A three-part institute will provide an opportunity to explore the cultural, religious and academic issues facing people from the Arab and Muslim East, and how these issues intersect with current political events and realities on American campuses. Discussion probes trends in acculturation and discrimination of this population, the role of media in shaping attitudes about the Middle East and how campus life and curricula have been influenced by post-9/11 factors.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Part I—Muslims and Arabs Living in U.S.
There are over six million Muslims and Arabs living in U.S., many in higher education. This part will highlight their religious beliefs and cultural identities. It will investigate the differences and similarities between sub-group of Muslim and Arab Americans and between them and Eurocentric beliefs and traditions. Discussion will include how individuals and institutions can better meet the challenges of diversity.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
Part II—Opening Eyes and Minds
As Americans’ perceptions of Islam grow increasingly negative, Muslim and Arab students and professors find themselves educating their college communities.  How student leaders and faculty are challenging Islamophobia and discrimination—in the classroom and in campus activities—will be explored and best practices shared. Discussion will include emerging areas of research on Arab and Muslim populations and their integration into American society.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Part III—Bridging Cultural Divides
Colleges and Universities across the country are seeing an overwhelming interest among students in learning about Middle Eastern culture, politics and languages. Is this a passing fad, or is it here to stay? Learn about trends in the field of Middle East studies, from the growth of K-12 language programs to undergraduate studies, and how U.S. government priorities and recruitment goals for “critical language” specialists are influencing the direction of the discipline.

Jen'nan Read, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Sociology, University of California—Irvine, California

Helen Samhan, Executive Director of the Arab American Institute Foundation—Washington, D.C.

The Institute will be presented by the Arab American Institute Foundation, Washington, D.C. and draw on Experts in the fields of Arab American, Islamic and Middle Eastern studies

A four-part institute will offer a framework using the arts as a vehicle for discussion.  The institute proposes diverse artistic explorations that engage the whole person—the intellect through discussion, the emotions through art and music, the body through song and movement.  The artistic output of any group reflects its collective attitudes and values.  It includes the arts but also language, religion, belief systems, social organizations, necessary skills and every day habits. The study of and reflection on personal encounters with a living, vibrant culture that is different from one’s own is a powerful experience, one which forces a person to examine one’s own beliefs, prejudices, cultural expressions and history. The encounter brings about deeper understanding of both cultures.  Because our deepest understanding of a different culture comes out of a comparison with our own, we will anchor the experiential with suggested readings and discussions related to culture and the academy.  Institute participants will engage in art and music making while viewing works of art that clearly speak to issues of racial, gender, ethnic or cultural difference.  The topic questions seek to understand common images–-people, social spaces and everyday objects—in terms of economic status, cultural space, and gender, racial or ethnic difference.  The presenters will offer various resources that include both directed questions and more open-ended discussion themes.  All of the topics raise discussion points that lead to deeper understanding about culture and its role in enriching the lives of each who touch it.  The Institute encourages people to locate themselves in a narrative larger than themselves and to ask questions like, “what does it mean to be human and to extend respect and grace to people unlike me?”     

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—The Power of Song
This session introduces the primary modes of transmission of culture: acculturation (the process of changing the behavior and thinking of an individual or group through contact with another culture) and enculturation (inviting participants to “step into” a different culture and begin to internalize its heartbeat). Music has an incomparable power to unite, uplift and move people. As a “conveyor of cultural knowledge” music has long been an instrument of political, social, spiritual, ethical and intellectual conversations. Through a series of discussions and experiences with song and play games from African and African American culture, participants will explore the transformative power and cultural significance of song.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–3:15 p.m.
PART II—Visual Media: Race, Class and Gender Through the Eyes of Sculpture
This session is designed to demonstrate the ways visual arts (sculpture, painting, drawing, etc.) can be used to facilitate conversations about race, class, and gender issues.  Nationally acclaimed sculptors, Kyle and Kelly Phelps will demonstrate, through their own personal social-political artwork (slide/power point presentation, and actual art work), how they collaborate to create narrative sculptures that speak about the everyday struggles of minority peoples.  Institute participants will gain an insider’s view into the process and intent of their works of art as well as have an opportunity to discuss the ways the works challenge their own understanding of poverty, classism, racism and gender inequities.

Tuesday, May 27—3:30–5:00 p.m. 
PART II—Visual Media: Race in The Media: How Media Can Impact Our Perspectives
This session will examine the capacity of media to serve our society as an extraordinary educational resource or as a force of political and social propaganda. It will also demonstrate how, throughout the Twentieth Century, the media has done both. Through the use of film clips, magazine advertisements and posters from international sources, participants will analyze and discuss the manner in which media for over ninety years has utilized multi-modal visual rhetoric as a force of persuasion on targeted audiences around the world.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–10:30 a.m.
PART III—Collage Making As Narrative
This session will introduce art images from a broad range of Chicana artists whose works encourage the viewer to engage emotionally, intellectually, politically and/or spiritually. These artists, using collage as a primary mode of expression capture a wide range of responses to a social problem. Participants will be encouraged to consider the moral and intellectual function of subject matter, narrative, and expressive intention in artistic works.  Afterwards, and as a culminating activity, participants will engage in the basic educational activities of inquiry, analysis, discovery, and integration by building a collage that speaks to their own identity. Because artistic production often works apart from the pressures of accountability and pragmatism, new ways of thinking will be practiced.  Importantly, those ways of thinking that foster non-linear connections across disciplines or amongst a set of problems enables important synthesis of information that can lead to new analysis and solutions. By producing creative work as a small community while also investigating diverse cultural meanings, participants collectively manifest new social bonds that inspire a more earnest commitment to explore issues of difference.

Wednesday, May 28—10:45–11:30 a.m.
PART IV—The Framework
Participants will work through a four-step process for using the Institute as a model for utilizing the arts as a vehicle for difficult conversations about differences on their home campus. The four key concepts of the framework, Collaboration, Exploration of Materials, Manipulation of Materials and Execution will be discussed at length. Participants will be given an opportunity to consider future uses in small groups. This will be particularly helpful to those institutions having multiple persons attend the Institute. The Institute and the framework are designed to be practical and immediately useful tools for future engagement of the arts in diversity work. 

Donna M. Cox, Ph.D., Professor of Music, University of Dayton—Dayton, Ohio

Judith Huacuja, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Art History, University of Dayton—Dayton, Ohio

Kyle Phelps, Assistant Professor of Art (Sculpture), University of Dayton—Dayton, Ohio

Kelly Phelps, Assistant Professor of Art (Sculpture), Xavier University—Cincinnati, Ohio

Dennis Greene, J.D., Professor of Law, University of Dayton—Dayton, Ohio

The Equity Scorecard process is an accountability initiative designed to foster institutional change in higher education using available institutional data. Its goal is to close the achievement gap for historically underrepresented students by assessing the current state of equity in student success measures. The core principle is that institutional change occurs as a result of changes in the attitudes, beliefs, and practices of individuals when they engage in data-driven inquiry into educational outcomes. New or intensified awareness of race- and ethnic-based inequalities motivates higher education practitioners to assume individual and collective responsibility for improving educational outcomes for minority students.
A three-part, daylong institute will cover how campus-based teams of faculty and administrators use evidence-based inquiry to become agents of change toward increasing levels of student success at their institutions. Presenters will lead participants through an interactive exercise examining institutional data disaggregated by race and ethnicity to identify inequities in student outcomes, and discuss lessons learned in implementing the Scorecard on several campuses.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—The Equity Scorecard Model: Background and Theory
Central to the Equity Scorecard model is disaggregation of routinely collected institutional data on student matriculation, enrollment, pass/fail, leadership and engagement trends, deans’ lists and honor roll appearances, and graduation rates, among other indicators. By extracting and interpreting information based on race/ethnicity and gender, the Equity Scorecard process provides concrete information on basic indicators of achievement among different student populations. Disaggregating data leads to identification of critical gaps in student outcomes, thereby permitting institutions to respond with purposeful actions. Cross-institutional teams comprised of faculty, student affairs professionals, institutional researchers and other administrators review their data and share their findings with their peers. Because the reports offer detailed information about their own units, the teams regard the Equity Scorecard as a campus initiative, taking ownership and developing proposals unique and specific to their own local contexts. Collaboration is emphasized in every facet of the process, with institutional change addressing inequitable outcomes as the ultimate goals.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Examining and Analyzing Disaggregated Institutional Data (Hands-on Exercise)
Participants will engage in an interactive hands-on exercise in which they will examine sample institutional data disaggregated by race/ethnicity to simulate how the Equity Scorecard process of examining and interpreting data works in the context of team meetings. This exercise will demonstrate how disaggregated institutional data can be used to highlight gaps in student outcomes.

PART III—Practical Implications of Implementing the Equity Scorecard
The final part will cover the practical and policy implications that institutional administrators must consider to successfully implement the Equity Scorecard process of their campus. Examples will be drawn from the Equity Scorecard project at the University of Wisconsin system. Presenters will also discuss: the importance of support from campus leadership; the decisions involved in forming an Evidence Team; some potential obstacles/barriers encountered during the process and strategies for overcoming them; approaches to use to build buy-in among faculty and administrators who are not part of the evidence team; and working with the CUE facilitators to support your work.

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

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, trends and issues—both nationally and from the institute participants’ respective campuses. Complex problems will be placed in explanatory sociocultural frameworks, and practical recommendations for effective interventions and collaborative partnerships will be offered.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
The City University of New York Black Male Initiative: An Overview
The City University of New York Black Male Initiative (CUNY BMI) established a research institute that will explore issues related to social and educational equity for underrepresented students, particularly African American males. The presenter as the central administrator of this important university-wide program expects that university will raise the enrollment, retention and graduation rates of students from groups that are severely underrepresented in higher education, particularly African American, Caribbean and Latino males.
The session will provide an overview of the CUNY BMI—a new program at the nation's largest urban public university, that is open and available to all students, administrators, faculty members and staff and dedicated to increasing the enrollment, retention and graduation rates of students from populations that are severely underrepresented in higher education including African American males. The work that has been done by the talented administrators, faculty members and students throughout the CUNY system whose dedication and commitment has resulted in the creation of programs that we believe will provide additional levels of guidance, direction and support to students from underrepresented populations who are often the first in their families to go to college. The session will focus on the development of what believe will evolve into a model program that is designed to provide an additional level of support to students from populations that are severely underrepresented in higher education including African American males. Often when discussing some of the challenges that African American males face in the present society we focus on the problems and use alarmist language such as the "crisis facing African American young men." At CUNY BMI what we believe is the colleges should make sure that large numbers of students from populations that are severely underrepresented in higher education actually complete college successfully and go on to graduate.  For a discussion of the history and purpose of CUNY BMI, please visit http://www1.cuny.edu/academics/oaa/initiatives/bmi/history.html  Additional information about CUNY BMI may be found at www.cuny.edu/bmi
    
Elliott Dawes, J.D., Director of the CUNY Black Male Initiative, The City College of The City University of New York—New York, New York

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
Black Males: Anxiety of Excellence
This session will focus on the psychological  turmoil often experienced by Black male students attending predominantly white institutions of higher education. This turmoil tends to limit black males participation in the academic and non-academic life of these institutions. Consequently, black males are somewhat more likely than others, to experience self-doubt regarding their worth and value in this institutional setting.

M. Rick Turner, Ph.D., Educational Consultant—Charlottesville, Virginia

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Understanding the Achievement Gap Facing African American Students: Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice

Recent explanations regarding the achievement gap between African American and
White students have centered on cultural explanations, which assert that African American parents and students—even those who live in and attend schools in middle-class and affluent settings— do not value schooling, and that African American students are disengaged from the educational enterprise. Such explanations have created a maelstrom among the U.S. public and in policy and research circles by asserting that African American culture is a major factor contributing to the achievement gap. The larger body of research on Black education, conversely, suggests that a number of factors inform the achievement gap. Some of these influences include structural forces in schools which create differential quality of school experiences (e.g., academic tracking, gifted education, and advance placement), teachers’ low expectations for and pejorative perceptions of African American students, and the inability of district level reforms to improve the schooling of Black students.

Emanating from a multi-year research study that focuses on issues of identity and achievement for Black students in a predominantly Black suburb in the U.S. South, this session will provide an interdisciplinary framework for understanding what is commonly termed the achievement gap facing Black students, particularly Black males, in U.S. schools, and then suggest implications for research, policy, and practice. Conceptually, Dr. Morris suggests that researchers and practitioners cannot focus primarily onthe role of a group’s or an individual’s beliefs about schooling, apart from a careful analysis of how the structure of schooling and the larger social, political, economic, and historical contexts (have contributed to and continue to) influence what happens in schools and classrooms today.

Jerome Morris, Ph.D., Research Fellow at the Institute for Behavioral Research and Associate Professor in the College of Education at the University of Georgia—Athens, Georgia

A four-part institute will explore a collaborative approach to developing a recruitment and retention action plan for student of color utilizing best practices and many of the programs and services that may already exist on most campuses.  This interactive institute will explore using efforts that include collaboration from admissions, orientation, advising, student involvement and leadership, financial aid, housing and multicultural affairs to successfully recruit and retain first year students. The institute will take a holistic approach to recruitment and retention incorporating services and programs that have been identified as best practices.  The institute should particularly benefit those faculty, staff, and administrators that work with recruitment and retention programs as we will explore how to implement a Recruitment and Retention Summit as foundation to help with your goals. Learning Outcomes: Participants will have the opportunity to (1) discuss and gather information on targeted recruitment and retention programs for students of color that can be adapted for their institutions; (2) discuss relevant issues that face faculty, academic affairs and student affairs administrators regarding the recruitment and retention of students of color; (3) discuss and gain knowledge on best practices and campus programs that works across academic affairs and student affairs, working in collaboration for the student's success; and (4) have the opportunity to examine an inclusive program that focuses on building bridges between different offices with proven results. This institute is participatory in nature, designed to allow the audience to discuss and develop recruitment and retention plans for their campus within the institute. The program will present a model that has proven success but then move into a discussion phase, exploring other models and programs to help the participants develop a plan of action that will work on their campus.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Overview and Introductions of Problem Statement
This segment will introduce one model program and then explore and identify specific needs of each institution so that participants can develop outcomes that are more targeted and explicit to the institution and groups needs.

PART II—Developing a Successful Recruitment Plan
What is the road map to success in recruiting students of color? Is there one road to follow or many? This interactive session will spend some time in identifying ways to find the best map for you. From crystallizing goals to determining targeted strategies, this session will make a difference in your recruitment work ? tomorrow, next week and for the 2008 recruitment cycle.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART III—Building Your Retention Program From the Ground Up
This segment will be an interactive exploration of the realities and challenges of building successful retention programs for students of color. Learn how to design and energize your retention program from the ground up. Participants will examine the planning process and focus on best practices of results-oriented retention plans. Participants will also have the opportunity to share experiences and strategies from your own campuses.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART IV—Developing and Implementing a Recruitment and Retention Summit
This segment will explore how to take all the information you have developed along with an assessment of your campus programs and needs, and develop a plan of action through as you develop your Recruitment and Retention Summit.  By using collaboration and the assessment of campus needs you will be able to develop strategies that will prove to be more efficient and effective to your campus demographics and environment.

Robert N. Page Jr., Director, Office of Multicultural Affairs, University of Kansas—Lawrence, Kansas

Brenda Williams, Representative, Noel Levit Inc.—Centennial Colorado

This day and half-long institute is designed to provide attendees with an in-depth understanding of the leadership complexities and challenges of Asian Pacific Islander Americans in higher education.  Presenters will review the critical issues that impact Asian Pacific American educators, as well as campus-based challenges that impact hiring and promotion decisions.  Stereotypes and myths as well as cultural values will be explored in a context of leadership profiles within higher education. A mini-version of the successful Leadership Development Program in Higher Education for Asian Pacific Americans will be presented.  Additionally, participants will have an opportunity to have hands-on practice in enhancing presentation and interviewing skills.  Strategies for dealing with campus politics will also be shared.  Participants will also have the opportunity to explore ways to develop leadership programs on their campuses—for Asian Pacific Islander American staff, faculty, and management as well as students.

Audrey Yamagata-Noji, Ph.D., Vice President, Student Services, Mt. San Antonio College—Walnut, California

Judy K. Sakaki, Ph.D., Vice President, Student Affairs, University of California System, Office of the President—Oakland, California

Other presenters to be invited.

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 participate 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.  What are the connections between intercultural issues - including race, ethnicity, color, class, gender identity, etc.—in the United States and those in any other country?  When we seek to understand how to best work internationally, are we considering these intercultural issues as integral to this process, or are we just thinking in terms of "national cultures"?  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.

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

Carl E. James, Ph.D., Professor and Director of the Graduate Program, Sociology,
York University—Toronto, Canada

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

Victor Savicki, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Western Oregon University—Monmouth, Oregon

A three-part institute will offer participants an intense and comprehensive overview of conflict management, with a view toward enhancing the climate for diversity and social justice on college and university campuses. The institute will engage participants in a discussion on conflict management and share a faculty professional development model (AWS Model) for training faculty and administrators to be mediators.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Building a Conceptual Framework for Conflict Management and Diversity
Presenters will provide an overview of conflict management and strategies for thinking about how diversity and social justice impact conflict in an organizational culture. Through the use of self-assessment exercises and case study scenarios, participants will identify and learn how their mental models influence their conflict management style.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:00 p.m.
PART II—Examining Models for Conflict Management and Socialization
Presenters will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of conflict management models used in mediation practice, including an overview of the AWS Model that is now being used at a public research institution to successfully mediate conflicts in an academic setting. Through the use of a role-play conflict scenario, participants will be provided with an opportunity to observe the AWS Model procedures and process in mediating conflicts.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Implementing Conflict Management Models in a University Setting
Presenters will engage participants in thinking about the culture of their institutions and how to work on creating a conflict management model that is suited for their environment. Participants will be provided with an opportunity to hear testimonies from faculty and administrators, including a department head who has been trained to use the AWS Model. Presenters will work with participants to develop an implementation plan for their campus.

Nancy E. Algert, Ph.D., President, Center for Change and Conflict Resolution and Visiting Assistant Professor, Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University—College Station, Texas

Karan L. Watson, Ph.D., Dean of Faculties and Associate Provost and Regents Professor of Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University—College Station, Texas

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

Valerie Taylor, Ph.D., Department Head and Professor, Department of Computer Science, College of Engineering, Texas A&M University—College Station, Texas

How receptive are faculty and academic departments to the argument that they have an ethical responsibility to address diversity in the classroom?  How can faculty concerns about diversity’s impact on academic freedom be addressed while also trying to depoliticize the discourse?  Some would argue that curriculum and instruction that is devoid of diversity and globalization runs the risk of creating a high “GPA” academic underclass that underachieves.  How can one find balance in this discussion?

This daylong institute will explore in-depth the implementation of successful models of faculty and curricular transformation. Participants will examine proven models that work as they construct a model for their own institution.  The focus will be on five critical areas of examination: (1) examining the construction of models appropriate for your type of campus.  Generating the seminal questions that promote campus buy-in, ownership and both extrinsic and intrinsic values associated with teaching, learning, and curricular transformation; (2) understanding that the real work of faculty and curriculum transformation must be couched in measurable outcome statements that can be assessed and can overlap with more traditional curricular outcomes; (3) how do we assure that faculty have the strongest voice in the discussion on faculty and curricular transformation?  What should happen when there is dissonance among varied campus groups about the direction and content of transformation; (4) curricular transformation should/must be accompanied by instructional transformation and faculty development.  Do students need a baseline of analytical tools to benefit from a transformed course; (5) reshaping the Teaching and Learning Discourse to account for the increasing diversity of learners. Can faculty stay true to their disciplines while they explore the inclusion of curricular transformation? Will progress toward promotion and tenure be threatened?

James A. Anderson, Ph.D., Vice President for Student Success, Vice Provost for Institutional Assessment and Diversity, Professor of Psychology, State University of New York, University at Albany—Albany, New York

A three-part highly interactive institute designed to give participants a greater understanding of racial identity development for multiracial people and the issues surrounding multiracial people as they interface 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 inter-group dialogue and coalition building between different racial groups and multiracial people on campuses and in community settings. The institute includes dialogue with a panel of multiracial people 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. Following the institute, time will be set aside for continuing discussions of larger issues raised over the course of the institute. Participants are encouraged to share resources related to multiracial students, identity, and organizational development.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Racial Identity in Multiracial Students: Models for Understanding the Experience of Multiracial Students
This session provides an overview of different models of racial identity in Multiracial people to enhance participants? understanding of multiracial students and their experiences on campus. Through interactive presentation, small and large group discussion, and case studies, participants test, analyze, and apply the theoretical frameworks to their own practice of teaching, advising, or counseling multiracial students. This session also raises for discussion key questions related to racial identity, including: What constitutes race and racial identity? Can a person choose his or her racial identity? What roles do factors such as physical appearance, cultural expression, family background, and political orientation play in the development of an individual’s racial identity? And how does our own sense of racial identity affect our ability to work effectively with multiracial students? Handouts include summaries of models covered and additional material that participants can use on their own campuses.

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

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Describing and Distinguishing a Racial or Multiracial Identity
As a way to realize and anchor theories of multiracial identity presented in Part I, we will draw on creative arts therapy structures. Interdisciplinary theories such as Howard Gardner in education, Maxine Greene in philosophy, Pierre Bourdieu in sociology, and mirror neurons and symbolic communication in dance/movement therapy will inform our exploration of multi-racial identity. Each participant can self-define his or her unique individuality through an experiential creative arts therapy process. Such tangible self-identification serves as a personal frame of reference within the many images of how race is represented. As David Mura says, “Reality is not simply knowing who we think we are, but also what others think of us.” Through this experience we will reclaim the multiple aspects of ourselves in order to apply them empathically in our work with students, faculty, and co-workers.

Meg Chang, Ed.D., American Dance Therapy Association (ADTR), Faculty, Creative Arts Therapy Certificate Program, The New School University—New York, New York

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Part III—Panel Discussion of Multiracial Persons: The Assessment and Development of On-campus Programs Addressing Contemporary Multiracial Issues
This session is an interactive panel discussion designed to give participants a greater understanding of racial identity development for multiracial people through a discussion of their lived experiences. Faculty, staff, and students representing a range of multiracial backgrounds (e.g. Black/Asian, Asian/Latino, Hispanic/Native American) will examine the similarities and differences between multiracial people attending school, working, or residing in a college or university setting. 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. Through small- and large-group work, participants will be provided measurement tools, comparison opportunities, and direct feedback for the multiracial programs at their respective institutions. Using simple assessment instruments and/or other measurement designs, participants will identify strategies for applying information from the NCORE Institute to issues confronted by their own institutions. In addition, all participants will have time to create beginning action plans for forming more inclusive environments for multiracial students at their institutions.

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

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 matters relative to diversity unresolved. Over the years, opponents of Affirmative Action have had considerable success in initiating public ballot initiatives that amends state constitutions to eliminate race and gender consideration in campus admission, recruitment, financial aid and scholarship, pre-college and academic successes programs and policies in Michigan, California and Michigan (a voter referendum was passed in November 2007). Furthermore, it is expected that more states will be targeted in the future. 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 judicial and voter mandates. It is essential that campuses have comprehensive institutional approaches to achieving the long terms goals of diversity, despite the challenges.

The purpose of this day and half-long interactive institute is to have in-depth discussions on what Michigan and other public institutions in states that have been impacted by ballot initiatives and court decisions have done over the years. It builds on last year's successful institute. Participants will discuss strategies that have worked as well as those that have not worked in critical areas that influence campus climate. Key campus leadership representing different institutional areas will guide and explore diversity progress in various areas such as the legal responses to campus diversity, diversity programs including outreach, retention, pre-college and student success; leadership, communications, research and assessment, and multicultural teaching and learning. The experts will explore various successes, strategies and challenges over the past four years and into the future. Presenters and participants will discuss the critical role of information sharing and networking between various campuses. For example, institutions in Washington, Michigan, California and Texas have had meeting between students, faculty and staffs share lessons learned. The targeted audience for this institute are the faculty, staff, administrators and diversity practitioners to collaborative explore strategies, successes and challenge and best practices for advancing comprehensive institutional approaches to diversity on their campuses. The institute also will involve significant interaction between presenters and participants.


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

Lester Monts, Ph.D., Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, and Senior Counselor to the President for the Arts, Diversity, and Undergraduate Affairs, 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

Additional co-presenters from other institutions will be identified.

Educational processes and practices are inextricably bound up with culture and context.  Educators are privileged authorities with social powers to define reality and make impactful judgments about others.  Yet, from our privileged standpoints, we often look but still do not see, listen but do not hear, touch but do not feel.  Such limitations handicap our truth-discerning, trust-building, teaching/learning and “judging” capacities. When we fail to systematically address the ways our sociocultural lenses, filters and frames may obscure or distort more than they illuminate, we do violence to others' truths and erode our capacities for actualizing inclusive excellence and success for all.  To address these issues, we must constantly expand our understandings of self in dynamically diverse contexts within power and privilege hierarchies and our understandings of the contexts embodied in the self across time. This institute spotlights the need for calibrating and cultivating our most valuable instrument—the SELF—as an open and expansively learning-centered, responsive instrument.  This is an ethical responsibility as well as an essential pathway for professional excellence. 

A three-part institute introduces participants to an intensive capacity-building intervention that systematically addresses self-as-instrument and inclusive excellence issues—the Excellence Through Diversity Institute (EDI).  EDI is one of the five year-long diversity-grounded professional development opportunities serving the full workforce at the University of Wisconsin-Madison—faculty, classified staff, academic staff and administrators.  While all address the critical need for a world-class educational institution to move beyond simply acknowledging and celebrating diversity towards proactively engaging diversity for excellence, EDI focuses on seasoned practitioners and capacity-builders.  This community of practice advances higher education’s diversity and multicultural vision beyond a basic access agenda towards a much more challenging success-for-all agenda:  notably, cultivating and sustaining authentically inclusive and vibrantly responsive teaching, learning, living and working environments that are conducive to success for all.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Helping the Helpers:  Who? What? Why? How?
This module provides a comprehensive campus climate improvement framework for examining the “self-as-instrument” personal homework agenda as embodied in the Excellence Through Diversity Institute.  EDI is an intensive train-the-trainers/ facilitators learning community and organizational change support network organized around responsive assessment at multiple levels:  self-to-self, self-to-others and self-to-systems.  The Institute cultivates connections among four core elements to foster conceptual and experiential learnings that help participants build capacity in others, as well as themselves, and promote organizational transformation for inclusive excellence.  Participants will sample some of the best of EDI processes and exercises and start mapping climate improvement initiatives on their own campus and beyond. 

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Spotlighting the Inside-Out Agenda: Self as Responsive Instrument and Progressive Change Agent Work
The Excellence Institute focuses on the “Textbooks of the Self” rather than the usual fixation on “Textbooks on the Shelf.” EDI mindfully and heartfully cultivates multilateral self-awareness through knowing and using SELF as equity-grounded instrument within systems of power and privilege as well as other situational, relational and spatial contexts.  EDI embeds assessment and evaluation processes in order to support development of border-crossing bridge-building proficiencies that enhance capacities for keeping one’s eyes focused on the ultimate prize.  Participants will complete selected assessments and explore their implications for cultivating and sustaining vibrant intercultural/multicultural relations.   

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Enacting Authentically Inclusive and Responsive Environments: Putting Wheels Under Your Campus Vision
This session draws together deliberations from the previous two sessions as a foundation for small groups brainstorming and exploring the implications for their campus community.   Participants will build upon the mapping of their campus climate improvement initiatives started in session one.  We will zero in on the workforce-focused initiatives and examine the extent to which those approaches are vertically and horizontally aligned and synergistic.  We will explore ways to embed developmental assessment/evaluation processes into the natural rhythms of programmatic initiatives so that all three key drivers—inform, improve and prove—work for and within one’s interventions.  More specifically, they magnify the benefits of relevant knowledge creation and ongoing development towards   excellence as well as for the benefits of accountability compliance verification.

Hazel Symonette, Ph.D., Senior Policy and Program Development Specialist, Offices of the Dean of Students and Office of Human Resource  Development, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Wisconsin

This daylong institute will engage participants with The Storytelling Project: A Model for Teaching about Race and Racism through Storytelling and the Arts.  This innovative, interdisciplinary curriculum model was developed by a racially diverse team of artists, teachers, and university faculty working under the auspices of Barnard College and the Third Millennium Foundation. In the Storytelling Model the arts provide an opening for critical dialogue that requires emotional and intellectual engagement. This powerful approach is carefully grounded in a critical theory of racism and a pedagogy of social justice that have been tested by the creative team in teacher professional development and in middle and high school classrooms.

The session will introduce the model, provide opportunities for participants to experience the arts-based content of the curriculum, allowing time to investigate and critique the model as a tool for curriculum and professional development. We will discuss our team process, issues that emerged over the course of our collaboration and what we have learned about using the arts to teach challenging social content such as racism.  Critique from and discussion with the audience will be welcome as well as time to discuss back home application of the model. Participants who attend this session will leave with a working knowledge of the Storytelling Project Model, experiential engagement with aspects of the curriculum, and ideas for potential use of the model in their back home curriculum and professional development activities.

Lee Anne Bell, Ph.D., Professor and Director, Education Program; Principle Investigator: The Storytelling Project, Barnard College, Columbia University—New York, New York

Zoe Duskin, Teacher, Storytelling Project Creative Team—San Francisco, California

Kayhan Irani, Teaching Artist, Storytelling Project Creative Team—New York, New York

Brett Murphy, Teacher, Storytelling Project Research Team—New York, New York

A three-part institute will offer the necessary building blocks and resources that will assist our colleagues in creating Multicultural/Minority Affairs departments at institutions across the nation. The institute will focus on theoretical, practical, and innovative solutions to give credence to the evolving grass roots work of putting diversity into action in higher education settings.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Foundations of Excellence: Creating the Multicultural Affairs Office
University personnel (faculty, professional staff, and administrators) have an increasing responsibility for training culturally competent global leaders.  Similarly, these professionals have the challenge of being more aware of the various aspects (theoretical, intellectual, developmental, and otherwise) faced by underrepresented student populations. At Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) the trend is shifting to creating Multicultural Affairs Offices that embrace and enhance multiracial and multiethnic populations instead of the “either/or” “majority/minority” mindset. Whether establishing a new Multicultural Affairs Office or seeking innovative ways to enhance existing office; this session will assist Multicultural Affairs professionals with creating a theoretical framework, mission statement, and implementing the most recent evidence-based research into best practices. Discussion will have a central focus on creating strategic plans, goal setting and adopting management practices that will create a solid foundation of excellence for diversity offices.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—How Do We Get Them? How Do We Keep Them? Recruitment/Retention Programs That Work!
Creating signature programs that seek to recruit, retain, and graduate students of color at PWIs has been a widely used tool on many college campuses. Research suggests that support networks, mentoring relationships, academic strategies, and other consistent and high quality educational/social activities are major factors in successful recruitment and retention efforts.  This session will focus on the programmatic aspect of diversity work. Discussion will have a central focus on formulating strategies to develop comprehensive model recruitment/retention programs, creating campus and community collaborations, enhancing meaning opportunities for cross-cultural interactions, encouraging civic engagement, and maintaining sustainability. This session will examine program conceptualization, program design, marketing, assessment tools, and post program reports. This session will also examine the relevance of cultural centers and their significance at PWIs.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—Beyond the Borders
In the spirit of inclusive education, diversity professionals realize that holistic success with diverse populations extends beyond recruitment and retention efforts.  Validation, growth, and expansion of the work of Multicultural Affairs offices often hinges on building internal and external partnerships and relationships.  These partnerships provide resources (human capital, political, financial, etc.) that serve to strengthen the assets of these offices. This session will examine how partnerships broaden the friends and alumni-base, enhance power brokering around critical decision making processes, and strengthen funding streams by friend giving and major gifts. Discussion will also have a central focus on the role of the Multicultural Affairs office with crisis management as it relates to divisive, “hot-button” diversity issues that may arise as well as offer a decision matrix when response to natural disasters. Finally, the session will allow participants to provide recommendations that can be used to further diversity work at their respective institution.

Katrice A. Albert, Ph.D., Vice Provost, Equity, Diversity and Community Outreach, Louisiana State University—Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Chaunda Allen, Director, Office of Multicultural Affairs, Louisiana State University—Baton Rouge, Louisiana

While many have called for a fresh diversity orientation that rebuilds egalitarian spaces on campuses after the era of affirmative action, this three-part institute engages participants in constructing their own “blueprints” for such a revitalized framework. Designed for participants who direct diversity programs on their campuses—or research how to change how diversity is practiced—this institute will ask attendees to share what they believe will be the components of the “next shift” in diversity work and then co-plan how those new components will be translated into campus programs and policies. The institute will conclude with a brief discussion of how diversity education can be used to develop a wholly new “theory of the self” based in “mutuality” rather than the selfish individualism presumed under a free market capitalist based society of NCLB.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART I—Critiquing Existing Frameworks
This year’s institute will begin with a new storytelling exercise that asks participants in small groups to identify weaknesses in current diversity approaches on college and university campuses—and then indicate how their own institution might correct for these deficiencies in an ideal world. In Socratic style, the presenters will lead a discussion of the limitations linked to the category based approaches, deficit based models, and “resistance theory” of today’s campus.

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART II—Building Your Own Theoretical Framework
This segment of the institute will take the participant’s proposed blueprint for diversity and translate that into an action plan for organizational change on his/her campus. In this segment, participants will learn how institutions can move out of “essentializing” categories, depart the ?us-against-them? relation between white students and students of color, and use their diversity courses to prepare students for full participation in a global society. Attendees will also learn how to use grants and pre/post assessment to initiate and track this change on their campuses.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART III—How To Launch A “Systemic Change” Project
The last segment of this institute will describe three current change projects and ask attendees to design a similar change project of their own. Putting in motion ideas explored earlier in the institute, this segment will describe ongoing change projects that seek to: (1) better protect minority faculty from racism on college campuses, (2) replace No Child Left Behind (NCLB) with a new law that corrects for inadequacies linked to race and class, and (3) close the achievement gap for African American teenagers by providing them with knowledge of computer literacy, two foreign languages and global economics.

Laila Aaen, Ph.D., Specializes in identity development for white college students and has been an organizational change consultant for colleges and universities for over 20 years; Chair, Human Development Distance Learning Department, Pacific Oaks College—Pasadena, California

ReGena Booze, Ph.D., Diversity Consultant for 20 years; Professor, Department of Human Development, Pacific Oaks College—Pasadena, California

Greg Tanaka, Ph.D., Leading proponent of intercultural education in the U.S.; Professor, Department of Human Development, Pacific Oaks College—Pasadena, California

A six-part institute offers comprehensive, hands-on training for diversity professionals in higher education. The institute examines the concepts of diversity and leadership, using researched techniques, best practices and current resources in an interactive, small group setting. Experienced facilitators will assist emerging and experienced diversity officers in their quest to further diversity, inclusion and academic excellence throughout their institutions.

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m. and continuing 1:30–5:30 p.m.
PART I—Organizational Structure in Higher Education: Strategic Career Planning for Chief Diversity Officers
1. The Culture of Higher Education
2. Aligning your position with your personal/professional interests
3. Servant Leadership: The Reciprocity of Service
4. The Twelve Key Competencies of am Emerging Diversity Officer

PART II—Recruitment, Retention and Advancement of Faculty and Staff of Color
1. Leadership, Faculty Governance and the Search Committee
2. Innovative ways and technology to Recruit and Engage People of Color
3. From Fellowships to Internships: 360 Degree Retention Programs
4. Diversity Matters: Re-Thinking Faculty-in-Residence and Sabbatical Programs to Attract Scholars of Color

PART III—Best Practices in the Recruitment and Retention of Students of Color
1. How Racism, Oppression and Privilege Impact Retention
2. Customizing Mentoring Programs for People of Color
3. Begin with the End in Mind: From Fellowship to Professorship
4. Critical Connections with HBCU’s/HACU/Tribal Colleges Faculty
5. Strategies to Strengthen the High School-to-College Pipeline: The “Seamless” Process

PART IV—Accessing Diversity Across the Curriculum and the Campus: The Equity Scorecard
The Equity Scorecard is an effective diversity assessment tool developed specifically for institutions of higher education. Designed to benchmark, measure, and foster institutional change, the Equity Scorecard tracks incremental progress across the institution through a consultative process customized to the needs of the organization, as well as to the individualized needs of colleges, schools, units and strategic programs. The outcome of this dynamic, evaluative process has been instrumental in providing the data to close the achievement gap for historically underrepresented students.

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
PART V—The Power of an Inclusive Campus: Essential Core Competencies for Diversity Trainer
1. Gender Equity and the Numbers Games
2. Religion & Spirituality: Complexities and Commonalities
3. Understanding the Sexuality Orientation and Gender Identity Continuum
4. Generational Diversity: Cultivating an Inclusive Campus
5. Intercultural Communication: The Globalization Imperative
6. Disability Protocol: No ?DIS?respect for Persons with Disabilities
7. Can You Hear Me Now?: The Challenges of First Generation College Students
8. Living with Diversity: The Residential Experience
9. The Greater Campus Community: Critical Collaboration and Partnership

PART VI—Creating an On-line Diversity Training Program

Carla D. Gary, J.D., Assistant Vice Provost, Office for Institutional Equity and Diversity,  University of Oregon—Eugene, Oregon

Corey Holliday, Director of Admissions, Clark State Community College—Springfield, Ohio

Bruce A. King, Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, Chief Diversity Officer, Academic Affairs and Diversity, University of South Dakota—Vermillion, South Dakota

Robert N. Page Jr., Director, Office of Multicultural Students, Kansas University—Lawrence, Kansas

E. Rahim Reed, J.D., Associate Executive Vice Chancellor-Campus Community Relations, Offices of the Chancellor and Provost, University of California—Davis, California

Abbie Robinson-Armstrong, Ph.D., Vice President, Intercultural Affairs, Loyola Marymount University—Los Angeles, California

Hazel G. Rountree, Assistant Director, Affirmative Action, Wright State University—Dayton, Ohio

This daylong institute will engage participants in a set of interactions designed to examine and deepen the understanding of the nuances of inclusive leadership for women of color in the academy.  Is being inclusive a different proposition for women of color?  How are experiences different for women of color compared to those of white women? What are the inherent risks as women of color develop and become allies, seek and provide mentorship, analyze and critique their individual location within larger systems, advocate and champion social justice issues, understand and use cultural resources as integral to building effective leadership, and use emerging spheres of influence to build the kind of institutions that nurture success?  And, are those risks different for white women?  Participants will also address the issues of horizontal relationships among women of color as a source of complication but also a source of strength.  Through self-reflection, dialogue, and capacity building exercises, the institute experience will stimulate a reinterpretation of what inclusive leadership might be.  This is a continuation of previous institutes supported by Campus Women Lead, an affiliation of AAC&U that explores new ways of navigating the complexity of diverse collegial interactions that result in richer dialogue and greater ability to influence change.

Rusty Barceló, Ph.D., Vice President For Equity, and Vice Provost, University of Minnesota—Minneapolis, Minnesota

Linda Marchesani, Ed.D., Manager, Workplace Learning and Development, University of Massachusetts—Amherst, Massachusetts

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

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

This Institute will examine the challenges that community colleges are facing and are addressing in ensuring that students succeed. The Institute will focus on the research and development, and innovative policies and practices being developed and that are needed for community colleges to succeed in fulfilling this role of narrowing gaps. The Institute will include research devoted to addressing the challenges and opportunities offered by community colleges. Among the topics are the following:

Tuesday, May 27—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Enrollments and Attendance Patterns at Community Colleges

Community Colleges enroll almost half of the undergraduate students in America’s colleges and universities and they are among the most diverse by race and ethnicity. For many students community colleges are the only means of access to higher education and they are relying upon the colleges to be a route to narrowing gaps in the workplace, and in baccalaureate and higher levels of degree attainment. As moderator, Dr. Nettles will present some trends, issues and challenges that will be addressed in this institute.

Michael T. Nettles, Ph.D., Senior Vice President and Edmund W. Gordon Chair of Policy Evaluation and Research Center, Educational Testing Service—Princeton, New Jersey 

Hispanic Urban Community College Students: Gaps, Laps, Maps, and Raps
The presenter will use data collected from a five year longitudinal project, The Transfer and Retention of Urban Community College Students (TRUCCS), to understand the unique successes and barriers experienced by Hispanic students in the Los Angeles Community College District.  This presentation will cover issues of course taking, time to complete remedial sequences, and the policies that either help or complicate the way for students.  Examining data and the resulting analyses, presenter challenges some of the myths that surround America’s largest “minority” group.

Linda Serra Hagedorn, Ph.D., Chair and Professor, Department of Educational Administration and Policy, University of Florida—Gainesville, Florida

Tuesday, May 27—1:30–5:00 p.m.
Pathway to the Baccalaureate: Trends and Implications
This presentation will discuss current trends in the research about the transfer process from community colleges to four-year institutions. Specifically, the presentation will cover the following topics: transfer and articulation policies, role of faculty and support services in facilitating student transfer, challenges and barriers to transfer, and successful strategies. Data from the Laanan-Transfer Students’ Questionnaire (L-TSQ) will be used to understand the experiences and transfer adjustment process of students. A component of the presentation will address the role of community colleges in increasing women and ethnic minorities in STEM baccalaureate majors. Finally, recommendations will be addressed that will inform community college and four-year institution leaders, faculty, and staff.

Frankie Laanan, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Higher Education, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, Iowa State University—Ames, Iowa

Development of a Noncognitive Assessment and Intervention System for Community Colleges.
Many students beginning community college are at risk for attrition because they lack basic skills and have competing demands (e.g., work) that threaten the likelihood of completing their degree. This session will present a web-based self-help tool designed to assist students to plan for and meet college objectives. This system comprises assessments and feedback on several topics, providing students with advice tailored to their proficiency level. The topics covered are time management, text anxiety, working with others, test-taking strategies, and career planning (Interests). In this session, the presenterwill discuss data from various studies providing preliminary validity evidence for these assessments. Also the presenter will describe the development of feedback and action plans that are an integral part of the complete assessment system, as well as future plans to develop institutional reports

Richard Roberts, Ph.D., Senior Research Scientist, Center for New Constructs, Educational Testing Service—Princeton, New Jersey

Wednesday, May 28—8:30–11:30 a.m.
Building New Pathways Between Further Education and Training Colleges and Higher Education Institutions in South Africa

Carolyn G. Williams, Ph.D., President, Bronx Community College,
The City University of New York—Bronx, New York Carolyn.


Community Colleges After Grutter and Gratz
A good deal of attention since Grutter and Gratz has gone to how selective 4-year institutions will be affected. Very little has been said about the impact on community colleges or ways in which community colleges can be useful. This presentation will examine ways in which community colleges, given their population of low-income and minority students, can provide solutions to problems stemming from decisions of Grutter and Gratz.

Ronald A. Williams, Ph.D., Vice President, College Board—Washington, D.C.