Opinion: What would be different about a commission on racism, bias and community safety at Penn State?
When I read recently that President Eric Barron wanted to establish a Select Penn State Presidential Commission on Racism, Bias and Community Safety, countervailing thoughts emerged. Barron is well-meaning and his words and actions should be taken seriously and respectfully. Coming, as they do however, after the public execution of George Floyd and the national and global clamor that erupted into righteous indignation, I am compelled to ask reflectively: Were it not for this utterly heinous crime would this commission ever have been proposed? The cataclysm of protest over the last three weeks has shaken the core of the American body and soul. Thus, it is within this context that a “presidential commission” evolved.
Albeit I do not offhand reject the idea of a commission to examine these issues, a few questions are warranted. What specifically have other Penn State diversity commissions accomplished that have addressed systemic racism throughout the university’s administrative and departmental cultures? Clearly, there has been none of significance when it comes to the recruitment, retention and promotion of African American faculty over the last 15 years, as documented in the recent “More Rivers to Cross” report. In fact, many of the previous recommendations were never implemented. Why should we believe that this commission would produce a different result? What is the intended plan of action upon completion and how long will we have to wait?
To persuade nonbelievers that the commission is not just a public display of institutional guilt and catharsis or an adroit gambit to placate aggrieved constituencies, I have a suggestion. Why not do what many parents of a certain generation and of limited means did when they wanted to demonstrate their true intentions to achieve a certain end, such as purchasing an expensive household item? That is, commit to a layaway plan with an immediate down payment. In other words, let’s not wait one or two years and watch the machinery of institutional slow-nerita transform analysis into paralysis. Let’s start with a “layaway plan” that includes an “immediate down payment” and decisive responses along the way, demonstrating that the university’s intentions to eradicate institutional racism are genuine and will be honored regardless of whom may hold its highest office.
Toward this end, I recommend four specific “immediate down payments” that could help dismantle systemic racism at Penn State. First, recognize the enormity of this transformational period by discarding the pre-George Floyd framework of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and replacing it with a concentration on racial justice and identifying and expelling systemic racism. For all practical purposes, the DEI mandate was never meant to disband racism as a system. As an elixir, DEI made you feel better but it could never stop the pain.
Second, make it transparent how each dean and head will be held accountable in addressing and eradicating systemic racism within their colleges or departments. Those units that have woefully fallen short on recruiting, hiring and retaining Black faculty, (such as my own College of Health and Human Development) and in attracting Black graduate students should not be rewarded with new lines of tenure-track positions and their budgets should be frozen until substantive progress has been made. I suspect strongly that some colleges have not even interviewed, much less hired, an African American for a tenure-track faculty position within the last 5-10 years. Instituting a policy without any sanctions is akin to a lion that roars but does not bite.
Third, continue the COVID-19 inspired policy suspending the administrative use of student ratings of teaching effectiveness (SRTEs). Studies over the last 40 years, including a 2017 Penn State Faculty Senate report, have demonstrated that systems of student evaluation are replete with racial bias (and in some cases, animus) toward Black professors as well as women and others affecting promotion and annual raises. It is ridiculous to think that all students arrive on campus devoid of racism. Many have never encountered a Black person in an authoritative role and a large proportion come from towns with little or no racial diversity. Assigning them the privilege of assessing the quality of teaching and expecting their judgments to be unbiased is only one way in which systems develop, legitimate and sustain institutional racism. Accordingly, some major colleges and universities have already eliminated this form of explicit bias. Doing the right thing is always a great leap forward.
Fourth, stretch out and be made whole. Don’t just limit the scope of the commission or recommendations to University Park. The many campuses throughout the state deserve to be represented and their voices heard regarding their experiences, past and present, with structural racism. Many students who will eventually receive a Penn State degree will begin their matriculation on these campuses and need to be part of the conversation and path forward. Further, Black faculty and students on these campuses have particular concerns and issues that must be directly addressed.
Lastly, as we start this journey with more rivers to cross, another typical commission, President Barron, will not suffice as the bateau that will transport us over the turbulent cross currents of systemic racism at Penn State.