COMMISSION ON INCLUSION & DIVERSITY INITIATIVES
MEETING MINUTES
09/27/2018
9:13am – 10:29am
EU-101
Members In Attendance: Beverly Ntagu, Carlos Fuentes, Debra Hammond, Elizabeth Gutierrez, Elizabeth Say, Flavia Fleischer, Marcella DeVeaux, Marta Lopez, Mary-Pat Stein, Natalie MasonKinsey, Pastor Charles Humphrey, Scott Andrews, Susan Hua, Theresa White
Members Absent: Boris Ricks, Gabriel Gutierrez, Irene Tovar, Janet Oh, Priscilla Ramos, Rose Merida, Susan Cohen
Discussion Items:
A. . Introduction of Dr. Schutte: Mason-Kinsey called the commission to order at 9:13am, and began the meeting by introducing Dr. Schutte. She explained that he received his Ph.D. from UCLA, and completed his post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford University. He then served as an Assistant Professor at Columbia University, before accepting a Professor position at CSUN. She also mentioned that over the past 30 years, Dr. Schutte has participated in constructing and administrating over 200 National, State and campus-wide climate surveys. That includes CSUN’s Associated Students, Information Technology, and Sexual Violence Prevention surveys.
B. Presentation of Campus Climate Survey Data:Dr. Schutte began by thanking the commission for the opportunity to come and present the data. Dr. Schutte reminded the commission that the questions were devised by their sub-committee; he took no part in constructing them. He was asked to provide a summary analysis, and that is what he will be presenting to the commission at this time. He shared with the commission that he hopes they will discuss the results, and share their thoughts with him.
Dr. Schutte explained that the surveys were designed to target students, staff, faculty and administrators. The seven reference categories consisted of veterans, deaf, disability, religion/spirituality, LGBQTIA+, race/ethnicity and international status. In each category, there are 13 questions which measure perceptions/views, feelings of respect and feelings of being welcomed. Furthermore, there were questions that referenced mandatory diversity training, welcoming of groups, racial integration, degree of intimidation/hostility, safety and campus police. Categories which were specific to the target population included: search committees & overall climate (for employees), effectiveness of courses & classroom learning (for students). Dr. Schutte hopes that this information provides scope, as well as an indication of where we are as a campus.
The response rates from participants in the survey can be broken down as follows: 4.1% of students, 17% of faculty, 41% of staff, and 55% of administrators. Dr. Schutte noted the following:
- Student participants: females / long-time students were oversampled
- Staff participants: females and white people were oversampled
- Administrators: oversampled females, and under sampled white & Latin-X populations
Furthermore, he shared with the commission that the results reflect a 6% margin of error. As such, deviations should be considered to be in terms of about 12%.
When asked whether department chair participants were considered to be administrators or faculty, in regards to the survey, commission members shared that they were considered faculty. Dr. Schutte suggested that when reviewing the results of the survey, commissioners should also take note of the sample sizes for context. For instance, he noted that when looking at faculty, the sample sizes of veterans, deaf peoples, and international participants were lower than all others. Additionally, Dr. Schutte found that Latin-X veterans had the lowest participation in every group.
Two highlights reflected in the data that Dr. Schutte called attention to were:
1. A significant proportion of participants believed that diversity training should be mandatory.
2. Participants who did not indicate that they have a disability believed that the campus is very welcoming for people with disabilities. However participants who did indicate that they have a disability did not share the same opinion.
The commission observed that staff, faculty and administrators reported that they experienced intimidation or hostility more often than student participants. Furthermore, the data showed that staff and faculty have considered leaving the college at higher rates than students. Commissioners noted that this is most likely due to compensation, as well as the lack of advancement opportunities on campus.
Action Items:
1. Scheduling meetings for the rest of the semester – please participate in the doodle poll
2. Campus Climate Survey roll out plan & logistics
End: The meeting concluded at 10:29am.