1
EDUC 771: Organizing Higher Education for Equity and Diversity
University of Michigan School of Education
Fall 2014
Tuesdays, 9:00am-12:00pm
Room 2320
Instructor:
Julie Posselt, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, University of Michigan
Center for the Study of Higher and
Postsecondary Education
jposselt@umich.edu
2108E School of Education
Office phone: 734-764-8423
Office hours: 3-5pm Wed, or by appt.
Objectives & Outcomes
The objective of this doctoral seminar is to use organizational and social theory to analyze
foundational & current issues about how higher education might be organized toward greater equity and
more meaningful diversity. We will consider various types of equity and diversity, but will give special
attention to race, gender, and socioeconomic status. Through constructive, critical discourse, this
seminar’s learning outcomes are to
(1) Dissect specific and systemic barriers to equity and diversity,
(2) Assess proposed and emerging solutions,
(3) Think about the trade-off’s involved in naming equity and diversity as goals,
(4) Cultivate the intellectual community, trust, and imagination that it will take to broaden the
scope of possible strategies for educational change.
To that end, we will read intensively, engage in candid & structured discussions, and both critique and
design research studies of our own. As a doctoral seminar, I expect a high level of reflection and analysis.
We will also devote ourselves to improving writing for multiple audiences through a variety of
activities. Growing as writers is another important objective of this course, one that can amplify your
impact as an education scholar. As Pulitzer Prize-winning literary critic Stephen Greenblatt wrote, “You
should try to write well—and that means bringing to the table all of your alertness, your fears, and your
desires. And every once in a while—say every third paper—tell yourself you will take a risk.” I will hold
high standards for your writing in this course, and one of those standards is evidence of taking some risks.
Each member of this class brings a unique and valuable standpoint to the course content. I am
leaving one week open in each of the three major sections of the course, so that we can collectively
construct curriculum for those weeks, in line with specific interests of the group.
Texts
Most texts are are available online via CTools, but the book-length texts you will need to acquire are:
Required:
Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life. Duke University Press.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
And
Kahlenberg, R. (Ed). (2014). The Future of Affirmative Action. (pdf on ctools)
Or
Cashin, S. (2014). Place not Race: A New Vision of Opportunity in America. New York: Beacon Press.
2
Grading & Course Requirements
Your grade will be calculated based on the following requirements:
a. Attendance, Engagement & Participation (25% of course grade)
Attendance is required, except in cases of contagiousness and conference travel. If you are sick,
please stay home and notify me. If you have conference travel, please work this out with me well in
advance. More than one absence, except in unusual circumstances that have been discussed in
advance, will negatively affect your course grade.
Engagement means actively supporting our collective learning. I am committed to creating a
focused, non-competitive atmosphere in which we come together to build understanding that
contributes to our professional development and practice.
I expect your engagement through by contributing to discussion in ways that demonstrate you
have given thought to the weekly readings, such as by asking and answering questions (of me and one
another). Each week, by 9:00pm on the night before class, you will submit two possible discussion
questions through a CTools forum. These questions should encourage in-depth analysis of individual
articles and cross-text analysis or synthesis. As a follow-up to our course discussion, you should
continue the conversation by responding to at least one of the other questions that has been posted for
that week.
You can expect a number of short, low-stakes writing activities that occur in and out of class,
which are required and may be reviewed, but will not be directly counted in your grade.
Engagement also means turning off your phone during class (unless you have a child or other
caregiving responsibilities) and avoiding email or social media.
b. Paper Review & Leading Discussion (2-3 pages; 10% of grade)
Due on CTools Dropbox on the day before you lead discussion.
Scholars are frequently called upon to conduct manuscript reviews for their colleagues, either as
part of formal peer review processes for journals, conferences, publishing houses, etc. or informally
before the author submits it for publication. To encourage an especially close reading of one course
text and provide practice in this important academic activity, you will write a formal review and lead
discussion on of an article of your choosing.
On the syllabus, papers available for reviews are marked with three asterisks (***). You will
have the opportunity to sign up for this early in class, and examples of such reviews will be provided.
Each student should write their own review, but you will lead discussion with a partner.
I will return paper reviews to students with feedback at the end of each month. If you present in
September, you can expect feedback by Oct.1, for example.
c. Book review (2-3 pages; 10% of grade)
Due (on CTools Dropbox) Sept 30
Each student will choose to critically review one of two recently published books that proposes a new
approach to affirmative action. If you write a particularly strong review, I may suggest a journal to
which you could submit it for publication. I will provide resources and examples of book reviews.
d. Course Project (20-25 pages; 35% of grade)
One page prospectus/Abstract due Sept. 9
Literature review draft due (for peer review) Oct. 10
Literature review & Theoretical framework due (on Ctools Dropbox) Oct. 28
Full research proposal draft due, including methodology (for peer review) Nov. 18
Full research proposal draft due (on CTools Dropbox) Nov. 25
Final presentation Dec. 9
Each student will work throughout the semester to develop a polished research proposal on a topic
3
related to the course, consisting of introduction, literature review, theoretical framework and proposed
methodology. My preference is for you to write research proposals individually. Either way, my goal
for you is to receive feedback and make revisions on an iterative basis so that the final version is
something you can both use beyond the semester.
Please note that if there is another format for the course project that would be more suitable to your
developmental needs or goals that we need to discuss this in the first week of the semester.
e. Op-Ed (1000 words; 20% of grade)
Due on CTools Forum Dec. 7
Higher education scholar Ernest Boyer once wisely wrote, “The work of the professor becomes
consequential only as it is understood by others,” and this is true for all researchers whose work is
ultimately aimed at improving education and its outcomes. Through your research for the course
project, you will undoubtedly develop opinions and/or positions about the topic of your analysis. The
goal of an op-ed, which in this case will be the final paper you submit, is to express one such position
in a concise, well-substantiated way. Its goal is persuasion, and it should therefore be written to sway
readers to think differently— whether it is in an effort to shaping public opinion, institutional
practice, and/ or policy. With a limited word count (1000 words is typical for many media outlets),
the evidence and arguments you choose to include are critical. This is also a great opportunity to let
your voice shine through, and to exchange the usual academic jargon for direct language that a
broader audience will understand and find engaging. Writing quality will be a strong component of
the grading on this assignment. As with the book review, I will be glad to work with those who write
especially strong op-ed’s to consider submitting them to media outlets.
On Diversity
The presence of multiple perspectives is critical to building both our academic knowledge and an
equitable learning community. Research by UM professor Scott Page finds that when a diverse group
comes together around a shared problem, they will solve it more successfully and innovatively than
homogeneous groups of experts, because diverse individuals contribute more angles on the problem and
ideas toward its solution (Page, 2008). However, this is only true when members of the group believe in
the value of diversity (Ely & Thomas, 2001).
Please see the attached discussion guidelines, which we will review and add to (as you see fit) on the first
day of class as part of our collective framing of this course. I expect that our discussions and work
together will be respectful and encourage different perspectives, and that each of us will strive to be
inclusive of people regardless of background and identity. I also expect that some of us will have
moments in the class where identities are triggered—positively and negatively. I am comfortable pausing
our regularly scheduled discussion to address such issues as part of our learning during class time. If you
have concerns about anything that comes up in your experience of the class or as a graduate student,
generally, please know that my office is a safe, confidential space to raise them now and when the course
is done.
In selecting course texts, I have tried to reflect an array of perspectives and interests. You are welcome to
suggest additional texts, which I may add to our Ctools site. I have also selected readings with an eye
toward developing your capacity to consume and critique research that focuses on systems of inequality.
You may be interested in the institutional resources about diversity matters, non-discrimination, ADA,
and more that the University of Michigan’s Office for Institutional Equity has posted online:
http://www.umich.edu/~hraa/oie/
Accommodations
If you think you need an accommodation for a disability, please let me know at your earliest
convenience. Some aspects of this course, the assignments, the in-class activities, and the way the course
4
is usually taught may be modified to facilitate your participation and progress. As soon as you make me
aware of your needs, we can work with the Office of Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) to help
us determine appropriate academic accommodations. SSD (734-763-3000; ssd.umich.edu) typically
recommends accommodation through a Verified Individualized Services and Accommodations (VISA)
form. Any information you provide is private and confidential and will be treated as such.
PART 1: Equity
Sept. 2: Course introduction
Activity:
Syllabus, Set discussion guidelines & groundrules
Writing exercise
Discuss topics of interest for Oct. 7 & Nov. 4
Sept. 9 -- Foundations of Higher Education in Social Stratification
DUE: Abstract/ Research prospectus (one page—turn in at class)
Readings:
Barber, B. (1992). An Aristocracy of Everyone: The Politics of Education and the Future of America.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Required: Prologue & Ch. 6: What our 47 year olds know
Optional for those who like history: Ch. 1: Teaching Temporality
Plato, The Republic, Book II
pp. 211-239 in http://www.aprendendoingles.com.br/ebooks/republic.pdf
DuBois, W.E.B. (1903). The Talented Tenth. (Full text available on ctools or online at
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-talented-tenth/
James, W. (1903). The Ph.D. Octopus. (Full text available at
http://grammar.about.com/od/classicessays/a/The-Ph-D-Octopus-By-William-James-Classic-Essays.htm)
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch.1: Rules of Engagement & Ch.2: On Being Disciplined
Recommended:
Stockdill & Danico. (2012). The Ivory Tower Paradox: Higher Education as a Site of Oppression and
Resistance. Chapter 1
Key question:
The original purpose of advanced education was to separate out some people for unique training and
preparation for leadership. With its history and very founding aimed at stratifying society, how can higher
education be reclaimed for equity?
Sept. 16 -- Rethinking merit & meritocracy
Readings:
Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of
Management Review 20 (3), 571-610.
Guinier, L. (2002). Admissions rituals as political acts: Guardians at the gates of our democratic ideals.
Harvard Law Review 117 (113).
http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/guinier/publications/admissions.pdf
***Warikoo, N. & Fuhr, C. (2013). Legitimating Status: Perceptions of meritocracy & inequality among
undergraduates at a British university. British Educational Research Journal.
5
Brint, S. & Karabel, J. (1989). American education, meritocratic ideology, and the legitimation of
inequality: The community college and the problem of American exceptionalism. Higher
Education 18, 725-735
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 3: A Guide to the Style Guides
Recommended:
Kirwan Institute. A Common Guide to Understanding Democratic Merit.
http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/docs/Applied%20Democratic%20Merit.pdf
Castilla, E. (2008). Gender, Race, & Meritocracy in Organizational Careers. American Journal of
Sociology.
Peterson, T. & Saporta, I. (2004). The opportunity structure for discrimination. American Journal of
Sociology 109 (4), 852-901.
Key Question:
What does merit have to do with legitimacy? What are the benefits and drawbacks of thinking about
merit in terms of organizational legitimacy?
Sept. 23 -- Status & Equity in Intercollegiate Athletics
Readings:
Ridgeway, C. 2014. Status Matters for Inequality. American Sociological Review 79 (1), 1-16.
***Lifschitz, Sauder, & Stevens. 2014. Football as a Status System in U.S. Higher Education
New, J. (2014). Antitrust Loss for NCAA. Inside Higher Ed. Aug 11, 2014.
Branch, T. 2011. The Shame of College Sports. The Atlantic.
http://www.workplacebullying.org/multi/pdf/branch.pdf
Browse resources link at “Laboratory for Diversity in Sport”
https://diversityinsport.squarespace.com/resources/
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 4: Voice and Echo
Recommended:
Harper, S. R., Williams, C. D., & Blackman, H. W. (2013). Black male student-athletes and racial
inequities in NCAA Division I college sports. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Center
for the Study of Race and Equity in Education.
Holsapple, M. (TBD).
Key Question:
Should college athletes be paid? What can be learned about organizing athletics from the status
mechanisms Ridgeway discusses?
Sept. 30 -- New Approaches to Affirmative Action
DUE: Book review of either Kahlenberg or Cashin
Readings:
***Bobo, L. (1998). Race, interests, and beliefs about affirmative action: Unanswered questions and new
directions. American Behavioral Scientist 41 (7), 985-1003.
Kahlenberg, R. (Ed). (2014). The Future of Affirmative Action.(pdf on ctools)
Or
Cashin, S. (2014). Place not Race.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 5: Smart Sentencing
Kelsky, K. (2014). The professor is in: How to write an honest but collegial book review.
http://bit.ly/1sU4FBn
Recommended:
6
Alon & Malamud. (2014). The impact of Israel’s class-based affirmative action policy on admission and
academic outcomes. Economics of Education Review 40, 123-139.
Belasco, A.S., Rosinger, K. O., & Hearn, J. C. (2014). The test-optional movement at America’s selective
liberal arts colleges: A boon for equity or something else? Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis.
Darrity, et al. (2011). Who Is Eligible? Should affirmative action be group or class based? Amerian
Journal of Economics & Sociology 70 (1).
Key questions:
What are the arguments and evidence for class-based affirmative action? Are you persuaded?
Oct. 7: People’s choice (Foundations & Social Movements)
Readings:
Shiao (2005). Identifying Talent, Institutionalizing Diversity, Ch. 1 & Ch. 6
Bartley, T. (2007). How Foundations Shape Social Movements: The Construction of an Organizational
Field and the Rise of Forest Certification. Social Problems 54 (3), 229-255.
Barnhardt, C. (2015). Campus educational contexts and civic participation: Organizational links to
collective action. Journal of Higher Education.
Barnhardt, C. (2014). Campus based organizing: Tactical repertoires of contemporary student
movements. New Directions in Higher Education.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 6: Tempting Titles
DUE FRI, OCT 10: Literature review (peer review)
Oct. 14: Fall Break
No class, but continue to think about your writing. Also, please submit to CTools your questions about
the paper written by Liliana Garces for 10/28.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 7: Hooks and Sinkers
PART 2: Diversity
Oct. 21 -- Diversity as a Frame for Policy and Organizational Practice
Readings:
Goffman, E. (1974.) Frame Analysis—Chapters 2-3 (copies on ctools)
***Marichal (2009). Frame evolution: A new approach to understanding changes in diversity reforms at
public universities in the United States. The Social Science Journal 46, 171-191.
Garces, L. (2014). Aligning diversity, quality, and equity: The implications of legal and public policy
developments for promoting racial diversity in graduate studies. American Journal of Education.
Nivet, M. (2011). Diversity 3.0: A necessary systems upgrade. Academic Medicine 86(12), 1487-1489.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 8: The Story Net
Recommended:
Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayon-Pedersen, A., Allen, W. (1999). Enacting Diverse Learning Environments:
Improving the Climate for Racial/Ethnic Diversity in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher
Education Report 26 (8). http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED430514.pdf
Key questions:
7
What was gained and lost in Bakke? What benefits and drawbacks accompany diversity’s various
frames? How does historical, social, and political context shape prevailing frameworks for diversity?
Oct. 28 -- Diversity Management
DUE: Revised/enhanced literature review & Theoretical framework
Readings:
Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism & Diversity in Institutional Life.
Ch. 1
Rivera, L. (2012). Diversity within reach: Recruitment vs. hiring in elite firms. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 639 (71).
Smith, D. (2009). Diversity’s Promise for Higher Education.
Ch. 3: A diversity framework for higher education
Ch. 7: Student learning & success
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 9: Show and Tell
Recommended:
Hughes, G. (2013). Racial justice, hegemony, and bias incidents in U.S. higher education. Multicultural
perspectives 15 (3), 126-132.
Kalev, A., Kelly, E., & Dobbin, F. (2006). Best Practices or Best Guesses? Assessing the Efficacy of
Corporate Affirmative Action and Diversity Policies. American Sociological Review 71 (4).
Key question:
How does institutionalizing diversity carry risks of institutionalizing inequality?
Nov. 4: Diversity work in the US and abroad
Readings:
Ahmed, S. (2012). On Being Included: Racism & Diversity in Institutional Life.
Ch. 2-6
***Griffin, K. A. & Muñiz, M. (2011). The strategies and struggles of graduate diversity officers in the
recruitment of doctoral students of color. Equity & Excellence in Education 44(1), 57-76.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 10: Jargonitis
PART 3: Transformation
Nov. 11: What Do We Mean by Transformation? Norms, Classification, & Change
Readings:
Weick, K. (1984). Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems.
***Stephens, et al. (2012). Unseen Disadvantage: How American Universities’ Focus on Independence
Undermines the Academic Performance of First-Generation College Students. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology.
Chang, M. (2002). Preservation or Transformation: Where’s the Real Discourse on Diversity? Review of
Higher Education 25 (2), 125-140.
Haslanger, S. (2008). Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy.
http://www.mit.edu/~shaslang/papers/HaslangerCICP.pdf
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 11: Structural Designs
8
Recommended:
Gómez, M. (2012). Telling our stories, naming ourselves: The lost María in the Academy. In Stockdill &
Danico.
Key Questions:
What would transformation of higher education look like to outsiders? How would it feel to those inside
the system?
Nov. 18-- Peer editing your course projects.
(Also, ASHE, for some of us.)
Readings:
Whatever it takes to put the final touches on your course project, plus
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 12: Points of Reference
Nov. 25 – Liberatory Pedagogy & Curriculum Design
DUE: Course project
Readings:
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 13: The Big Picture
Developmental Education:
Required:
King, K. R., McEvoy, S., & Teixeira, S. (2011). Remediation as a civil rights issue in the California Stat
University System. In Dismantling College Opportunity in California (pp. 4-41). Civil Rights
Project.
Bahr, P. R. (2010). Preparing the Underprepared: An Analysis of Racial Disparities in Postsecondary
Mathematics Remediation. Journal of Higher Education 81 (2), 209-237.
Recommended:
CSU English Council. (2009). Position Statement: Mandatory Early Start Programs. Available at
http://csuenglishcouncil.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/psmandatoryearlystartprograms/
Liberatory Pedagogy
Required:
***Guillermo Zapata Calderon, J. (2012). One activist intellectual’s experience in surviving and
transforming the academy.
NOTE: You will sign up in duos to read one of the hooks chapters and one of the Freire readings.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. NY: Routledge.
Ch. 1, Ch. 5, Ch. 12
Freire readings TBD by the group. Choose one:
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group,
Inc. Available in full at http://www.users.humboldt.edu/jwpowell/edreformFriere_pedagogy.pdf
Freire, P. Paulo Freire on Higher Education: A Dialogue at the National University of Mexico.
Webb, D. (2011). Paulo Freire and ‘the need for a kind of education in hope’. Cambridge Journal of
Education.
Recommended:
Rojas, F. (2013, March 13). Why activism and academia don’t mix.
http://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2013/03/31/why-activism-and-academia-dont-mix/
Recommended:
Cohen, Steele, Ross, 1999; Cohen & Steele, 2002, “A Barrier of Mistrust”
Key question:
What is the role of academics as agents of social change?
9
Dec. 2 – Confronting Privilege, Countering Colorblindness
Readings:
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial
inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Chapters 1 & 8 (Copies on CTools)
Carter, D.J. & Tuitt, F. (2013). Contesting the Myth of ‘Post-racial’ Era: The Continued Significance of
Race in U.S. Education. Peter Lang Publishing.
Chapters TBD
***Cabrera, N. L. (2012). Working through whiteness: White, male college students challenging
racism. The Review of Higher Education, 35(3), 375-401.
Sword, H. (2012). Stylish Academic Writing.
Ch. 14: The Creative Touch & Afterword
Recommended:
Armato, M. (2012). Striving to be queer. Chapter 4 in Stockdill & Danico.
Rothman, J. (2014, May 12). The origins of “privilege.” The New Yorker.
http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-origins-of-privilege
Barnett, P.E. (2013). Unpacking Teachers' Invisible Knapsacks: Social Identity and Privilege in Higher
Education. Liberal Education 99 (3). http://aacu.org/liberaleducation/le-su13/barnett.cfm
Rothenberg, P. S. (2012). White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism. NY: Worth
Publishers.
Khan, S. (2011). Privilege: The Making of An Adolescent Elite at St. Paul’s School. Princeton University
Press.
DUE Dec 7: Op-Ed, based on your course project. Post to CTools forum.
Dec. 9: Last day of class; Final presentations
Readings:
Your classmates’ op-ed essays