INSTITUTE ON Bringing the Noise From the Margins to the Core

INSTITUTE ON Communities of Practice: Moving Toward Equity in Student Outcomes

INSTITUTE ON Crisis of Young Black Males

INSTITUTE ON Educating Beyond Our Borders: Race, Ethnicity, Identity and Privilege in a Not-so-Flat World

INSTITUTE ON Employing Dialogue: Racism Process to “Slay the Dragons” of Racial Conditioning and End the Racism That Beleaguers Our Every Effort to Eliminate Oppression

INSTITUTE ON Establishing a Comprehensive Framework for Concrete Diversity Outcomes and Institutional Change

INSTITUTE ON Faculty of Color: Teaching in Predominantly White Colleges and Universities

INSTITUTE ON Focusing on Whiteness and White Privilege: Re­centering White People or Dismantling White Supremacy?

INSTITUTE FOR An In-Depth Exploration of Institutional Progress and Strategies in the Wake of Maintaining and Advancing Campus Diversity Since the 2003 Landmark Supreme Court Decisions: UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

INSTITUTE ON A Model for Changing the Culture of the Academy: The University of California System

INSTITUTE ON Multicultural Alliance Building for Women’s Transformational Leadership

INSTITUTE ON Multiracial Identity and Multiracial Issues for College Campuses

INSTITUTE ON The "N" Word and Beyond: Unpacking Social Oppression—Dismantling Hierarchical Language—Challenging the Popularity of Dysfunctional Pop Culture Communication

INSTITUTE ON Opening Pandora’s Box: Including Socio­Economic Class in Teaching and Learning About Diversity and Social Justice

INSTITUTE ON Program Assessment/Evaluation

INSTITUTE FOR Sparking Systemic Change: Meeting the Needs of a Diversifying Student Body

INSTITUTE ON A Tool to Transform Your Campus Climate (When dialogue is not enough...)

INSTITUTE ON University-School-Community Partnerships: Engaging With Schools and Communities to Increase Participation in Higher Education

INSTITUTE FOR Use of Faculty Unions as Instruments of Economic and Social Justice

INSTITUTE ON Leadership and Empowering the Activist in Students

This four‑part, highly interactive Institute will focus on the Spoken Word Movement among students of color, and effective partnership opportunities between college campuses and local communities by utilizing Spoken Word and Hip Hop Culture. Through this institute, we will explore how through a unique partnership between Youth Speaks and the University of Wisconsin‑Madison, we aim to deconstruct dominant narratives in hopes of achieving a more inclusive, and active, learning, retention, and recruitment experience. Discussions will include conversation about the first Urban Arts and Spoken Word Learning Center in the country on the University of Wisconsin campus.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Spoken Word and Hip Hop Culture = Critical Literacy and Cultural Engagement

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Amplifying the Voice of the Next Generation
PART III—Partnering—College Campuses and Local Communities Of Color

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART IV—Housing and Culture—Recruitment and Retention Of Students Of Color Through Urban Art

Jeff Chang, Author of the seminal text on the hip hop generation Can’t Stop Won’t Stop—San Francisco, California

Shawn Ginwright, Ph.D., Associate Professor, African Studies Department, San Francisco State University—San Francisco, California

Marc Bamuthi Joseph, Spoken Word and Hip‑Hop Theater Artist, Lecturer, University of Wisconsin‑Madison, and Stanford University—Stanford, California

James Kass, Founder and Executive Director, Youth Speaks (a national nonprofit that works with 250,000 youth throughout the country)—San Francisco, California

William Ney, Senior Administration Program Specialist, Office of Multicultural Arts Initiatives (OMAI), School of Education, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Wisconsin

This three-part Institute will present how the Equity Scorecard brings together campus-based teams of faculty and administrators using evidence-based inquiry to achieve equitable levels of student success. The Equity Scorecard is a nationally-recognized initiative designed to foster institutional change in higher education using available institutional data. Presenters will lead participants through an interactive exercise examining institutional data disaggregated by race and ethnicity to identify inequities in student outcomes.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—The Equity Scorecard Model: Background and Description

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Implementing the Equity Scorecard

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Examining and Analyzing Disaggregated Institutional Data (Hands-on Exercise)

Hannah Alford, Research Analyst, Institutional Research and Academic Services, Long Beach City College—Long Beach, California

Estela Mara Bensimon, Ed.D., Professor, Rossier School of Education, and Director, Center for Urban Education, University of Southern California—Los Angeles, California

Frank Harris III, Ed.D., Associate Director, Center for Urban Education, University of Southern California—Los Angeles, California

Elsa Macias, Ph.D., Associate Research Professor, and Director, Research and Development Center for Urban Education, Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California—Los Angeles, California

Rebecca Martin, D.P.A., Provost and Vice Chancellor, University of Wisconsin-Parkside—Kenosha, Wisconsin

Vicki Washington, Interim Assistant Vice President, University of Wisconsin System Administration—Madison, Wisconsin

This Institute focuses on the most pressing issue facing Black men in the post-civil right era. Each part of the institute will present and discuss national trends and issues. Complex problems will be placed in explanatory sociocultural frameworks, and practical recommendations for effective interventions and collaborative partnerships will be offered.

Tuesday, May 29 — 8:30–11:30 a.m. and continuing 1:30–5:30 p.m.
Countering the Crisis Concerning Black Male Undergraduates: Progressive Responses to Underrepresentation, Attrition and Underachievement

For the past decade, increased attention has been devoted to better understanding the plight of Black male students in higher education. As such, the reasons why Black men are underrepresented on college campuses, the academic difficulty many encounter, the racism and stereotyping that cause them grief, the shortage of same‑race faculty upon whom they can rely for mentoring, and the reasons why they are retained least often among both sexes and all racial/ethnic groups are generally well‑understood. Conversations at national conferences, analyses in empirical research, and coverage in mainstream media outlets have focused almost exclusively on educational malpractice and discussions of disadvantage. While it is necessary to continually illuminate factors contributing to Black male underachievement and the unequal assurance of social justice via education, it is equally important and arguably more instructive to pursue insights into “what works”: the programs, people, and enriching educational experiences that have proven effective in preparing Black men for admission to and success at colleges and universities. A paradigmatic shift is warranted from Black male failure to Black male success in higher education.

In this Institute, minimal attention will be devoted to further discussing the aforementioned problems. Instead, emphasis will be placed on the collaborative exploration of solutions that lead to Black male achievement across a wide rage of different institutional types. Instructive findings from the National Black Male College Achievement Study will be presented and discussed. Instead of employing the popular deficit approach to examining Black men’s educational experiences, the National Study explored undercurrents of educational achievement, furnished evidence of good practices in access and educational engagement initiatives, and enabled undergraduate men to reflect on critical moments and key experiences that facilitated their success on 42 different campuses across the country. Moreover, the National Study magnifies lessons learned from more than 200 Black male achievers who maximized their college experiences, despite the racism, past educational deficiencies and familial issues, perceived socioeconomic limitations, and obstacles presented on their campuses. From it emerged a powerful set of implications for policy and practice, which will be shared in this Institute. Participants will also co‑construct action plans for institutional change on their respective campuses. A Certificate of Participation will be available for persons with documented attendance at all sessions of the one institute chosen. Admission priority for all institute sessions will be given to those who are pursuing a Certificate of Participation.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Increasing Black Male Student Enrollments and Degree Attainment Rates

In this session, attention will be devoted to improving the numerical representation of Black men at each stage of the postsecondary educational pipeline. Although majority of emphasis will be placed on college readiness and access at the bachelor’s degree level, there will be some discussion regarding Black male preparation for admission to graduate and professional schools. Strategic planning, fostering collaborative partnerships with K‑12 schools, and institutional intentionality in recruitment and college admissions are among the topics that will be discussed. Moreover, findings from the National Study regarding the ways in which participants gained access to the 42 institutions for undergraduate study and later to top graduate schools will be shared.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Enhancing Outcomes and Creating a Culture of Engagement for Black Male Student Success
The empirical evidence is indisputable: students who are most actively engaged in educationally purposeful activities, both inside and outside of the classroom, are considerably more likely than their disengaged peers to acquire a robust set of educational outcomes and persist through baccalaureate degree attainment. Given this, emphasis in this session will be placed on collaboratively “reculturing” campus environments to increase Black male student engagement and retention. Insights into the catalysts for engagement among participants in the National Study will help session participants better understand what is needed to increase Black male enthusiasm for participation in campus activities, active engagement in the classroom, and indulgence in enriching educational experiences that lead to persistence and success.

Shaun R. Harper, Ph.D., Assistant Professor and Research Associate, Center for the Study of Higher Education, The Pennsylvania State University—University Park, Pennsylvania 

To review Dr. Harper’s report, Black Male Students at Public Flagship Universities in the U.S.: Status, Trends, and Implications for Policy and Practice, released by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, D.C.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
DISAPPEARING ACTS: The Diminishing Numbers of African Americans at Top Tier Universities—A UCLA Case Study

The admission of African American undergraduates to UCLA has plummeted 65 percent over the last decade—the sharpest decline within the entire UC System. This session will fully engage participants in a lively discussion around the current plight facing the African American community and the issues of access and equity to higher education. Participants can expect to gain knowledge and first hand information on multiple approaches that enabled students, staff, community organizations, school districts and researchers to join together in this fight. The results of this collaborative effort are bringing about systemic change in policy and culture-more specifically how UCLA is undergoing sweeping changes in its admissions process for the Class of 2007.

Terry Flennaugh, Doctoral Student, School of Education, Division of Urban Schooling, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Phyllis Hart, Director, Special Initiatives, Academic Advancement Program, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Tyrone Howard, Assistant Professor, School of Education, Urban Schooling, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Doug Johnson, Chair, African Student Union, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Mandla Kayise, Black Alumni Association, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Jonli Tunstall, Coordinator of VIP Scholars, University of California—Los Angeles, California

Tara Watford, Doctoral Student, Division of Social Sciences and Comparative Education, Graduate School of Education and Information Studies; and CAPAA Researcher, University of California—Los Angeles, California

This day and half-long Institute is designed to help participants explore how issues of race, ethnicity, identity and privilege are developed inside of one's home cultures.  Participants will have the opportunity to engage in exercises and experiences designed to build cognitive understanding of how these issues may fail to translate across both psychological and geographic boundaries.  As colleges and universities encourage students to "study aboard," and invite students from other homelands to study in the United States, it is crucial that faculty, administrators and staff understand how "problems in translation" can interfere with the goals of these efforts.  As we seek to prepare all of our students to be able to live and work successfully anywhere in the world, we must also prepare them to understand how to learn in the world "beyond their borders."  Participants will receive relevant handouts and exercise designs for use with faculty, administrators, staff and students on their own campuses. The goals of this institute are: (1) explore identity issues, such as ethnicity, gender, race, socio‑economic status, national origin and sexual orientation, and how they are developed and reinforced in one’s home country; (2) identify how dominant culture issues, as they are expressed in one’s home country based on perceived race and ethnicity, skin color, immigrant status, class status, gender identity, religion, language accents and dialects, and other factors, can facilitate and/or impede the ability to work across cultural and national boundaries; (3) increase awareness and knowledge in how our own programming and experiences involving these issues can impair our effectiveness in both  preparing students to travel and study in other countries, and assisting students from other countries in their pursuit of education in our own; and (4) develop skills by participating in exercises and discussion of other tools for increasing our own awareness and effectiveness, and that of all our students, to study, work and live anywhere in the 21st century.

Cris Clifford Cullinan, Ph.D., Training and Development Administrator, University of Oregon—Eugene, Oregon

Carl E. James, Ph.D., Professor of Education, York University—Toronto, Canada

Janice D. M. Mitchell, Ed.D., Professor and Chair, Foreign Languages and Literatures Gallaudet University—Washington, D.C.

Magid Shirzadegan, Ph.D., Director, International Student and Scholar ServicesUniversity of Oregon—Eugene, Oregon

This day and half-long  Institute provides training for facilitators at all levels of anti‑racism work.  The training is based on the Dialogue process that has been tested for 17 years in hundreds of programs presented by the Center for the Healing of Racism. Through Dialogue:Racism the Center for Healing Racism serves as a catalyst for the healing of racism through the education and empowerment of individuals. Racism, surprisingly, continues to be a challenge at every level of our educational systems, as well as other institutions in which we operate.  Racism also complicates our efforts to dismantle other forms of oppression—sexism, homophobia, anti‑Semitism.  As we struggle to make change with our highly intellectual programs, we fail to mend hearts, and our efforts fall short of our expectations.  Venturing into the emotional quagmire engendered by even the mention of the dreaded “R” word is, however, fraught with danger for the individual who has not faced and conquered the racial conditioning that is the ubiquitous legacy of our too‑long history of slavery, reconstruction, Jim Crow Laws, and racism in many forms: unaware, internalized, cultural, institutional and environmental.  We have all been hurt by the persistence of racism and we all continue to be hobbled in our efforts whether we have overtly practiced, experienced, or simply observed racism in our lives, and even if we managed to live a life separated from people unlike us in some way.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Participants will learn about the process used in Dialogue, how to contribute to a revolution in listening, and how to create an environment in which it will be safe to confront one’s racial conditioning.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Participants will begin slaying the dragons of unaware and internalized racism and stereotypes that interfere with all our relationships.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Participants will grapple with the monsters of cultural, institutional and environmental racism.  In the process they will share their efforts to date and develop allies in the struggle.

Saundra Boyd, Ph.D., Co-Director, Center for Healing Racism; Faculty, Cross-Cultural Psychology, Houston Community College System—Houston, Texas

Lucille P. Fultz, Ph.D., Toni Morrison Scholar, African American Literature, and Associate Professor, English Department, Rice University—Houston, Texas

Patricia McFarlin, Ph.D., Facilitator, Safe Teacher Program; English Faculty, St. Agnes Academy—Houston, Texas

Cherry Steinwender, Executive Director and Founder, Center for Healing Racism; Psychology Faculty, Houston Community College System—Houston, Texas

This day and half-long Institute sponsored by NASPA – Student Affairs Administration in HigherEducation -- will offer participants an intense and comprehensive exploration of diversity across several dimensions: (1) reexamining the concepts of diversity and oppression within a new framework by playing an innovative new board game—the Game of Oppression; (2) framing leadership and diversity as forces that initiate and sustain institutional change; (3) gauging the concrete impact of diversity and globalism on academic excellence and student development by utilizing planning grids and outcomes-based assessment; (4) repositioning the campus Multicultural Center as a cornerstone of mainstream campus culture; (5) integrating a new tool for reflective analysis—The Centers of Responsibility for Diversity model; and (6) understanding the expectations for campus diversity efforts as a result of the findings of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education. Participants will be provided with a working manual that can be utilized during the session and then taken back to campus as an exploratory document. Moreover, they will not only preview the Game of Oppression but will also have the opportunity to purchase it. The session will also incorporate the activities of a new book titled Diversity and the Mandate of Institutional Transformation: Inclusiveness and the Global Challenge of Academic Excellence by Dr. James A. Anderson. Finally, participants will receive a copy of Now is the Time: Meeting the Challenge for a Diverse Academy (AASCU & NASULGC) that contains the questions and facilitators’ guide for the Centers of Responsibility for Diversity.

James Anderson, Ph.D., Vice President for Student Success, State University of New York, University at Albany—Albany, New York

Gwendolyn Jordan Dungy, Ph.D., Executive Director, National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA)—Washington, D.C.

Anna K. Gonzalez, Associate Dean of Students, and Director, Cross-Cultural Center, University of California—Irvine, California

Mildred Garcia, Ph.D., President, Berkeley College—New York and New Jersey

Lamara Warren, Doctoral Candidate, Higher Education Student Affairs, Indiana University—Bloomington, Indiana

This daylong Institute should benefit the faculty, future faculty, and administrators who desire to deepen their understanding of the issues and seek to engage in dialogue on developing effective recruitment and retention strategies for institutional change. The phenomenological experiences of the faculty of color teaching in predominantly white colleges and universities are rarely topics for dialogue, introspection, and experiential learning. Much of the existing, yet sparse research in this area implies that we have yet to listen to the narratives of the faculty of color in order to gain a better understanding of their challenges. Using the information from the book titled, Faculty of Color: Teaching in Predominantly White Colleges and Universities, edited by Christine Stanley (Anker, 2006), the presenter will share through the use of case studies, predominant themes and engage participants on the first-hand experiences of the faculty of color teaching in predominantly white institutions. Copies of the book will be available for purchase at a discounted price.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—What are Faculty of Color Saying About Their Experiences in Predominantly White Institutions?
Drawing on predominant themes from the personal narratives of 24 faculty of color across a variety of predominantly white institutions, as well as current research, the presenter will engage participants in discussing key issues that affect the recruitment and retention of faculty of color in higher education.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—What are Some Recommendations for Recruiting and Retaining Faculty of Color?
In this session, we will use the information learned from the personal narratives in Part I to explore recommendations for recruiting and retaining faculty of color in predominantly white colleges and universities. Through these dialogues we will begin to understand the importance of institutional policies and procedures, as well as attitudes and behaviors which can influence effective recruitment and retention.


Christine A. Stanley, Ph.D., Executive Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs, and Professor, Higher Education Administration, College of Education and Human Development, Texas A&M University—College Station, Texas

This day and half-long Institute is designed to give participants a set of tools—strategies, clues, and skills—to use in examining the rapidly growing scholarship and discussion of white privilege and whiteness to determine how the material is most likely to impact the actions of the reader. There is legitimate concern that discussions of whiteness and white privilege primarily serve to maintain power in the hands of white people rather than working to dismantle the supremacy of whiteness. The institute will be useful both to those who are familiar with the current literature as well as to those who aren’t.  Book Signing to be scheduled.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m. and 1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART I—On the first day of this institute we will (1) conduct a brief survey of different kinds of literature on these two topics, (2) distinguish between writings that explore white privilege with the goal of dismantling it or that mainly examines whiteness as a sociological phenomenon, (3) use lenses, matrices, and critical questions to assess writings, and (4) will identify useful points for having productive and perspective‑changing discussions with white people.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART II—In this session, a  roundtable of individuals who write about race and white privilege will discuss (1) the necessity of identifying the historical context of whiteness and white privilege, (2) the connections and intersections with other systems of privilege, (3) the importance of white writers identifying their own white perspectives in their writings, and (4) the actions suggested by the content of the writing.

Frances E. Kendall, Ph.D., Consultant on Organizational Change and Communication, Specializing in the Issues of Diversity—Albany, California

David S. Owen, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, and Coordinator, Diversity Programs, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Louisville—Louisville, Kentucky

This daylong Institute will reflect on the Supreme Court's 2003 decisions on the University of Michigan affirmative action policies, while viewed as a landmark decision in support of efforts to achieve racial diversity at the nation's campuses, also left numerous diversity matters unresolved. As the result, the University of Michigan and other campuses are still trying to assess approaches to maintain and advance their diversity goals and at the time, address the Court's mandate. Administrators and researchers at the University of Michigan continue to consider creative strategies for fostering its commitments to diversity. It is essential that campuses have comprehensive institutional approaches to achieving the long term goals of diversity. The purpose of this interactive institute is to have in-depth discussions on what Michigan and other institutions have done since the Court's ruling. Key leadership representing different U-M areas will guide and explore diversity progress in various areas such as the legal responses to campus diversity; diversity programs which include outreach, retention, pre-college and student success; leadership, communications, research and assessment; as well as multicultural teaching and learning. The experts will explore various successes, strategies and challenges over the past four years and into the future. The targeted audience for this institute is faculty, staff, administrators and diversity practitioners to collaboratively explore strategies, successes and challenge and best practices for advancing comprehensive institutional approaches to diversity on their campuses.

Pamela Fowler, Director, Financial Aid, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

Maya Kobersy, J.D., Assistant General Counsel, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

Marvin Krislov, J.D., Vice President and General Counsel, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

John Matlock, Ph.D., Associate Vice Provost, and Director, Office of Academic Multicultural Initiatives, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

A.T. Miller, Ph.D., Coordinator, Multicultural Teaching and Learning, Center for Research on Learning and Teaching; Director, Global Intercultural Experience for Undergraduates, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

Lester P. Monts, Ph.D., Senior Vice Provost, Academic Affairs, and Senior Counselor to the President for the Arts, Diversity, and Undergraduate Affairs, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

Ted Spencer, Associate Vice Provost and Executive Director, Office of Undergraduate Admissions, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

Katrina Wade‑Golden, Ph.D., Senior Research Specialist, Office of Academic Multicultural Initiatives, University of Michigan—Ann Arbor, Michigan

A three-part Institute presents how graduate students at the University of California, Berkeley formed a focus group exploring ways the academy might incorporate more rigorously, beyond issues of access and recruitment, and the challenge of diversity as it relates to its core mission. The project culminated in a University of California system‑wide (Spring 2007 conference). In collaboration with graduate students from other UC campuses, faculty, and administrators, the conference examined current practices, as well as tacit cultures within departments that inhibit equity and inclusion and moved to recommend concrete changes to be implemented system‑wide and on individual campuses. The institute will highlight the key themes and concrete action items resulting from this UC system‑wide diversity initiative.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Assessing the Graduate Culture
An interdisciplinary panel of graduate students from the UC campuses speak about aspects of the departmental culture that is at times less than inclusive and the role that graduate students might play in its transformation.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Beyond Access to Inclusion: Rethinking Diversity and the Core Mission of the University
A panel of administrators, faculty, and graduate students speak about how to rethink models for inclusivity that is integrally tied to the core mission of the university and how they might implement the changes ensuing from its mission as it relates to practices that move beyond mere access to a more rigorous mandate for inclusion.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Action Items for Changing the Culture of the Academy
A panel of graduate students and faculty speak about the story behind this movement and discuss concrete action items that emerged from their study of practices within the academy that delimit possibilities for inclusion of all students and faculty from diverse socio‑economic backgrounds.

Gibor Basri, Ph.D., Professor and Department Chair, Astronomy, University of California, Berkeley; Chair, University of California Academic Senate Committee on Affirmative Action and Diversity—Oakland, California

James Battle, Graduate Student, Medical Anthropology, University of California—Berkeley, California

Gloria Chun, Ph.D., Graduate Diversity Director for the Social Sciences, and Director, UC-DIGSSS/NSF, University of California—Berkeley, California

Amy Lee, Graduate Student, Sociology, University of California—Berkeley, California

Angelica M. Stacy, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Chemistry, University of California—Berkeley, California

Tamera Lee Stover, Graduate Student, Sociology, University of California—Berkeley, California

This daylong Institute is designed to nurture mid‑career women, emerging women leaders and men actively supporting the development of diverse women leaders by providing an opportunity to engage with others on the topic of inclusive leadership and how to meet the dynamic needs of faculty, staff, other stakeholders and ultimately the students. Inclusive excellence understands that strong, responsive organizations encourage the participation of everyone in its community by recognizing the value of multiple perspectives informed by multiple identities, successfully tapping into the skills and talents present, and striving to create socially just environments. Participants will: gain a greater understanding of multicultural alliance building and explore strategies for actualizing their vision of a campus that recognizes and strives for inclusive excellence.

Patricia M. Lowrie, Director, Women’s Resource Center, Michigan State University—East Lansing, Michigan

Sharon J. Washington, Ph.D., Interim Director, Faculty Equity Programs, University of California Office of the President—Oakland, California

Kathleen Wong (Lau), Ph.D., Assistant Professor, School of Communications, Western Michigan University—Kalamazoo, Michigan

A three‑part, highly interactive Institute designed to provide a greater understanding of racial identity development in multiracial people.  The institute also explores the dynamics surrounding multiracial people as they interact with different racial groups in their respective sociocultural environments. Using an assortment of educational approaches, appealing to a variety of sensory learning styles, the institute (1) reviews prominent models of racial identity development, (2) provides in‑depth reflection on personal perspectives and assumptions about multiracial identity, (3) discusses the implications of defining one’s self as multiracial—both in campus and contemporary social settings, and (4) outlines some ways to promote intergroup dialogue and coalition building between different racial groups and multiracial people in campus and community settings. The institute includes dialogue with a panel of multiracial students, who offer a wide range of perspectives about what it means to be multiracial on campus. In addition, the institute provides opportunities for participants to assess the multiracial programs established in their institutional environments and to develop action plans to further address the multiracial issues in their respective institutions. Presentations, experiential activities, case studies, and small-and large-group discussions allow participants to actively engage throughout the institute.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Understanding Racial Identity in Multiracial Students
This session uses theories of racial identity development to enhance NCORE participants’ understanding of the experiences of multiracial students. Through interactive presentation, small- and large-group discussion, and case studies, the models of racial identity are tested, analyzed, and applied to concrete situations involving teaching, advising and counseling. The session encourages discussion of larger issues related to multiracial identity, including: What constitutes race and racial identity? Can racial identity be chosen? How should multiracial students identify in terms of race? And, what roles do physical appearance, cultural attachment, political orientation, and social norms related to race play in racial identity formation? Participants are encouraged to bring situations from their home campuses for discussion.

Charmaine L. Wijeyesinghe, Ed.D., Consultant and Trainer, Organizational Development and Social Justice—Delmar, New York  

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Describing or Distinguishing a Racial or Multiracial Identity
This session uses experiential identification to assist NCORE participants with describing or distinguishing their own personal racial identities, no matter how those identities may be constituted. It uses an embodied and creative arts structure to pose and answer the question who am I to myself, to others? For attendees the exercises used in this session will enrich and personify the notion of empowerment, thereby providing them an opportunity to discover the additive rather than deficit model of mixed race carried within themselves. Self‑identification through the use of creative tools serves as a personal frame of reference for learning about and distinguishing the self, both personally, and in relationship to others. The session will build on the unifying experiences of the members in the session to explore the emotional [symbolic] and theoretical [cognitive] attributes of the multiracial experience. By engaging in a nonlinear process of exploring the mysteries of race, unconscious internalized and literal mixed race‑ethnicity issues will become available for examination. The anticipated and unexpected discoveries emerging from this session can lead to new ways of being multiracial and thinking about multiracial issues for individual participants.

Meg Chang, Ed.D., American Dance Therapy Association (ADTR), Faculty, The New School—New York, New York

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.         
PART III—A Panel of Multiracial Students to Assist With the Assessment of Multiracial Programs and the Development of Campus Action Plans for Addressing Ongoing Multiracial Issues
This interactive session is designed to give NCORE participants a greater understanding of racial identity development in multiracial people through the lived experiences of multiracial students. This segment begins with a panel of at least four students sharing their perspectives and experiences. The students representing a range of multiracial backgrounds (e.g., Black/Asian, Asian/Latino, Hispanic/Native American) will provide information about their experiences as multiracial students which follows by guiding questions, as well as panel facilitation. The session will examine the similarities and differences between multiracial people of similar ages attending or residing in a college/university setting. While the dynamics within and between different racial groups around the issue of multiracial identity may differ, there may also be some similarities in the personal and institutional responses to those with multiracial identities. Presentations and discussion during this session will focus on applying the theories of identity development and searching for ways to promote dialogue and coalition building around multiracial issues on college campuses. Participants will have an opportunity to evaluate the multiracial programs at their respective institutions through small- and large-group work. Using measurement tools, comparison opportunities, and direct feedback, participants will identify the most significant issues facing their own institutions. In addition, all participants will have time to create detailed action plans for creating more inclusive environments at their institutions for multiracial students. During this session participants will find that many multiracially‑identified students, staff, and faculty are eager to form coalitions to confront racism. Limited time will be provided for beginning discussions of larger issues raised over the course of the institute including a discussion of conflicting personal and political agendas within multiracial communities. Participants will be encouraged to share resources related to multiracial students, identity, and organizational development.

Dennis Leoutsakas, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Communication and Theatre Arts Department, Salisbury University—Salisbury, Maryland

This day and half-long Institute will challenge participants to examine their personal and professional histories with the “N” word, and other problematic and/or dehumanizing terms or dysfunctional aspects of language. The Institute will examine when and/or how participants were first introduced to these words and explore the pictures and different feelings associated with these various forms of profanity. We will examine the popular culture overtones associated with dehumanizing language, will explore the influence language has over identity development, and will engage the communicative feasibility of defusing language by popularizing it.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—This session will focus on the historical reality of the “N” word and other contemptuous words and their current day implications. The session will take a look at the history of the “N” word and how the word reflects DuBois' existential question concerning black folk's “problem” status? The session will also examine the “N” word's relationship to DuBois' notions of “double consciousness“ and the “inevitability of the black criminal?” Conversely, an examination of the history of other problematic words and consideration of its weight as oppressive tools to dehumanize others will be undertaken. Does the “N” word still generate the same reaction, incite the same feelings, and raise the same issues and concerns it did throughout the 20th century? How might the “N” word, “B” word, “F” word, etc. exacerbate internalized oppression while further stoking a dysfunctional perspective on underrepresented people from marginalized communities? How has the “N” word been misused and appropriated in a global sense? Is the “N” word’s popularization a precursor for the misuse of other dehumanizing language?  Will it ever end?

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—This session will focus on how the “N” word and other oppressive words are used in music, media and movies? We will look at how current events, media, popular music and movies have used the “N” word and words that frame or accentuate hate over the years and if these words have had any impact or influence on the millennial generation (21st century). Presenters will attempt to answer some tough questions, including why/how are these words are used in popular music, media and movies? The session will take a look at the history of the “N” word utilizing Randall Kennedy's popular controversial book along with TV shows (Boston Public and Dave Chappelle); film clips (Bamboozled, Any Given Sunday, Chris Rock's Bring the Pain, Pulp Fiction, School Daze and more). The session will also explore Michael Eric Dyson’s theory on the “B”-“H” nexus and its subsequent gendered implications from his popular book Holler If You Hear Me, In Search Of Tupac Shakur.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—This session will focus on whether anyone could ever be completely comfortable with the “N” word and other problematic language being used relatively indiscriminately by everyone? We will ascertain whether participants identify with the eradicationists position (believing, at the very least, that hateful words should be obliterated from the American lexicon), or the regulationists position (who allow for their usage within certain regimented contexts). Lastly, the session presenters will consistently offer suggestions about the need and importance of understanding various realities associated with terms like the “N” word and recommend how to challenge and encourage all people, but specifically young people, about the ramifications of casual or uninformed usage of extremely troublesome language. Presenters will provide some action steps/plan to help participants challenge themselves and others to think (if not totally eliminate) the harmful language from their vocabulary and psychological state of mind.

Eddie Moore Jr., Ph.D., Director of Diversity, The Bush School-Seattle; and Founder, The White Privilege Conference and America & MOORE Research and Consulting—Seattle, Washington

J.W. Wiley, Director, Center for Diversity, Pluralism and Inclusion, and Lecturer, Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Studies, State University of New York; and Consultant, Xamining Diversity Consulting—Plattsburgh, New York

In the U.S., class is confusing and is rarely talked about. Discussions involving issues of class and money are often more taboo than discussing sexuality. Shame at being poorer or richer than others leads to secrecy and silence. This silence powerfully maintains the invisibility of class. Meanwhile, the gap between rich and poor in the United States is the greatest since 1929. However, the harm from classism extends far beyond economic hardships. Popular culture and the media are full of classist stereotypes; as well as classist policies and practices flourish in every major societal institution, including higher education. Education is the class sorting mechanism or access channel, setting up future vocational opportunities and thus income. Ostensibly the sorting is by merit, but in fact it is heavily influenced by class background. Students arrive at college with beliefs about why they and their fellow students were admitted that are tinged with classism. Deconstructing test scores, the educational tracking system, the “halo” effect, the impact of role models and access to information, legacy, and other class‑based admission policies, not to mention the cost of college and financial aid policies, could be an Institute in itself.  Issues of class clearly intersect with every other form of oppression, but in the U.S. issues of race and class are particularly intertwined.  There is little clarity or agreement about what we mean by class—economists, sociologists, political scientists, anthropologists, and activists define “social class,” differently. Discussions of classism can often be challenging. For one, it is hard to name class identity. There is often confusion over, and may be differences between class origins and current class standing. If we can’t even agree on what it is, how can we talk about it? 

This day and half‑long Institute is designed to explore the issues of socioeconomic class and classism, (the final frontier), on campus. In this engaging and participatory institute we will explore what we mean by class, how class overlaps and intertwines with other aspects of identity, and how class impacts on us and on our students. We will explore the various myths that perpetuate classism and the larger economic context in which higher education operates. Participants will engage in some variety exercises and dialogues designed to explore these issues and will discuss how to use them back on their own campuses. We will also make use of some audio/visual resources focused on class that participants might utilize on campus. Participants will receive copies of exercise designs, handouts, as well as a bibliography of resources.

Dottie R. Morris, core Faculty, Applied Psychology Department, Antioch University New England—Keene, New Hampshire

Felice Yeskel, Ed.D., Executive Director, Class Action (a national non‑profit focusing on issues of social class and money, and their impact on our individual lives, our relationships, organizations, institutions, and culture)—Northampton, Massachusetts

A three‑part Institute designed to provide participants with savvy program assessment/evaluation insights, strategies and skills required for knowledge development, continuous improvement, and accountability compliance. Assessment works when we responsively work it for the greater good of those our initiatives exist to serve.  What claims are you making about the impact of your services or products?  How credible and compelling are those claims to your key stakeholders and how do you know?  Savvy educators and service providers proactively embrace assessment and evaluation as a rich self‑diagnostic resource for critical and creative reflection, empowered self‑improvement and strategic image management. Cultivate your capacity to tell your own evidence‑grounded story in ways that are credible and compelling to your key stakeholders. 

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Make Assessment Work for Excellence: Spotlighting Critical Concepts and The Role of Self As Instrument

This session lays the informational groundwork for demystifying the program assessment process and for clarifying its intimate connections to effective program development and continuous improvement.  It aims to sharpen and deepen program administrators’ and staff understandings of the value of seizing the initiative and systematically using assessment/evaluation tools as a participant‑centered, self‑diagnostic resource for (1) proactive critical reflection on outcome promises, program effectiveness, and performance gaps; (2) a continuous cycle of empowered program improvement; and (3) strategic image management, i.e., effectively framing the meaning and appropriate interpretation of program data.  In addition to an overview of tools, techniques and strategies, participants will be introduced to a pivotal resource for excellence in evaluations (and for communications generally)—“interpersonal validity.”  This critical, yet sorely underdeveloped, form of validity involves the mindful, diversity‑conscious uses of SELF as responsive instrument—as knower, inquirer and engager of others vis a vis one’s judgment‑making through assessment and evaluation.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Working It!: Maximizing the Value and Utility of Assessment/Evaluation Practices for Excellence and Equity

This session explores the program development and evaluation logic model and provides participants with a set of probing questions and guidelines for conducting effective program assessment. This information is designed to assist them in focusing on key elements needed to move beyond simplistic program description to critically and creatively reflective program assessment. This module will help participants deepen their knowledge of “interpersonal validity” as a critical complement to the more conventional methodological validity considerations—notably, the soundness and trustworthiness of understandings warranted by the uses of assessment/evaluation tools, techniques and strategies.  Each participant will start compiling their own Self As Instrument Portfolio.  This session will help to create a bridge to assessment practice and will give participants a head start in thinking about their work in the assessment practicum that constitutes the final session of this institute. 

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Assessment Works!: Moving From Insight to Action for Social Justice 

This session is designed as an intensive interactive, skills‑building working session for persons who have completed the first two institute sessions or for those who have a solid working knowledge of program assessment/evaluation.  No time will be spent on basic concepts.  Stimulated by probing assessment‑savvy questions and worksheets, participants will work in groups to apply participant‑centered concepts and models.  Levels of specificity for working groups will depend on the mix of programs represented.  Building upon insights from their Self As Instrument Portfolio, participants will start exploring “interpersonal validity” issues and their implications for the group evaluation projects.  Participants will be encouraged to map out the shape and pacing of their programs' developmental trajectories, and the practicum will end with a "what will I do—or do differently—on Monday" group brainstorming exercise and a focus on how to incorporate assessment smoothly and effectively into the service delivery process. 

Hazel Symonette, Ph.D., Senior Policy and Program Development Specialist, University of Wisconsin System Office of Academic Development and Diversity, and University of Wisconsin-Madison Office of Dean of Students, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Wisconsin

This day and half-long highly interactive Institute will help lay the groundwork for teams of campus leaders to engage in a participatory cycle of dialogue, assessment and planning. Unprecedented demographic and economic changes raise the urgency for institutional change and leadership on issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion. California Tomorrow will introduce participants to a model, framework and skills building tools that have been used and refined by leadership teams from 16 California Community Colleges working to strengthen and develop campus‑wide reforms around issues of access, equity and inclusion through a partnership with California Tomorrow. This institute should particularly benefit small teams from the same college and/or university who want to (1) deepen and hone their understanding of access and equity issues as it relates to their campus’ capacity to serve an ever‑growing diverse student body, (2) conduct a preliminary assessment of the strengths and gaps at their college/university regarding access and equity issues, (3) explore different leadership styles and multiple perspectives and how to harness the assets they represent, (4) reflect and share ideas, opportunities and challenges around issues of access, diversity and equity with peers and colleagues, (5) hear from committed campus leaders working to create institutional change around access and equity on their campuses, and (6) take away additional skill building tools for self as well as organizational learning.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Setting the Context

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Equity Mapping

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Hearing From Campus Leaders/Generating Next Steps

Ireri Valenzuela‑Vergara, Senior Program Associate/Director, Campus Change Network, California Tomorrow—Oakland, California

Brian Stanley, Ed.D., Senior Program Associate, California Tomorrow—Oakland, California

Guest Panelist from California Community Colleges involved in the Campus Change Network a partnership with California Tomorrow

This day and half‑long Institute guides small group(s) of participants through a “Dialogue on Race Relations” and conclude with a preview of specialized facilitator training based upon an innovative model developed by Hope in the Cities and adopted by the Dayton, Ohio Dialogue on Race Relations and Wright State University. In the actual dialogue sessions, individual groups will be guided by trained facilitators who will provide instruction in the basic tenets of the model. This model differs from traditional “dialogues” in that they begin with participants sharing information about family history, encounters with racial conflict, and current attitudes about race in their respective communities and concludes with participants developing specific strategies and realistic, attainable, and measurable action plans. The institute should benefit community or institutional leaders who address issues of racial conflict within their constituencies, the faculty who manages multiracial student bodies, as well as individuals who are interested in racial reconciliation.

Kim Goldenberg, M.D., President, Wright State University—Dayton, Ohio

Patricia Hicks‑Smith, Facilitator and Trainer,
Dayton Dialogues on Race Relations—Dayton, Ohio

Jacqueline McMillan, Executive Assistant to President/Board of Trustees,
Wright State University—Dayton, Ohio

Jeffrey Vernooy, Director, Office of Disability Services,
Wright State University—Dayton, Ohio

A five-part Institute will provide information on the California Faculty Association's efforts for improving working conditions in Higher Education. The application of collective bargaining in Higher Education came relatively late to the university and college labor environment. The unionization of the faculty and other staff in the academy had profound consequences for faculty working conditions and student learning. In addition to its impact on faculty wages, unions have also worked as levers in opening up the academy to under‑represented and underserved groups, in both the faculty and student ranks. Utilizing unions as agents of social change in higher education has not gone unnoticed, either by friends or foes.  The California Faculty Association (CFA) is a union committed to fair labor, compensation, and social justice. In many respects, CFA is ahead of most other unions in terms of its commitment to racial, ethnic and gender justice. It has built alliances between faculty, staff and students that have advanced the causes of social and economic justice and improving access for those who historically have been unwelcome or uninvited to participate in the academy.

Tuesday, May 29—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Student Internship Program

In this segment, the student intern/activists will provide information on the initiation, implementation, and role of the CFA student internship program.  The students will include material on the relationship between faculty working conditions and student learning, student organizing, and race relationships on campuses.

PART II—Alliances

This segment will cover alliances formed between faculty, staff, and students, under the umbrella of union support and collaboration and the resulting social actions. Concrete examples will be provided illuminating the nexus between ideas, action, and activism.

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART III—CFA Equity Conference and the Council for Affirmative Action

In 2003, the California Faculty Association hosted its third Equity Conference. The conference was a success overall, but even more so because a number of specific caucuses were formed and continue to remain active in the organization. The activism of the new and diverse faculty within the faculty union has had a resounding positive affect on the union, faculty, students and staff in the California State University System. We will share examples of how the activism of a diverse faculty brought political victories, increased membership, created new allies and birthed a fast learning organization. This section will also discuss the development of the Council for Affirmative Action (CAA) from a historical perspective, as well as how the faculty union has gained experience in strategic planning, coalition building, and political action.

Wednesday, May 30—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART IV—Building Alliances Committed to Social Change and the Quest for Social Justice

Many unions are finding it necessary to develop partnerships within their communities and/or across borders in order to effectively address the needs and concerns of a diverse membership and the communities in which they work and live. This segment illustrates the usefulness of applying an Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) approach—a partnership model that increases social capital by using the assets found within the community—to university and community settings committed to resisting institutional racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination and prejudice. This session will examine ways in which faculty of color confront and overcome racism, sexism, and structural obstacles to social mobility on college campuses. The goal of this session is threefold: (1) to demonstrate the continuing significance of racism and other forms of institutional discrimination for people of color regardless of class status, (2) to illuminate how associations are cultivated and developed to provide valuable support systems within communities of color that are historically under‑resourced, and (3) to demonstrate the ways in which effective leadership strategically builds alliances with non‑traditional and traditional organizations within and outside of higher education. This segment will also highlight the response to the racial profiling of Dr. Antwi Akom and the biased decision making affects the tenure process of Dr. Pat Washington. 

PART V—Media and Organizing
This section includes films from the California Newsreel on the role of unions in the struggle for racial, gender and ethnic justice in the academy.

Cecil E. Canton, Ed.D., Associate Vice President for Affirmative Action, California Faculty Association, and Professor, Division of Criminal Justice, California State University—Sacramento, California

This Institute is designed to address critical student issues and concerns. The overall intent is to have the students complete the institute with an enhanced sense of self, campus community and world at large, explore leadership development, as well as cross-cultural communications, and to build and find a passion to become an activist.

Tuesday, May 29—9:00–11:30 a.m.
Ways to Teach Engagement or to Sustain Political Hope, or How to Get the Students More Involve

This interactive session will combine the themes of Paul Loeb’s last three books: The Impossible Will Take a Little While, Soul of a Citizen, and Generation at the Crossroads. Drawing on these books and 35 years of exploring citizen involvement, including seven years interviewing students on their responses to the larger issues of our time, the presenter will focus on how ordinary citizens and students in particular can make their voices heard and actions count in a time when we're told neither matter. The session will discuss how people get involved in larger community issues and what stops them from getting involved; how they burn out in exhaustion or maintain their commitment for the long haul; how involvement can give them a sense of connection and purpose rare in purely personal life. The particular focus at this session will be on the themes of hope and persistence from The Impossible Will Take a Little While: Hope in a Time of Fear which was named the number three political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association, and the winner of the Nautilus Award for best social change book.

Paul Loeb, Author of Soul of a Citizen, The Impossible Will Take a Little While: and Generation at the Crossroads, www.paulloeb.org—Seattle, Washington

Tuesday, May 29—1:30–5:30 p.m.
Students Teaching Students: Leading Educational Sessions on Diversity
"Diversity Education As You Have Never Seen It!" This powerful, thought provoking, humorous, interactive session addresses the "diversity experience" on our campuses. It takes a much-needed "open & honest" approach that challenges traditional thinking. Fast paced with insightful exercises, participants leave with an "action plan" for improving themselves and their environment. A must for those who care about diversity issues!

Steven T. Birdine, President/CEO, Affirmation in Action—Laurel, Maryland

Wednesday, May 30—9:00–11:30 a.m.
Discovering Voice: How to Encourage, Nurture, and Challenge Students to Tell Their Own Stories

In this interactive session, Professor Fulbeck gives exercises, activities, and examples designed to get students to break out of their comfort zones and challenge the established parameters of traditional roles. Based on the premise that under-represented groups must create their own stories and images to combat the inaccurate portrayals of mass media, this fun and non-traditional session values originality, community, and an open mind.  No previous experience is needed, but group activity and participation is required.

Kip Fulbeck, Author, and Professor of Arts, and an affiliate in the Asian American Studies and Film Studies Department, University of California—Santa Barbara, California