The faculty forum held on Sept. 10, the first convened to discuss the Diversity Plan, witnessed both praise and reservation.Led by members of the Strategic Long Range Planning (SLRP) committee, the forum provided the first chance for faculty and staff to share their thoughts and feelings concerning this project. The Diversity Plan is a seven-year guide to implementing and sustaining diversity on campus, and is still undergoing the revision process.

David Hammond, theatre studies professor and member of the SLRP committee, announced early in the forum that, “addressing race, gender and ethnicity is the first phase of the plan, but we want to let people know that we are considering all of the other populations as we continue.”

The first phase of the seven-year plan specifically targets Guilford’s diversity statistics, which are low in comparison to the national average. In addition to recruiting and retaining more students of color, the plan hopes to maintain the current female to male ratio (51:49) for the entire student body.

As of 2008, African Americans compose ten percent of Guilford’s traditional student body and forty percent of the CCE student body. The traditional numbers numbers are short of the thirteen percent national average.

Latinos compose two percent of the traditional and adult student body, Native Americans one percent, and international students two percent. The Diversity Plan intends on raising these statistics to six percent for Latino students, three percent for Native American students, and five percent for international students.

While there is no specific mention of Asian American students, a target goal is forthcoming in subsequent drafts.

Eric Mortensen, assistant professor of religious studies, expressed enthusiasm for the plan and its future revisions, but also concern about its funding.

“We have these new initiatives at Guilford that are very exciting, but we need to commit to them financially,” Mortensen said.

David Hammond, theatre studies professor, assured those in attendance that the plan would not suffer because of budget restraints.

“It will be a tight-fisted ride for awhile,” he said. “When the budget was partially cut last year, Sekinah Hamlin (former director of Multicultural Education) brilliantly restructured the priorities and preserved the integrity of the program.”

Tom Guthrie, assistant professor of sociology and anthropology, articulated concerns about the language used to frame the plan.

“My biggest concern is the way diversity is being conceptualized,” he said. “The way the document is worded reinforces the norms of some people being ‘normal’ and others being ‘different or diverse.’ That seems to be a problematic slippage.”

Guthrie explains that being “diverse” should not imply that such students are somehow abnormal.

However, Guthrie reiterated his enthusiasm for the project and said that he looks forward to its future.

“The document reflects a lot of work. I’m proud Guilford is engaging in this thinking about diversity in such a systematic and sustained way.”

Associate Professor of English Jim Hood expressed hope that this initiative for building and sustaining diversity would be carried over into Guilford’s core focus, academics. “If we could find more and better ways of integrating these goals into the curriculum, that would be beneficial in the long-term,” Hood said.

The possibility of making anti-racism training a required course was mentioned over the course of the discussion.

Above all, members of the SLRP want to differentiate between diversity “quotas” and substantive equality.

While increasing the number of students representing diversity at Guilford is a priority, substantive equality constitutes results that are far less empirical, yet more indicative of the progress Guilford achieves in becoming a diverse community. At the forum, an example was offered that instances of intolerance decreasing on campus would be a measure of substantive equality.

A draft of the plan was initially posted online last spring. An upcoming second posting of the plan will be featured in the Guilford Beacon with a link for student feedback. Additionally, the plan can be discussed and commented on in Student Senate, the CCE Student Government Association, the Multicultural Education Department, the SLRP committee, and the Quaker Life and Diversity committee.

Holly Wilson, Africana community coordinator and interim director of multicultural education, stressed the importance of student input in the revision process. “It is vital for the student body to read the draft of the Diversity Plan when it is made available online,” she said. “It is also important for students to attend the forums and fully participate as a way to have their voices heard.”