CIDE Meeting Minutes                                                                                                                                                                  November 3, 2017

● Names, affiliations, departments

Denise: how we got here today
● What progress has been made? What do we need to continue to do?
○ 2001: $800,000 Irvine Grant (2001-2003) to help implement the College’s
diversity initiatives

○ Goals: diversify faculty, diversify the curriculum, improve campus climate
through multicultural projects, and develop a summer program for 9th and 10th
grade girls from underrepresented groups as a means for encouraging academic

○ Diversity Coordinating Committee (DCC) key oversight role

○ Alumni, students, faculty, staff, administrators involved in ECC

○ Student representatives expanded in DCC

○ Included students and alums from “Whose Voice, Whose Vision”

○ Funding for training for student lectures, faculty and staff training, office space
for Wanawake Weusi

○ Multicultural Resource Center, which became SCORE

○ Baseline Campus Climate Survey (have we done anything similar since?)

■ There is a summary and analysis that will be sent to the group

○ Audit of all institutional research collection instruments

○ Greater awareness to support for diversity through Institutional Advancement

■ Funding opportunities, making sure potential donors were aware of ways
to support inclusion on campus

○ Funding provided to establish Scripps College Academy (SCA)

● DCC became PACDI in 2012

● Once Lara arrived, reevaluated goals and procedures of PACDI and created CIDE

○ CIDE is to be parallel with strategic planning but will focus on diversity and
inclusion at a much higher level

● Prof. H-K: didn’t think there was the institutional support for the DCC that it needed, so
it transformed into PACDI to make it more institutionalized

● Martha Gonzalez: tried to usher in institutional memory with PACDI

○ We should continue to build on that momentum rather than reinvent the wheel

● Denise: CIDE should look at more structural and strategic planning elements that can
improve student experience and better represent the voices of the community, as opposed
to programmatic elements

● Prof. Chancy: what is meant by “higher level” plans for inclusion and diversity?

○ Denise: need to tailor our objectives with the larger plans of the College and
recommend actionable plans

What are some of the major issues on our campus?

● Denise: structural diversity and interactional diversity
○ Structural diversity: what are the policies and programs we have in place?

■ Classroom, admissions, etc.
○ Interactional diversity: now that we have brought people here, what do we have in
place to make sure their transition to our community is positive and

● Prof. Chancy: doesn’t think there has been much change to address institutional diversity
over the past few years
○ Can’t just claim that we care for the students or expand our admissions policies,
but we need to shift the actual structure itself

○ Issues of campus climate, which speaks to belonging and disbelonging

○ We still use Reagan-era ethnic categories, which are extremely harmful for
students and forces definitions upon people

○ The way we define race and ethnicity requirements for GEs is still from the

■ Her classes on transnationalism don’t actually count for the Race and
Ethnicity GE because it uses different theories and terms

■ How can Scripps change its ethnic or racial categories?

● It’s a private institution, so we have the power to do so
■ Changing these categories will allow different people within the institution
to use the system in a new and more inclusive way
● The system will become more flexible, pliable, and inclusive
■ It’s about being up-to-date
■ There’s a way to do this legally, but also to signal that we want a structural
apparatus that reflects the government shifts since the 1980s and that we
are a progressive and diverse institution

● Denise: this conversation has been had before, we do have people working on it and
thinking about it, and there have been changes

○ Prof. Chauncy: I want to make sure that we do see these changes because it’s
frustrating to feel like despite being a small and intimate campus, things are so
slow and we are not where we should be
■ Can we as a group have a goal to recommend structural changes and can
we communicate exactly how these changes would be made?

● Prof. Soliman: Where are we in the conversation about student housing?
○ Left off last year talking about a potential floor for students of African descent,

● Jenn: We have a new hire to do a comprehensive review of LLCs and affinity housing

○ Brenda and SCORE have created a working group to look at identity-based

● Prof. Soliman: There are a lot of ideas on the table, so we have to be a group that holds
the institution accountable and enforces the timeline for the entire community

○ How do we also communicate what progress has been done?

○ The goal is to implement the affinity-based housing next year (tentative)
Students are rejecting the term “diversity” at this point

● Denise: if these are terms we should move away from, we should talk about it

● Prof. Soliman: Diversity is more structural and data-based, while social justice strategies
can do a better job implementing actual changes for the community

● Prof. Soliman: Diversity for who? Who cares about diversity?
○ Tends to be predominantly white authorities to talk about diversity
○ White parents tend to care about diversity numbers in college so they know their
student is having a “holistic, well-rounded” experience in college
○ The people who fall under the “diverse” category care about it in a different way
○ We should be picking the brains of youth these days
■ Ex. the restroom signs: why does it say “all genders?” Why can’t it just
say “restroom?”
■ Need the inter-generational voices and conversations
○ Also important for faculty and staff to not get frustrated and disillusioned
■ Only one long-term faculty in the room: is this from burnout?

Denise: we need people who have more interaction with students to help those who aren’t as
familiar with what students want so that we can work together to make these changes happen

● Prof. Chancy: we often talk about diversity as exclusionary and embattled
○ It’s not that this is not always the case, but if you are always fighting to be a part
of a certain category, you are always fighting to be included and it’s a struggle
○ Finding that in her Core 1 section, she is constantly having to supplement the
material with positive depictions of the “diverse bodies” or communities
■ Need to find a way to include these positive depictions in the curriculum

● Prof. Williamson: how do we break down the terms and look at the communities that
exist across the 5Cs so we can all be on the same page about things

● Prof. Soliman: goes back to numbers for the institution
○ Always needing to “negotiate” one’s “difference”

● Prof. Chancy: I don’t think it’s just about the numbers, but also about the worldview and
reeducating everyone in the space
○ There’s this conception that the most educated and wealthy students have the
most sophisticated understanding of the world, but that is not always the case
○ Want to get to the place where we can recognize that students from
underprivileged backgrounds possess knowledge and have a sophisticated

Prof. H-K: when we talk about belonging and disbelonging, are our students relating to that?
● Advises first-gen students and encounters students feeling that the whole culture
is very phony and that it doesn’t matter
○ What’s it like to be a first-year? Can we find parallels?
○ We find that they all learn from each other, so can we do that more
effectively and on a larger scale?
■ Should focus on some commonality that students can relate to

● Zara: coming as a South Asian student, seen as a model minority, that first-year
experience is so real
○ The model minority phenomenon is very harmful and limiting
○ Took five years to get a South Asian mentorship group on campus that
could finally split from the AAPI groups
■ As a queer South Asian student, it is very difficult to have these
conversations with students on campus because we feel stuck in
that myth but we don’t feel like we have places to go
○ The “margins of the margins” are not even represented in the bodies on
campus that are supposed to support “diversity”

■ Prof. Chancy: I think that goes back to the limiting categories

Prof. Gonzalez: do we have a budget for this committee?

● Denise: not technically, President Tiedens is looking for recommendations, but those
recommendations could be supported by funding

Denise: nomenclature and belonging/disbelonging seem to be the biggest issues people have
talked about today


Action Items/Next Steps:
1. Create a shared resources site – Box or Sakai (Denise)
2. Share names of those who expressed interest in participating in CIDE
3. Schedule next meeting via Doodle for December after working groups have met
4. Working Groups (engage additional members of the community in discussion on the
following topics)
Mary Hatcher-Skeers (Convener)
Denise Nelson Nash
Zara Singh
Kevin Williamson
Sarah Wilson
Transnationalism within Structural Systems
Juliette Cagigas
Sue Castagnetto
Myriam Chancy (Convener)
Abby Clarke
Martha Gonzalez
Gaby Ollig
Affinity Housing and Nomenclature
Jennifer Berklas
Scott Busiel
Sabina Hills-Villalobos
Maryan Soliman
Jenn Wells (Convener)