Education in Diversity at UCLA

       As we begin the 21th century, our world is rapidly shrinking and UCLA graduates find themselves in increasing interaction with individuals of diverse backgrounds and perspectives.  Our graduates must interact productively with individuals of differing race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic background, religion, sexual orientation, age, and others characteristics.  In fact, simply participating as a member of the UCLA community exposes our students, faculty and staff to a broad spectrum of diversity.  This was dramatically brought home to me during my last sabbatical leave, which I spent at the University of Regensberg in Bavaria (South-eastern Germany).  I was struck by how much the student body at Regensberg reminded me of the student body I remember from my undergraduate days in the late 50s at Michigan State University.  To a first approximation the University of Regensberg students seemed much more like those at MSU of the 50s than the UCLA students of the 90’s.  It finally dawned on me that what I was reacting to was the lack of diversity in the students at Regensberg compared to the UCLA students.  Individually the Regensburg students had a sophistication similar to UCLA students and vastly exceeding the MSU students of the late 50s, however collectively they lacked the richness of perspective afforded by the diversity found at UCLA.  In a similar vain I find my self increasingly challenged to pronounce (correctly) the names of my students, or for that matter to (correctly) identify their gender based on their given names.  Several years ago in a upper division seminar with over 20 students, which I teach with Dr. Roger Bohman, I was taken back to find that only Dr. Bohman and I had English as our first language.  This seminar deals with the impact of human activity on the global ecosystem and could hardly be construed as a course with a significant diversity component.  Yet, having a class with a substantial degree of ethnic diversity significantly informed our discussions.

       The faculty, staff and particularly the students at UCLA are among the most diverse group to be found on any university campus.  In a very real sense being an active member of the UCLA community is itself an education in diversity.  In a more formal sense there has been pressure for some time to have a diversity requirement as part of the undergraduate curriculum.  UCLA, among the UC campuses, is the only one without such a requirement.  Not withstanding the inherent diversity present at UCLA in both the individuals and in course offerings, not having a diversity requirement is awkward.  This situation has been under consideration for several years by agents of the College of Letters and Science and the Academic Senate, including the General Education Governance Committee, the College Faculty Executive Committee and the Undergraduate Council.  A detailed report on their proposal for a diversity requirement within the College of Letters and Science can be found at http://www.senate.ucla.edu/committee/UGC/Documents/DiversePropFinal.pdf

       Within the past several years the General Education (GE) requirements for the UCLA undergraduate degree have been extensively reviewed, revised and reformulated.  Currently, required GE courses are grouped in three foundation areas, Scientific Inquiry, Arts and Humanities and Society and Cultures.  The institution of an additional GE requirement requires careful balance.  There are numerous laudable goals suggesting an ever increasing number of GE requirements, with virtually each requirement highly meritorious in its own right. 

Many other UC campuses have a diversity requirement of a somewhat narrowly focused nature.  At UCLA rather than instituting new courses to meet the diversity requirement, existing GE courses were carefully examined to access their appropriateness in fulfilling the diversity requirement.  In essence only GE courses in the foundation areas of Arts and Humanities and Society and Cultures were considered.  Among these courses over 50% were judged to provide appropriate material to meet the diversity requirement and an additional 25-30% could meet this criterion with nominal modification.  Clearly, instruction in diversity is already occurring at UCLA.  A proposal has been made to add following sentence to the Senate Regulation (458D) that specifies the GE requirements: “Additionally, one of these courses must carry diversity credit”.  This proposal has been endorsed by the appropriate Senate agencies and is expected to be adopted by the legislative assembly this year.  A list of GE courses that meet the diversity requirement will be maintained.  Fulfillment of the diversity requirement can be accomplished by simply including one of the approved courses among the GE courses a student takes.

Adoption of the modification to Senate Regulation 458D will regularize the issue of instruction in diversity at UCLA.  Currently, UCLA students receive significant instruction in diversity, however we do not have a formal requirement for a diversity offering.  Instituting a formal GE requirement for a course that focuses in a central and substantial way on diversity will make clear the importance UCLA attaches to issues of diversity.

Cliff Brunk, Chair

UCLA Academic Senate