Hook:

• Stories of students and faculty feeling alienated and out of place due to the color of their skin or where they come from.
  • Samia
  • Benji
  • PRCC Director – Carlos Wiley
• Penn State is satisfied with meeting the bare minimum requirements of diversity initiatives
  • This is symbolized in our long standing love of yelling the “we are” chant which represents a time when the Penn State football team welcomed the first black college athletes. However, at the same time, black students were required to live in a separate, segregated, off-campus location. In short, we have always been and still are numb to the real story of people of color at Penn State. We stop after checking off the boxes instead of digging into the real struggle and disadvantage of the black community in “Happy Valley.”

transition into →

Context and Historical background

Recent history of racism and issues of race relations at PSU

• Demographics of admissions
  • Compare to other universities
• Deliberate how widespread of an issue this is
  • Mention affirmative action as an effective means of fighting the issue – but not enough
• Express sentiment “if you lower the bar enough, you can always clear it.”

THESIS:

Penn State not only fails to meet its diversity initiatives, but needs to improve upon its current requirements to create a more welcoming campus for people of color.

Breakdown of Issue Brief:

Breakdown current diversity plan of 2016-2020:

Goal #1:      Create a Welcoming and Inclusive Campus Climate

• In what ways is campus not welcoming and inclusive

Goal #2:      Advance and Build a Diverse Student Body

• Statistics to prove that we are not diverse
• Pick up on narratives from introduction

Goal #3:      Advance and Build a Diverse Workforce and Management

• statistics
• Use paper written by professor on what it means to be black at PSU

Goal #4:      Develop a Curriculum That Fosters United States and International Cultural Competencies

• Not sure on this one yet

Analyze the success of SMART:

1. To assist in the recruitment of underrepresented student populations.
2. To assist the Penn State community, faculty, staff and support services with developing positive relationships within the diverse student body.
3. To increase retention and graduation rates of minorities by incorporating the use of workshops and conferences focused on student success.

• Luis and Victoria
  • Two students recruited by SMART
    • How effective was it?
    • How did scholarship play a role?
• How can SMART be expanded to increase its effect
  • Compare to other diversity programs at schools across the country

Reports and Opinions on PSU Diversity

• ranked at #1,453 in the nation (College Factual)

• Dr. Errol A. Henderson reports of racism and discrimination
• “why from 2010-16 did black students graduate from Penn State at a rate of 70.5 percent when their white counterparts graduated at 87.5 percent?”

Conclusion:

• Positive note on the growth and inclusion improvements of the past

• • Where we are with gender diversity has come along way → we can have hope in doing the same with racial diversity here at PSU
• Dr. Errol A. Henderson report quote

https://www.collegian.psu.edu/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_56c889e0-19d6-11e9-918c-4b0acfadb892.html

https://news.psu.edu/story/555134/2019/01/21/campus-life/martin-luther-king-jr-rec-hall-jan-21-1965

During the Deliberation Nation event, I attended the deliberation titled, “Old MacDonald HAD a farm, but now there’s GMOs: Genetic Engineering and Capitalism.” While I’m still wrapping my brain around the title of their event, I found the deliberation to be extremely informative and overall quite successful. I only have my own deliberation to compare theirs to, however, I walked away with a wealth of information from the event about a topic that I thought I already knew a lot about. GMOs, a publicly discussed issue that has emerged in the last decade, is often known as a subject based in ignorance. Many people falsely believe that GMOs are some chemical modification to their food that is inherently bad. In reality, GMOs present a wide range of positive factors to the food industry worldwide. During the deliberation, the three different groups explained the many effects of GMOs, including nuances that benefits or hurt different communities. Further, they clarified how the law relates to GMOs, and the many disputes between larger companies and more local farmers. While GMOs can present positive benefits to a wide range of communities, small farmers are often victims of industry changes. Also, GMOs can reduce genetic variation amongst species, meaning that diseases or environmental changes are even more detrimental. These are just some of the factors that were introduced by the hosts of the event.

While reflecting, it would be a disservice to not mention the two special guests who were at the deliberation. I cannot remember either of their names, however, two retired professors, one of which who had written a book about GMOs, drove much of the conversation. In areas that they felt were underrepresented in the deliberation, both of them spoke up and brought up invaluable perspectives. Further, they mentioned ongoing research which may not have been readily available to the students who prepared for the event. As a result, the conversation mostly centered between those prompting questions or ideas, and the two professors. Other people certainly chirped in from time to time, bringing in other perspectives, however it was mostly a back-and-forth between the two parties.

I thought that the first approach was lacking, and could have been changed entirely. Their approach was based on the idea that there should be absolutely no GMOs. And while I understand the event was supposed to incorporate three leveled approaches, there was almost no reason to completely ban GMOs. A better approach could have been to seriously regulate GMOs until they are proven to have no drawbacks or issues. The first approach quickly became void in the discussion, making me question whether it even belonged in the event overall.

In conclusion, the deliberation event was a huge success, from which I gained a wide range of informative knowledge. All perspectives were included in the event, and the conversation was particularly rich and authentic due to the two special guests being in attendance.