climate. An increase in student of color enrollment

should translate to similar increases in the hiring practices of faculty and staff. There should be

an equally strong commitment to diversifying the faculty.

Similar to a history of exclusion in relationship with students, there has been historical

patterns of exclusivity where the title of administrator is considered whiteness property in

higher education, so therefore, white counterparts have become an organizational norm in

higher education (Wolf & Dilworth, 2015, p. 667; Hurtado et al., 1999). If structural conflicts of

claiming space and privilege continues to exist within higher education, these attitudes will

continue to perpetuate within the student experience. Rather, faculty of color have demonstrated

positive impacts on the diversity in higher education. Literature on diversity in higher education

suggests that students of color seek out faculty that look like them and who they believe will

understand their experiences; faculty of color serve as important representatives that play a

significant role in advancing diversity initiatives, and the diversity of faculty helps retain new

and current faculty and staff (Hurtado et al., 1999). Additionally, the barriers of retaining faculty

of color need to be addressed. These barriers include: lack of professional identity, lack of career

path, poor working conditions, inadequate compensation, competition from outside of the
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 14

academy and competition within the academy (Wolf et al., 2015). The existence and retention of

faculty of color correlations to the confidence and resilience of students of color to persist.

Lastly, it is without surprise and confidence that in order to advance educational equity

and address racial campus unrest is by building an effective leadership that is culturally

inclusive, willing to take risks, culturally self-aware, able to separate individuals from

stereotypes, and viewing cultural differences as assets (Kezar, 1997; Kezar et al., 1999; Kezar et

al., 2006; Yosso, 2005;). We know that the boards of trustees are accountable for the mission of

the institution and responsible for the decision making of the institution; we need to begin to

address the minimal attention brought to the diversity as it relates to governance (AGB, 2010).

Currently, diversity within campus governance is described as differences in position or level

within an institution and gender (Kezar, 1997, p. 63). Exploring the ways in which to

effectively increase and support a diverse institution is something that is not being addressed. As

key decision makers of the institution, there is great power and capital to move the institution

towards an institution that acknowledges the power of racial saliency and the impacts of a history

of inclusion.

Recommendations for College Presidents

In American society, education has been deemed as an equalizer, yet higher education

remains a source of inequality; Engstrom and Tinto (2008) state access without support is not

opportunity. While society has provided interventions, programs, and other sources of support

for students of color to get to college, issues continue to arise regarding getting the same

population of students through college. Formal education serves as a pathway for personal and

professional advancement, yet postsecondary institutions disproportionately provide that

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 15

opportunity to some groups of students over others (Kezar & Eckel, 2005, p. 1; Kezar et al.,

2008).

Moreover, diversity is increasingly becoming an institutional objective, and to fully

ensure the success of diverse students is a presidential issue (Hurtado & Harper, 2007; Kezar &

Eckel, 2005). College leadership, specifically college presidents, have a critical role in

accelerating diversity agendas to create more inclusive campus communities that contributes to

the success of students of color (Kezar et al., 2008). Kezar and Eckel (2005) mention mentorship

and advising of students of color is the responsibility of all faculties, not solely faculty of color.

The work to implement a diversity agenda and similar initiatives is a collective responsibility

that must begin with the symbolic, hierarchical leader at the top, the college president. Based on

the trends in the literature, this research provides three recommendations for college presidents:

(1) creating a campus agenda that puts commitment into action; (2) utilizing research and data

intentionally for advancement; and (3) supporting diversity through budget allocations.

Creating a Campus Agenda that Puts Commitment into Action

The first recommendation is creating a campus agenda that puts commitment into action

(Kezar & Eckel, 2005). An institution can include diversity in its strategic plan, but without

purposeful, proper implementation coupled with the active support of the president, it does not

become an institutional reality. Strategically, this commitment to diversity needs to function

structurally and should connect back to the institutional mission (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Kezar

& Eckel, 2005). As discussed earlier, a presidents personal connection to diversity issues can

help them to check their assumptions and create strategies that are better aligned with student

needs. Racial salience is critical in the development for students of color, and integrating a

diversity agenda in every aspect of the institution including strategic plan, curriculum, and hiring
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 16

practices exemplifies the presidents personal commitment and connection to students of color.

When interweaving a commitment into varying aspects of the institution, there should exist

either an informal or formal accountability system. In practice, presidents can ask deans how

they are implementing diversity into their work and/or what their updates are regarding their own

diversity plans (Kezar & Eckel, 2005). This informal system holds individuals accountable for

not only planning for diversity, but actually advancing diversity on campus (Kezar & Eckel,

2005). Furthermore, presidents should regularly revisit their campus diversity plans during

board meetings (Kezar & Eckel, 2005). Cultivating support early and continuously from the

Board of Trustees is imperative, especially when student racial protests arise; boards can serve

as essential presidential allies (Kezar & Eckel, 2005, p. 11) through advocacy, financial support,

partnerships, networks, and activities. Moreover, a strategic way to obtain buy in from the board

includes the second recommendation in utilizing research and data intentionally for

advancement.

Utilizing Research and Data Intentionally for Advancement

The second recommendation is utilizing research and data intentionally for advancement.

Hurtado et al., (1998) discuss that many institutions are undertaking assessments of their

climate for diversity to understand better their own institutional context (p. 296). Due to the

history of exclusion, specifically from predominantly white institutions, assessments can be used

to better understand previous and current institutional context for better informed decisions and

practices. Chessman and Wayt (2016) found that based on the student demands from national

protests, the most recurring demand was a review and revision of institutional policies. More

specifically, students demanded for more transparency in the process, student oversight,

protocols for racial discriminatory acts, and climate assessments (Chessman & Wayt, 2016).
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 17

After the collection and analysis of data have been compiled into a comprehensive research

document, this information should be continuously revisited for further research, policy, and

practice. For example, Seattle University established a task force in 2013 on diversity and

inclusive excellence that examined and analyzed the data from Rankin & Associates

Consultings (2015) Campus Climate Assessment Project. The Task Force on Diversity and

Inclusive Excellence (2016) developed a final report with specific recommendations for campus

initiatives outlined after the primary six goals based on the data from the assessment. When data

from campus climate assessments are available, presidents need to work in collaboration with

other departments on campus to implement a diversity commitment into action as mentioned in

the first recommendation. These recommendations and specific initiatives need to be integrated

as part of the institutional structure even after the task force dissolves after fulfilling their charge

to demonstrate the presidents personal commitment to diversity (Kezar & Eckel, 2005). Kezar

and Eckel (2005) suggest [creating] and [satisfying] a culture of evidence surrounding the

success of students of color is essential to progress (p. 16). Data adds legitimacy to this work

campus wide and can also help set funding priorities (Kezar & Eckel, 2005, p. 16; Harper &

Hurtado, 2007).

Supporting Diversity through Budget Allocations

The third recommendation is supporting diversity through budget allocation (Kezar &

Eckel, 2005). In a society where money is equated to the value of an individuals profession,

college and university presidents who purposefully allocate money to support diversity initiatives

structurally demonstrate their continuous commitment to diversity as a priority. The inception of

higher education institutions did not have students of color in mind, so there exists a historical

pervasiveness of whiteness in space, curricula, and activities (Harper & Hurtado, 2007, p. 18)
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 18

based on the history of exclusion. Due to the saliency of race as an identity, students of color

have found difficulty in identifying cultural spaces as their own except for cultural centers

(Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado et al., 1998). Advancing diversity is a collective

responsibility and not the sole responsibility for cultural centers and/or faculty of color (Harper

& Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado et al., 1998; Kezar & Eckel, 2005). Additionally, presidents need to

advocate and protect safe, cultural spaces for students when they are in question or during an

institutional financial strain. Hurtado (2005) emphasizes the criticality including diversity in

both curriculum and co-curriculum, as it results in student development along many dimensions

of complex thinking and social cognitive growth (as cited in Harper & Hurtado, 2007, p. 20),

especially within the first two years of college. Presidents can [put] resources aside for hiring

faculty of color, [support] faculty projects that advance diversity or undertake curriculum

transformation efforts, and [provide] bonuses for meeting departmental targets of hiring faculty

of color or retaining students (Kezar & Eckel, 2005, p. 14). Additionally, presidents can

encourage collaboration between academic and student affairs divisions and departments in

student programming with financial incentives to leverage one another as assets. The presidents

involvement with student groups can further relieve fragmented multicultural programming that

function in silos and instead make institution-wide changes that are in congruence with student

voices (Kezar & Eckel, 2007). This is further supported by Hurtados (1992) research that

student-centered environments lead to lower racial tensions. Presidents who find the time in

getting know students on a micro-level coupled with allocating financial resources to support

diversity initiatives on a macro-level contribute to a positive campus climate (Kezar & Eckel,

2007).

Limitations
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 19

While this research provides recommendations for college presidents in addressing

contentious racial climates and racial protests on their campuses, there exist a few limitations.

Each campus has its own institutional culture and climate. Presidents must examine the

historical nature of their campuses; in order to move forward, presidents must connect the past

with their vision for the future (Gaudiani, 1996). Additionally, presidents must ground this

vision to their institutional reality, and understanding the past, both successes and challenges, can

provide a focus in a strategic plan. Presidents need to continuously reflect and ask what is

appropriate for their campus.

Furthermore, regarding racial climate, research has focused on experiences of black and

Latina/o students. There is a dearth of research on the experiences of Native Americans, Asian

Americans, and Pacific Islanders (Harper & Hurtado, 2007). Hurtado et al., (1998) mention how

campuses with an increased enrollment of Asian Americans had higher reports of racial

discrimination than any other racial groups based on the research of the Asian Pacific American

Education Advisory Committee (1990). Aggregating the data and experiences of students of

color can diminish the distinguishable experiences of each racial and ethnic group, which can

lead to more appropriate support. Presidents should consider these limitations in thinking about

how to better support students both on a macro-level and micro-level in the decision making

process.

A final limitation is the minimal amount of information on diversity related to

governance. Campus governance brings together people from various experiences and

backgrounds and is often filled with contentiousness, and this diversity will significantly affect

and impact higher education institutions (Kezar, 1997). Understanding the amount of weight

that board of trustee members play in driving the institution to meet internal and external
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 20

demands, there needs to be further exploration in examining the role of intentional recruitment of

members. Understanding the recruitment process will help members of the community

understand how diversity initiatives are being met and examine the places where there is a lack

thereof.

Implications for Student Affairs Practice

Understanding how decisions are made through leadership and governance impacts the

work of student affairs professionals. When addressing issues on racial diversity, the top two

senior administrators that presidents rely on are vice presidents of student affairs/dean of

students or chief diversity officer (American Council on Education, 2016). Additionally, student

affairs professionals directly work with students on a daily basis, so they must be well-informed

and attuned to the national climate on other college campuses because no campus is immune to

racial controversy. Student affairs professionals need to continuously grow and develop in their

multicultural competence (Pope, Reynolds, & Mueller, 2004) especially as 21st century

students do not fit the traditional profile (Miler, Valle, & Engle, 2014, p. 5). Regarding race, 42

percent of students come from communities of color (Miler, Valle, & Engle, 2014). In effect,

student affairs professionals need to critically reflect if they are approaching work with a deficit

perspective and instead use their knowledge of Yossos (2005) community cultural wealth in

leveraging student capital. This work is a collective responsibility of institutions, and student

affairs professionals can advocate for students of color because of their academic background in

student development theory coupled with their direct work on the frontlines.

Although there exists great accountability on college presidents to achieve and advance

the diversity agenda due to their political, symbolic and entrepreneurial leadership, (Kezar et.

al, p. 3) structurally, there is also great accountability for student affairs professionals and
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 21

beyond. As a collective, student affairs professionals cannot be blinded to the systematic

oppression that exists within society and in academia. In order to strengthen the psychological

climate on campuses, they must also contribute to educational programs to help all members of

the campus community to identify and confront the stereotypes and myths that people have about

those who are different from them (Hurtado et al., 1998, p. 9) As indicated in research and

campus studies, there is an element of racial realities that continue to be unnamed, ignored, and

unaddressed in systematic ways on college campuses (Harper et al., 2007; Kezar & Eckel, 1999;

Kezar et al., 2005). For as long as administrators ignore the racial tensions at their institution,

there cannot be substantial efforts made to advance diversity beyond institutional and personal

commitment. An effect of that will be dissatisfaction, hostility and disservice for people of

color. Historically minoritized students will be unable to engage in academia that serves the

purpose of advancing as a citizen in society.

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 22

References
Author. (2010). AGB Statement on Institutional Governance. Washington, D.C., Association of

Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

American Council on Education. (2016). Racial climate on campus: A survey of college

presidents. Retrieved from https://higheredtoday.org/2016/03/08/racial-climate-on-

campus-a-survey-of-college-presidents/

Asian Pacific American Education Advisory Committee. (1990). Enriching Californias future:

Asian Pacific Americans in the CSU. Long Beach, CA: Office of the Chancellor, The

California State University.

Chessman, H., & Wayt, L. (2016, January 13. What are students demanding? Retrieved from

https://higheredtoday.org/2016/01/13/what-are-students-demanding/

Cunningham, Melanie. (2016, January 31). PWI's (predominantly white institutions) that have

acknowledged the history of slavery on their campus (blog entry). Retrieved from

https://blackthen.com/pwis-predominantly-white-institutions-that-have-acknowledged-

the-history-of-slavery-on-their-campus/

Davis, K. (2012). The Great Race Debate. Diverse: Issues In Higher Education, 29(6), 14-15.

Engstrom, C., & Tinto, V. (2008). Access without support is not opportunity. Change: The

Magazine of Higher Learning, 40(1), 46-50. doi:10.3200/chng.40.1.46-50

Gaudiani, C. (1996). Developing a Vision. In Leadership Transitions: The New College

President. J. B. McLaughlin. (Ed.) San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass.

Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for

institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 7-24.

doi:10.1002/ss.254

Hurtado, S. (1992). A campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. Journal Of Higher Education,
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 23

63(5), 539-569.

Hurtado, S. (2005). The next generation of diversity and intergroup relations research. Journal of

Social Issues, 61(3), 595-610.

Hurtado, S., Alvarado, A. R., & Guillermo-Wann, C. (2015). Thinking about race: The

salience of racial ddentity at two- and four-year colleges and the climate for

diversity. Journal Of Higher Education, 86(1), 127-155.

Hurtado, S., Milem, J. F., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1998). Enhancing campus

climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of

Higher Education, 21(3), 279-302.

Inside Higher Ed. (2016). The 2016 Inside Higher Ed Survey of College and University

Presidents. Retrieved from

https://www.insidehighered.com/system/files/media/2016%20IHE%20Presidents%20Sur

vey%20booklet_0.pdf

Kezar, A., Eckel, P. (1999). Balancing the core strategies of institutional transformation:

Toward a Mobile model of change. Paper presented at the 1999 American Educational

Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

Kezar, A. J., & Eckel, P. D. (2005). Leadership strategies for advancing campus diversity:

Advice from experienced presidents. Washington D.C.: American Council on Education.

Kezar, A., Eckel, P., Contreras-McGavin, M., & Quaye, S. (2008). Creating a web of support: an

important leadership strategy for advancing campus diversity. Higher Education, 55(1),

69-92.

Miler, A., Valle, K., & Engle, J. (2014). Access to attainment: An access agenda for 21st century

college students. Retrieved from

RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 24

http://www.ihep.org/sites/default/files/uploads/docs/pubs/ihep_access-

attainment_report_layout_rd5_web.pdf

McDonald, N. (2011). African american college students at predominantly white and historically

black colleges and universities. Retrieved from Vanderbilt ETD Library (etd-03222011-

191245).

Pope, R.L., Reynolds, A.L., & Mueller, J.A. (2004). Multicultural competence in student affairs.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Rankin & Associates Consulting. (2015). Campus Climate Assessment Project. Retrieved from

https://www.seattleu.edu/media/secure/task-force-on-diversity-and-inclusive-

excellence/Seattle-Executive-Summary-FINAL.pdf

Richardson Jr., R., & Skinner, E. (1990). Adapting to Diversity: Organizational Influences on

Student Achievement. Journal Of Higher Education, 61(5), 485-511.

Sanders Thompson, V. (1999). Variables affecting racial-identity salience among african

americans. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139(6), 748-761. Retrieved from

http://login.proxy.seattleu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/199816326?

accountid=28598

Smith, W., Hung, M., & Franklin, J. (2011). Racial battle fatigue and the miseducation of black

men: Racial microaggressions, societal problems, and environmental stress. Journal Of

Negro Education, 80(1), 63-82.

Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical Race Theory, Racial Microaggressions,

and Campus Racial Climate: The Experiences of African American College Students.

Journal Of Negro Education, 69(1-2), 60-73.

Steck, L. W., Heckert, D. M., & Heckert, D. A. (2003). The salience of racial identity among
RACIAL CAMPUS CLIMATE UNREST 25

African-American and white students. Race and Society, 6(1), 57-73.

doi:10.1016/j.racsoc.2004.09.005

Stulberg, L. M., & Chen, A. S. (2014). The Origins of race-conscious affirmative action in

undergraduate admissions: A comparative analysis of institutional change in higher

education. Sociology Of Education, 87(1), 36-52.

Task Force on Diversity and Inclusive Excellence. (2016). Final Report. Retrieved from

https://www.seattleu.edu/media/secure/task-force-on-diversity-and-inclusive-

excellence/Task-Force-on-Diversity-and-Inclusive-Excellence-Final-Report.pdf

Wolfe B, Dilworth P. Transitioning Normalcy: Organizational Culture, African American

Administrators, and Diversity Leadership in Higher Education. Review Of Educational

Research [serial online]. December 1, 2015;85(4):667-697. Available from: ERIC,

Ipswich, MA. Accessed June 5, 2016.

Yosso, T.J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race discussion of community cultural

wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91.