Higher Ed Institutions are Responsible for the Isolation of BIPoC Students
A lot has been written about why BIPoCs (Black Indigenous People of Color), do not complete college at the same rates as their white counterparts. While lack of access may sometimes be a deterrent, once students are enrolled there are other unexamined issues that can hinder persistence and completion. For many students of color enrolled in institutions of higher education, with a white-majority, academia remains a very isolating place. Because historically college student life departments are the counterbalance that provide students with social engagement through athletics, clubs, and Greek Life, there is a lack of examination as to how and why academic endeavors disengage and isolate students. Furthermore, faculty often delude themselves with the idea that academics have no responsibility for students’ engagement. In addition, there is also the wide-spread belief that somehow academics can regulate impartiality and ensure bias-free practices. As a consequence, academics often create cerebral atmospheres that are unemotional, unsympathetic, and compassionless. Yet, they fail to realize that their attempts at impartial regulation have the corollary effect of creating an atmosphere of partiality and bias. The fundamentals of this impartial regulation are steeped in the ideals of meritocracy, individualism, and a celebration of white culture that further heighten the barriers that create isolation for students of color in institutions of higher learning.
Meritocracy, Individualism & White Culture Dominance
Meritocracy is the idea that rewards (namely grades, honors, recognitions etc.) are only due to those who prove intellectual prowess and ability. It does not measure effort neither does it consider challenges overcome by those seeking merit. Meritocracy also rewards those who achieve high grades, usually by testing. Whether a student can apply knowledge to solve real life problems is usually not measured, instead the student’s ability to memorize and test well are the standards used to grant merit. The achievement of merit is also framed within the ability to meet structured and established timelines. Thus, those who may need or try to secure additional or extended time will often fall short of the standards of merit. Meritocracy historically favors those who arrive first or on time, those who are on the top, whose perceived intellectual abilities stay within the established policies and norms and fall within structured timelines. Meritocracy is at the heart of every traditional institution of learning, and no place is this more prevalent than in higher education.
Likewise, individualism functions around the belief that every individual must become self-reliant and is thus solely responsible for his/her advancement. Students enroll in college and are expected to figure things out and make decisions without much guidance because after all they are adults. If they fail or make wrong decisions, that oftentimes costs money, then it becomes their responsibility. Individualism absolves institutions from providing clear targeted guidance but more importantly it exonerates them from providing supportive frameworks or appropriate help to remedy failure. In the past decade conversations in institutions of higher learning have begun to reckon with the need for supportive structures that will boost student success. While several smaller models of success may exist in some states, there has been limited institutional adoption of frameworks that are diverse or include meeting the needs of all students.
When Institutions of higher learning were created Black and indigenous people were not allowed to pursue an education. In fact, they were prohibited from learning how to read. Without falling in the realms of exaggeration, we can safely say that colleges and universities were not created for BIPoCs. Herein, the rise of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU). Yet, when faced with the desire for admission by people of color into predominantly white institutions, very little was changed to accommodate them. In fact, for centuries students of color in these institutions have been forced to accommodate to a largely unchanged academic landscape. This is even more evident in the propagation of white culture, that is prevalent in institutions of higher learning. The ratio of white faculty versus students of color remains high, even at institutions located in Urban settings. The curricula, literature, textbooks, theories and conceptualizations heavily taught and held on to in higher education remain largely Eurocentric. Higher education remains an unexamined bastion and promoter of white mindsets, white structures and white culture.
In too many colleges today, for a student to sit in a class where the history and culture of other civilizations that are not Western is taught, that student would need to declare a major or minor in a specific discipline like Africana, Latin American Studies, etc. In other words, BIPoC students and their counterparts could spend years at a college and complete full degrees without ever having to take a course that exposes them to the diversity and culture of other people, unless required by their program of study. Even in so-called liberal arts institutions, there is a grave need to update and revise curricula to reflect more inclusive and diverse topics of study.
These isolating experiences are particularly discomforting for many students of color. Students of color are in an environment that more often than not, expects them to fail and is not prepared to help them succeed. Although most black students may have come in contact with white teachers, since the average public school teacher in America remains white and female, the experience still does not prepare them for the over-representation of white culture prevalent in Higher Education. Most students of color are not prepared to deal with the erasure of identity that sometimes accompanies white intellectual dominance prevalent on many campuses. And while diversity, equity and inclusion are trending, even in the whitest of academic institutions, the fact remains that students of color continue to experience isolation in higher education settings.
Internal Barriers
Students of color, often struggle with feelings of belonging when they are in predominantly white spaces, thus feeling like impostors is not unusual. More so, the feelings of un-belonging, lack of community, in addition to unawareness of how to ask, who to ask, and where to find help are larger isolating experiences for students of color. When students of color are first generation college students, they traditionally carry with them the burdens of pride and high expectations of their families and communities, along with real or perceived unpreparedness to navigate the academic world. If we add to these internal barriers other realities that may be prevalent for some, such as: low-income households, immigration issues, language barriers, childhood traumas, food and housing insecurities etc., feeling that no-one will be able to relate or understand these realities increases isolation. These internal barriers are further compounded by other existing external barriers.
External Barriers
Students of color, often face regular microaggresions from faculty and staff. The stories of Black students accused of cheating or plagiarizing and forced to redo tests or papers are still occurring in academia as vestiges of racist notions of inferior intellect. At the same time, faculty who believe that inflating the grades of students of color is somehow “helping” them, also perpetuate these racist ideas. Students also face macroaggressions in the form of institutional neglect. Often times in trying to recruit students of color, institutions invest in marketing a vibrant student life (athletics, Greek life etc.) but do not provide any frameworks for academic engagement and success. Once enrolled, students of color also fail to see representations of themselves in faculty, mentorship is unavailable, they have no supportive communities to become part of — these lack of institutional provisions impact retention, persistence and graduation.
Institutional Commitment
It should be the responsibility of every institution to provide supportive structures and programming that include corrective assessments that address the intricate challenges faced by of students of color. Yet, institutional commitment for students of color has been in steady decline. In fact, a study from the Center for American Progress, released in 2018, shows that public colleges are spending less money to educate students of color.
Every student that enrolls in an institution of higher education comes with some level of funding (personal, federal grants, state tuition assistance, scholarships, loans); they are all paying students. There is a moral obligation that should drive institutional commitment. In the era of Black Lives Matter we can no longer tolerate institutions that function under the guise that they are doing students of color a favor by admitting them. Institutions of higher learning need to be held accountable for creating and providing environments that nurture and foster academic engagement and success for students of color. Standards that are attached to federal funding must be developed to hold institutions accountable. Institutional accountability needs to become a national mandate for justice and leveraging of racial equity for students of color.
References
Bauer-Wolf, Jeremy. “Feeling Like Impostors”. 6 April 2017, Insidehighered.com
Garcia, Sara. “Gaps in College Spending Shortchange Students of Color”. Center for American Progress. 5 April 2018, Cdn.americanprogress.org
Geiger, A.W. “America’s Public School Teachers are Far Less Racially and Ethnically Diverse than their Students”. 27 Aug. 2018, PewResearch.org
Lawton, Georgina. “Why do Black Students Quit University More Often than Their White Peers?” The Colour of Power. 17 Jan. 2018, Theguardian.com
Lynch, Matthew. “Racism in Higher Education”. 14 Sept. 2020, Theadvocate.org
