Introduction
Background
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State: 2004 - 09
Campus Climate and Intergroup Relations
Representation (Access and Success)
Education and Scholarship
Institutional Viability
and Vitality
Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Notes
Framework Main Page

Archive
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State:
1998 - 03

Printable Version
A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State:
2004 - 09 (PDF 2,606 KB)

Adobe Acrobat Reader

A Framework to Foster Diversity at Penn State: 2004-09
As we enter this next phase of diversity strategic planning at Penn State, the Challenges identified in the 1998-2003 Framework continue to provide a concrete roadmap for achieving our diversity goals. To continue our diversity planning through the next five years, we position the Challenges within four dimensions of diversity which current scholarship suggests must be addressed in higher education.9 These four dimensions provide a context for the seven Challenges and for developing the 2004-09 diversity strategic plan. The dimensions and their relationship to the Challenges of the Framework are summarized below.

Campus Climate and Intergroup Relations
The dimension of campus climate and intergroup relations includes not only activities focusing on the needs of individuals from historically marginalized groups, but also scrutiny of institutional characteristics that affect intergroup relations among all students, faculty, and staff. The climate on college campuses is a significant factor because of its impact on the intellectual and academic enterprise, as well as on the individual members of the academic community. The necessity for creating a more inclusive, welcoming climate on college campuses is supported by several national education association reports10 which suggest that in order to provide a framework within which a vital community of learning can be built, a primary mission of the academy must be to create an environment that ideally cultivates diversity and celebrates difference. Fostering diversity will continue to be an important dimension of educating future citizens at Penn State and at most institutions of higher education. This dimension encompasses the Challenges of “Developing a Shared and Inclusive Understanding of Diversity” and “Creating a Welcoming Campus Climate.”

Representation (Access and Success)
The dimension of representation focuses on data gathering and efforts aimed at the inclusion and success of previously underrepresented and/or underserved groups. This dimension is the most commonly understood component of campus diversity and is basic to other facets of diversity. The fundamental importance of access is substantiated in the many amicus curiae briefs filed in support of the University of Michigan’s admissions policies, speaking to the educational importance of a diverse student body. While representation is most widely understood in terms of student access, the issues of access and success within the workforce are also critical. The Challenges of “Recruiting and Retaining a Diverse Student Body” and “Recruiting and Retaining a Diverse Workforce” correspond with this dimension of diversity.

Education and Scholarship
The dimension of Education and Scholarship focuses on the “inclusion of diverse traditions in the curriculum, the impact of issues of diversity on teaching methods, and the influence of societal diversity on scholarly inquiry.”11 This dimension recognizes that educating all students for the realities of today’s increasingly diverse society and global community is integral to the mission of higher education, and that diversity is integral to teaching and learning. While the dimension of Education and Scholarship in many ways encompasses all aspects of the University, the Challenge of “Developing a Curriculum That Fosters Intercultural and International Competencies” is a key element.

Institutional Viability and Vitality
This dimension refers to systemic and structural realignments necessary to support the first three dimensions. To ensure institutional viability and vitality, the organization must be able to achieve a holistic view of diversity. Consequently, we must ask ourselves, what message is sent to our students and other important internal and external constituencies when the diversity championed in our mission statement is not reflected in the leadership of the institution? What role does diversity play in ensuring an institution’s future? What are the prospects for an institution that proves itself incapable of engaging pluralism at its highest levels? These questions point to the link between diversity and institutional sustainability. The Challenges of “Diversifying University Leadership and Management” and “Coordinating Organizational Change to Support Our Diversity Goals” must be met at all levels of the University.

In this document, the seven Challenges are organized under these four dimensions of diversity. A review of the progress on the Challenges to date acknowledges achievements and identifies continuing concerns, referring to work already completed (e.g., benchmarks, paradigm for diversity definitions, best practices, etc.). Next, targeted areas for improvement within the dimension are presented. Finally, assessment questions are provided that will be used to evaluate each unit’s progress on strategic initiatives. In preparation for the periodic assessment of progress in implementing this document, it is the responsibility of each unit to develop appropriate measures of success for behaviorally anchored outcomes.

It should be noted that these dimensions, as well as the Challenges themselves, are interrelated and success in one cannot be fully realized without achievement in the others. Similarly, as a University community, no unit or college functions in isolation; lack of success in any part of the University affects the whole community. Meaningful diversity initiatives MUST encompass initiatives targeted to multiple groups; success in one arena does not allow units to forego aggressive action in others.

Assessment
Strategic planning units are asked to consider their progress in implementing the 1998-2003 Framework along with this document in developing their new diversity strategic plans. The final reports on implementation of the 1998-2003 Framework along with the plans for implementation of the 2004-09 diversity strategic plan will be submitted to the vice provost for Educational Equity on February 16, 2004. Teams similar to those utilized in the 1998-2003 Framework mid-point reviews will review the documents, and feedback will be provided to each unit by May 2004. At the mid-point (December 2006) and conclusion (December 2009) of the next planning cycle, evaluation teams that include key stakeholders will be utilized in the evaluation process. Demographic data profiles will be updated for each unit prior to the mid-point and the final assessment to assist them in evaluating their diversity initiatives. Interim data will be made available by request.

The assessment questions are based on those asked in the 1998-2003 Framework mid-point reviews and reflect the targeted areas for improvement presented under each Challenge. It is the responsibility of each unit to develop appropriate measures. These measures will be developed and reported in the new plan for submission in February 2004. Supporting data will be included in the mid-point and concluding reports. Collection of data over the life of the plan will permit longitudinal analysis of progress. Identification of most successful initiatives will facilitate identification of best practices--processes, programs, and procedures that most successfully lead to the unit’s ability to reach the University’s diversity goals and can be validated through measurable outcomes--that can be shared among units. Analysis of less successful practices and processes will help to distinguish institutional barriers that must be addressed from unit-specific trends.

A timeline of assessment over the life of this plan is included in Appendix 1.

TOP