Queen’s: Stop Putting Diversity On The Back Burner
Nine months after writing an open letter to Queen’s administration about a lack of professors of colour, there was finally a response.
SPOILER: It was underwhelming
“As the fall term of my final undergraduate year at Queen’s comes to a close, I can’t help but notice something, or rather someone, is missing.
Professors of colour.”
It was this disturbing realization that inspired me to send, on Dec. 1, 2015, an open letter addressed to the Faculty of Arts and Science, the Department of English Language & Literature, and Queen’s Senate. Fifty-seven students, alumni, as well as the chair of English Graduate Studies, have since signed onto the letter.
The open letter has been brought up a number of times in Senate—one of Queen’s three governing bodies, “responsible for determining all matters of academic character affecting the University as a whole”—only to be shut down. How do I know this? I sat in on one such Senate meeting on April 19, 2016. I heard a Senate member ask if anyone had contacted me since the letter had been written, unaware that I sat on the other side of the room. Someone responded that they had not. They never did.
Nine months after the original letter, the Senate Educational Equity Committee (SEEC) released a public statement (which I break down later in this article), and the December 2015 letter was officially discussed in Senate on Sept. 27, 2016.
During the discussion one senator said:
“I’m extremely glad that we got to see that letter. It’s a very important letter that senators got to read and ponder even if it falls beyond the mandate of SEEC.”
Basically, the letter was discussed, many acknowledged that a lack of diversity is a serious problem, and then Senate stood back and said: not our problem.
It probably comes as no surprise that I’ve something to say about that (and at the end of this article you will find a letter I’ve addressed to Senate) but in the meantime, let me break down the past nine months for you.
The timeline:
Dec. 9, 2015 —The original open letter is sent.
Sept. 27, 2016 — Queen’s Senate discusses the letter.
For those of you who haven’t read it, here’s the original December 2015 letter, but feel free to scroll past.
Note: The only change made to the letter since it was originally sent was the addition of the names of students, alumni and a professor who wished to add their signatures. If you would like your name included, feel free to message me:
To Queen’s Senate, the Faculty of Arts and Science and the Department of English Language & Literature,
I have spent the past five years as an undergraduate in the English Department. During that time I’ve been in the presence of some truly intelligent, beautiful and inspirational professors. But as the fall term of my final undergraduate year at Queen’s comes to a close, I can’t help but notice something, or rather someone, is missing.
Professors of colour.
Never in my time at Queen’s have I ever been taught by a professor of colour. A quick glance over the English Department’s “Faculty Listing” page shows there are about 75 English program members. Less than five of them are not white.
This past semester I took ENGL 471, a seminar on “African American Literature and Culture”. The course was taught by Dr. Justin Sully, someone who is brilliant, knowledgeable and made me see the everlasting impact slavery holds on our world today.
In short, I would rate his class among the top courses I’ve taken in my five years.
But there were two glaring issues with ENGL 471.
1. Dr. Sully was forced to cram 200 hundred years of rich and devastating history into one semester, while I’ve taken full-year courses that focus solely on one decade of white literature.
2. Dr. Sully is a white man.
I would take another course with Professor Sully in a heartbeat. Especially on African American Literature and Culture, because the man knows his stuff.
But what we truly need are professors of colour.
Professors of colour can help enrich student learning, disrupt the white canon and offer students a perspective they otherwise would be without.
Last year, I wrote a feature in The Queen’s Journal entitled “Racism alive but subtle at Queen’s”. Maybe you’ve read it, and maybe you haven’t. After speaking with many black students I realized many of them experience serious alienation at Queen’s.
This sense of alienation is perpetuated by the overtly racist and micro-aggressive behaviour of other students. However, it is also perpetuated by what happens in academia.
The reality is this: there is a homogeneity in the classroom, where white privilege and yes, even white supremacy, is allowed to exist.
What is white privilege?
White privilege is when white history is part of the core curriculum and everything else is taught as an elective. White privilege is when “Frankenstein” is on my reading list for three different courses, but black, brown and everything-else literature are only taught when professors have support to branch out.
During my time at Queen’s, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed and benefitted from the work of white writers. However, that doesn’t mean non-white literature should only be on the curriculum as a customary lip service.
As students of literature and language, we need Toni Morrison’s complexity, Thomas King’s theory and Rohinton Mistry’s humour. We need Maria Campbell’s experience, Lawrence Hill’s heartbreak and Joy Kagawa’s truth.
But I am not the first to bring up a need for diversity in curriculum and faculty.
Many of you are likely familiar with the Henry Report, which was conducted at the request of the University administration. It involved a survey of visible minority and Aboriginal faculty members at Queen’s to get a better sense of their experiences. Nearly two dozen of respondents said they were treated differently at Queen’s because of their ethno-racial status.
When the report was completed in 2006 and presented to Queen’s Senate, it concluded that “white privilege and power continue to be reflected in the Eurocentric curricula, traditional pedagogical approaches, hiring, promotion and tenure practices, and opportunities for research” at Queen’s.
This report is among an overwhelming amount of evidence that Queen’s University stands upon a tradition of Eurocentricity and white privilege.
Such traditions are damaging to not only students of colour, but white students as well. The best way to counter such traditions is to diversify not only curriculum, but staff.
Students of colour shouldn’t be able to go through their entire undergraduate careers without seeing their own face or hearing their own history. Equally important, white students need to interact with other races in an academic setting so that they are equipped to bring about equity in humanity.
Literature has the power to give us an insight into other worlds. It seems a waste to limit ourselves within white borders. We need professors of colour in our classrooms to take students to these places and to challenge our perceptions and understanding of literature as we know it.
While in this letter I wrote of my personal experience, my sentiment is one that is shared by many. Below my name you will find 47 signatures of students, alumni and faculty who stand by this letter.
I beg of you to no longer allow the forces of lethargy and privilege to continue inaction. Now is the time to stand up, now is the time for change.
Sincerely,
Anisa Mercedes Rawhani
Signatures
Faculty: Sam McKegney (Chair, Graduate Studies)Alumni: Ali Meghani, Chantal Tshimanga, Matt Fillmore, Morgan Lewis, Paighton Newmarch, Tiffany Chan
Students: Abigail Conners, Adam Laskaris, Akasha Naraine, Alexandra Watson, Ali Haidar, Andrea Howard, Anne Spence, Ashley Quan, Astrid Hieblinger Rempel, Carissa Gordon, Chioma Odozor, Claire Stacey, Dean Edwards, Dominique Holmes, Ellie Berry, Emerson Murray, Emily Keeler, Evelyna Darkling Lily Ekoko-Kay, J. L. Devries, Jamie Munro, Jenn Watson, Jenna Zucker, Kate Meagher, Katherine Singh, Kianah Lecuyer, Kristen Cochrane, Lorraine Lau, Maggie Tadros, Maha Faruqi, Maria Kyres, Maria-Teresa Matani, Marion Gonsalves, Marissa Andrade, Megan Robertson, Michaela McCrudden, Michelle K Allan, Michelle Soucy, Natasha Bowman, Natali Juriansz, Nika Farahani, Nikki Clementine, Nyah Hernandez, Payal Majithia, Peter O’Donnell, Saba Farbodkia, Shawna Ratko, Simran Sharma, Tia Wilson, Victoria Gibson, Victoria Sicilia, Vishmayaa Jeyamoorthy
(Note: Immediately after writing this letter, I realized I misspoke when I said it was a problem that a white man was teaching this course.
The point isn’t that brown people should be teaching brown content and white people should be teaching white content, the point is that there’s a minuscule amount of black, brown, non-white professors to begin with. However, while I made this mistake, I don’t think it should take away from the overall legitimate message of this letter.
In response, many readers may argue that they’ve had incredible white professors and that true equality comes from a meritocracy. However when we look at cases like the English Department — where only about five per cent of faculty are not white—we can clearly see that whatever hiring system is in the place is not working. To suggest that it is, is to suggest that racialized professors aren’t getting positions because they aren’t qualified enough to teach in the first place.)
The public statement
The Senate Educational Equity Committee (SEEC) finally released a statement of sorts addressing the December letter. Their statement is dated April 13, 2016, but from what I understand was only released online at the end of September and was then discussed in Senate on Sept. 27. The statement was brought to my attention, not by the Senate, but by a friend who still attends Queen’s.
You can read the full statement here, but here are the highlights:
- It was signed by Michael Blennerhassett, chair of the Senate Educational Equity Committee (SEEC).
- Now, this is important: Blennerhassett states that through his meetings with the English Department head, the Faculty of Arts and Science, and the Equity Office, he has found that the concerns raised by the open letter were “timely” and that many students experience “a lack of representation … among faculty” and “a lack of non-Western knowledge in the curriculum”.
- The conclusion: SEEC feels some parts of “employment equity” are outside their scope and should be addressed by other Queen’s bodies.
- The solution: SEEC partnered with Queen’s Equity Office to develop the recently-launched Diversity and Equity Assessment Planning (DEAP) Tool.
- Now, what the heck is the DEAP Tool? Basically it’s this online application where a department or faculty can see the demographics of their staff, faculty, and students, which they can then reflect on and develop a strategic plan for better inclusion — if they feel so inclined.
- Queen’s Provost (Vice-Principal) has endorsed the DEAP Tool and has invited all departments to develop their own diversity plan.
That’s it.
To Queen’s Senate,
Nine months ago, I begged you to no longer allow the forces of lethargy and privilege to fuel continued inaction in the face of severe underrepresentation within Queen’s faculty.
However, if Sept. 27’s meeting has taught us anything it is that such forces have won out among many of you — despite knowing full well that a lack of diversity among professors compromises the quality of students’ education.
However, rather than focus on the theoretical consequences of this complacency, I wanted to give you a glimpse into what a lack of representation means for the Queen’s experience:
It means students can go through their entire degree without once being taught by a non-white professor, or encountering non-Eurocentric curricula.
It means my friend of colour will have a professor who, in front of an entire class, humiliatingly mimics an Indian accent, assuming that’s what my friend’s mother sounds like.
It means my black friend will walk down Johnson Street only to be met with male students yelling out their cars all of the violent and sexual things they want to do to her “black ass”.
It means my friend of colour will be called a “towelhead” in a classroom and be made to feel worthless.
It means this Halloween, without fail, a student will wear blackface — just like every other year.
It means all of this will simply continue to be a part of their Queen’s experience.
It’s worth commending the Equity Office and SEEC’s recent efforts in the creation of the DEAP Tool. However, simply quantifying and reflecting on a department’s lack of diversity isn’t going to make it go away — nor does collectively standing back and saying, this doesn’t fall under our mandate.
If it doesn’t fit into your agenda, make some room.
Until faculties and departments are given the resources and financial support to diversify curriculum and faculty, the DEAP Tool will simply follow in the steps of other one-off projects that posed little threat to the deeps roots of this issue. I know this from my conversation with department heads and professors.
To put it simply: Meaningful, long-lasting change will require the unified support and dedication of the Senate.
I do not envy you. You have been handed a weighty legacy and history that cannot be reversed over night. It does not help that Queen’s financial situation in recent years has seen better days and demands constant attention. But this item can no longer remain on the back burner; it can no longer be tabled for discussion at a later date.
Unfortunately equity is unlikely to make you money, but I can guarantee you it will make a difference in the lives of students.
Sincerely,
Anisa Mercedes Rawhani
Class of 2016
A proud alumni
