Panels discuss flaws of Levin's diversity plan

JULIA TIERNAN/YH SPEAKING OUT: On Mon., Mar. 1, a crowded room of students watched a heated disucssion about President Levin's new tenure diversity plan.

By Emily Gold

University President Richard Levin, GRD '74, announced a groundbreaking plan of action to increase faculty diversity on Wed., Feb. 24--but not everyone is satisfied. "Levin's new statement is out, but if you've seen it or read about it, then you know it doesn't say too much," wrote Student Coalition for Diversity (SCD) moderator Lee Wang, BK '00, in an e-mail to fellow members, reminding them of the Mon., Mar. 1 panel discussion on academic diversity. "Tomorrow night at 8 p.m. is our big chance to show that we are not satisfied with the way things are being run. We must come out in big numbers to this and make sure that our concerns are not ignored," Wang continued.

And come out they did. With two well-attended meetings on academic diversity--SCD's panel discussion and a Hillel-sponsored discussion of tenure issues on Tues., Mar. 2--this has been a week of heated discussion about Levin's plan. But when all is said and done, much uncertainty still surrounds the proposal. It is unclear whether the majority
of Yalies fully support SCD's demands for major change in Yale's level of academic diversity--and just as unclear whether Levin's plan of action will actually result in significant change at all.

Levin's proposal calls for new resources, leadership, and faculty commitment in order to increase the number of female and minority professors at Yale. To Yale's diversity activists, however, the plan falls dramatically short. Wang made this clear in her opening statements at Monday's meeting, which featured a panel consisting of Yale College Dean Richard Brodhead, BR '68, GRD '72, professors Michael Denning, Rogers Smith, and Donald Crothers, Lori Brooks, GRD '00, and Wang herself. "The new plan is a first step and I applaud it. But it's really misguided in its avoidance of curriculum diversity.Yale is currently training students to be agents of a very old and anachronistic tradition," Wang stated, receiving loud cheers from the audience.

The boisterous audience voiced displeasure with Brodhead's opening statement that "it may seem that Lee favors diversity and that the Administration disfavors it, but that's not true." Wang pointed to the lack of targets and numbers in Levin's policy, as well as the failure to fill the vacancy left by the departure of Yale's sole Asian-American Studies professor, Brian Hayashi. "Dean Brodhead can talk a lot about how he supports diversity, but his claims are contradicted when you look at who is in our faculty," Wang declared. Nonetheless, Brodhead contended at the end of the meeting that "anyone who listened carefully would see that there were shades of agreement on many issues."

Although Tuesday's discussion at the Slifka Center featured a smaller audience, the calls for major changes in Yale's academic diversity remained the same. Comprised of professors Paula Hyman, David Bromwich, PC '73, GRD '77, Daniel Oren, and Bryan Wolf, and moderated by Justin Florence,
TD '00, the panel focused on faculty diversity but also touched on curricular issues. "The question is why Yale's stated commitment to diversity hasn't produced enough diversity," Hyman said. "Why does Yale lag behind other universities in its faculty diversity?" Wolf agreed, connecting the lack of faculty diversity to the lack of curriculum diversity. "We have a dismal record of bringing in senior members of color to Yale. We don't have the curricular attractions," he stated. "In an ideal world, I would like to see an expanded diversity of curriculum drive the engine of hiring."

Judging solely from the two meetings, it would seem that the only remaining issue is how to expand Levin's proposal. Yet some students question whether this view actually represents the majority of Yalies' voices, particularly since those who attended and spoke at this week's meetings were primarily SCD members and supporters. "I think that the professors and students who are skeptical of these changes have been totally marginalized," Emil Kleinhaus, TC '99, commented after the Hillel meeting. "They're not making their voices heard."

Kleinhaus raises a serious concern, but it may be a moot point. Since Levin's plan to increase faculty diversity operates mainly through increased resources for departments, it remains unclear whether change will actually take place. "President Levin's plan may prove useful in stimulating further action to enhance faculty diversity, but it still leaves the job chiefly in the hands of the departments," Smith said. "They must display the will to make it work: if they do, the resources will be there." As Smith stated at Monday's meeting, however, "My sense is that there is not a genuine commitment to making it happen at a faculty level."

Denning agreed. "I think the Administration is way out in front of the departments," he stated. "There needs to be more pressure on the departments. Since the departments have the appointment-making and agenda-setting roles, they are the ones with the power."

Professors at the Hillel discussion echoed these sentiment. "I find that in the search committees I serve on, the issue of affirmative action is never raised," Hyman said. "There is a reluctance to consider affirmative action as anything beyond the statement that Yale is an affirmative action employer."

As a result, those in the forefront of the movement are beginning to call for stronger measures in departments with little diversity. "The best thing the University could do probably is not to make additional slots available to departments lacking in diversity. Instead, it should insist that they document who the minority and women scholars are in each field where such a search has taken place, and why they were not regarded as appointable," Smith said. "Failure to provide documentation of this sort should be grounds for refusing to appoint the white male candidates brought forth."

Other professors, however, are wary. "I think the Administration is understandably reluctant to tamper with the autonomy of departments," Bromwich said. "There is a fear of compromising the intellectual excellence and academic freedom of departments."

Back to News...