“Inclusive excellence” is a flawed solution to a growing issue

While many of us are worrying about getting classes and graduating on time, Cal Poly seems to believe that diversity-based education is a much greater priority.

This is not a new issue, but it has been surfacing more and more on our campus. Cal Poly has been sucked into the growing movement formally known as ‘inclusive excellence.’

The meaning of ‘inclusive excellence’ seems to change with every description. This term, popularized by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), is defined as an effort to “fully integrate the diversity and educational quality efforts and embed them into the core of academic mission and institutional functioning.” What frightens me about ‘inclusive excellence’ is its vagueness and potential for extreme interpretation.

According to Cal Poly’s Statement on Diversity, “The ultimate product of universities is education in the broadest sense, including preparation for life in the working world. In this regard, it is in the compelling interest of Cal Poly, the state and the nation to provide our students with an education that is rich with a diversity of ideas, perspectives, and experiences.” The phrase “compelling interest” plainly suggests that professors may soon be mandated to teach according to these objectives, regardless of relevance.

AAC&U cites “decades of educational research” in their argument that “diverse environments are better learning environments.” Furthermore, they claim that our “collective failure to educate students of color and those from lower socioeconomic groups” have led to a “decline in higher education rates” among Americans. In their eyes, “inclusive excellence” will solve all of these issues. However, now is not the time to be focusing on achieving diverse environments. The way the budget is going, we are lucky to even have a learning environment. Cal Poly’s Inclusive Excellence Council has taken on this AAC&U model out of blind ignorance to reality.

Nevertheless, national advocates for ‘inclusive excellence’ have deluded themselves into thinking that this is not the case. They claim “whereas excellence in the past has been equated with selectivity,” excellence today “will be determined by high expectations,” “high support,” and “other general factors.” This statement looks past the basic premise that selectivity highlights the students who have demonstrated their ability to achieve excellence. High expectations and high support provide absolutely no guarantee of a student’s success. And what other “general factors” could possibly be more important than one’s intelligence?

Through a recent inclusive excellence initiative, the City University of New York (CUNY) appointed Dr. Henry Vance Davis as the university dean for recruitment and diversity. The fact that this official handles both recruitment and diversity clearly insinuates the direction of this movement. What kind of example would Cal Poly be setting if it were to start placing diversity at the same level as merit. Davis is ignorant to the fact that some qualified students will get rejected because they are not a minority. As Davis implies, students simply need to take one for the team, as “it takes everyone to make it work.”

“Inclusive excellence” not only affects college students, but also faculty and staff. Provost Gregg Kvistad of the University of Denver (DU) has been looking into ways to “attract more faculty of color.” DU Human Resources director Dick Gartrell even encourages “behavioral interviewing — things like, ‘Tell me about a time when you worked in a diverse group.’” Which is more important to teaching: having experience in a diverse group or having competence and experience in a field of study? The push to “enrich” campuses with diversity has stepped its bounds. Professors should not be discriminated on the basis of their social history, and should never be forced to teach to social objectives. They are here to offer unique insight on a specific topic — not to make us join hands and sing “We Are the World.”

“Inclusive excellence” has good intentions but is unfair at the most elemental level. Cal Poly needs to recognize the flaws of this initiative and encourage other methods of promoting diversity on campus.

Now don’t get me wrong. I believe that embracing diversity is necessary in just about any job today. But ‘inclusive excellence’ is not the answer. Students should not be forced to accept diversity. They should embrace it on their own. Diverse minorities need to achieve recognition and attention on campus through their own merit — not through ‘institutional functioning.’ This movement toward affirmative action echoes the reverse discrimination of the ’70s. Although administrators may deny it, we all know where this is really going.