[MUSIC PLAYING]
BOBBIE LAUR: Good afternoon.
My name is Bobbie
and I am honored
to serve as the
Executive Director
of the Coalition of Urban and
Metropolitan Universities,
or CUMU.
And we're located here at Towson
University in Towson, Maryland.
Thank you for joining us today.
As you can probably tell from
a little bit of an audio glitch
this is our live stream.
And we have over 750 higher
education and community leaders
registered.
Each of you play a vital role
in the CUMU community, which
has for over 30 years created
spaces for shared learning,
connecting, and action.
I hope that you've seen
our just-announced Learning
and Sharing virtual series
that's debuting this coming
fall for CUMU members.
It's going to center on the most
pressing challenges we are all
facing in our work today.
Please consider
submitting a proposal
to present or facilitate.
We need your voices
and expertise.
Today's forum is a key
step in CUMU's commitment
to move beyond rhetoric
and towards lasting change
when it comes to combating
systematic racism
and inequities.
Our discussion today is going
to be moderated by Fred de Sam
Lazaro, a PBS NewsHour
journalist, who
focuses his reporting on issues
that are of great importance
to our CUMU members--
social innovation, alleviating
poverty, and racial justice.
I am thrilled to
welcome Fred who
will introduce our esteemed
group of CUMU presidents
and chancellors.
Thank you again for joining
us for today's live stream.
Fred--
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Thanks
so much Bobbie, and welcome
everyone.
I'm going to abbreviate
introductions and bios
and just try to launch
as quickly as possible
into the conversation
that we are about to have.
And I have every
confidence based
on getting to know the
four panelists that it
will be a spirited one.
Your geographic location--
I suspect at most
of your campuses--
informs very much your
modus operandi and very
profoundly your missions.
And we're gathered today to
address what an increasing
chorus of municipalities
are calling a public health
threat, which is racism.
You are in the epicenter of
this public health threat.
The city of Minneapolis, from
where this is coming to you,
declared it officially so.
That racism is a
public health crisis
and it's elevated anti-racism
efforts from the personal
to systemic, as
Bobbie alluded to.
We're going to hear from four
thinkers who you've probably
heard of if you haven't
actually heard them.
Each is a leader of a campus.
Each is what, in my business,
we call a walking soundbite.
And my job is to keep those
to about PBS NewsHour length
so that we can move
the conversation along.
One of the ground rules
that we established early on
is that we're not going
to make this a show
and tell about previous
efforts in pursuit of diversity
or anti-racism goals, unless
these initiatives illustrate
how complicated and difficult
these goals are to attain.
I'm charged with keeping
us in this moment,
and looking forward.
To see whether the George
Floyd aftermath can generate
measurable progress
that hasn't happened--
or hasn't happened enough--
in previous such
incidents dating
at least in our modern mass
media era to Emmett Till.
Could the politics, sociology,
economics, demographics,
or technology make things
different this time?
Do our speakers-- leaders
of anchor institutions
in their urban space--
have unique opportunities
as presidents
to move the proverbial needle?
And what are those.
We've collected
dozens of questions
that have come in from
you, the audience,
and almost all of them fold into
the theme of our conversation
today.
And if you have
specific questions
that we don't get
to directly, CUMU
is obviously the
very logical exchange
to facilitate this
ongoing conversation.
So as we say in my business stay
tuned and go to CUMU's website
frequently.
So without much
further ado, I'd like
to move us along
and begin with you,
Kate, Dr. Conway-Turner
at SUNY Buffalo State.
A question I'd like each
of our guests to kick in
with as we move along--
how has the George Floyd killing
ricocheted on your campus,
generally?
And what opportunities are
you seizing in its wake?
And feel free to
personalize this.
How much personal stake
you see in your own mandate
in answering that question.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER:
Well thank you
so much for the question, Fred.
It's a pleasure to be
here with my colleagues
to talk about this very
important issue that we face.
The George Floyd moment
ricocheted in many ways
across our campus.
As a campus of
course we are well
aware of the centuries
of discrimination
that African-Americans
have experienced.
We are a social justice campus,
so there is much discussion
and work that we
do both on campus
and throughout the community
as an anchor institution.
And so the issue itself--
the broad issue of
racism, systemic racism--
was not new to our campus.
But that eight minutes and 46
seconds of seeing what happened
and the death of George Floyd
certainly was a tipping point.
It was a extreme hit in the gut,
you might say, of a realization
that for all the work
that people had thought
they had been doing and
have been attempting that we
are still here at this moment.
Our campus also is a
highly diverse campus.
55% of our students
are students of color.
And so people felt it deeply.
It was us.
It was our brothers.
It was our sisters.
It was our family that
this was happening to.
So it was a profound
shaking up of our community.
Every part of our community.
We're in Buffalo, New
York as you mentioned,
which is the second
largest city in New York.
A very diverse city as
well as our campus is.
And a community that has
really worked through issues
for many years around racism.
And so it was an awakening, and
a tipping, and a stripping off
of any hope that we had that
we were in a better place
than we are now.
And so it did cause quite a
severe reaction for our family
campus and our
community around us.
And so the issue for
us is then what's next?
So we cannot deny the reality.
We see the problem.
We understand the
difficulties of it.
We understand how long term
this has been going on.
We see the
manifestations of racism
in terms of incarceration,
killings, health disparities,
educational disparities,
wealth, income.
So what is next?
And so we have
already, on our campus,
deepened our discussions
and our work in this area.
So coming together to really
think about more than just
understanding more
deeply, but what
are the appropriate actions?
And for college
campuses I'm going
to start the discussion
by saying, well,
what do we need to do?
We're a microcosm of
the larger community.
We need to look internally.
We need to make sure that
the processes and policies
and the behaviors of our
campus really have eradicated
and continue to move
forward to be anti-racist.
So we need to have
those discussions.
We need to look at what's
happening on our campuses.
We need to look
at who we hold up.
Who we exalt on our campus.
Who we memorialize.
How do we recruit on our campus?
Whether students,
faculty, or staff.
How do we make sure
we're putting people out
into the world that
graduate from our campuses
that will be thought leaders
and anti-racists in the world.
So really there's
lots of work that's
going on now that's been
deepened by this space.
And I really feel
that people's eyes
are open wider now to
understand how the time is now.
How can we capitalize on this
special moment right now.
We cannot waste this moment.
The moment where people
are understanding
the reality of racism.
And so that's where we are.
We're beginning with
that realization.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
OK and I look forward
to getting into
specifics once we
get a round robin going amongst
all four of our leaders today.
I'd like to go next to
you, Paul Pribbenow,
President of
Augsburg University.
And your campus is a
very short few blocks
from 38th and Chicago,
which is now George Floyd
Square in Minneapolis.
Tell us a little bit
about what happened
in the immediate
aftermath on your campus,
and perhaps a little digest
of your campus' history
will be illustrative
because it was not
of the social milieu
that surrounds you today.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: That's
exactly right, Fred.
Well thank you.
Good to be with all
of you, especially
with my good friends and
colleagues here on this panel.
So as Fred said
Augsburg University
is located just
a couple of miles
from the George Floyd site
of where he was murdered.
We're about a mile away from
the third precinct police
headquarters, which was
abandoned and destroyed
in the violent protests
that followed the murder.
So Augsburg is a
university that is
located in one of the most
diverse zip codes in the United
States.
All of our neighbors
are immigrants.
Somali, and Ethiopian, and
Vietnamese, and Korean.
And so it's a fascinating
place in context.
Augsburg itself just
finished its celebration
of its 150th anniversary.
So quite a year to celebrate
that sesquicentennial.
But over the past 15
years-- this is my 15th year
as Augsburg's president--
we have seen a
radical transformation
of our student body.
So given that I'm the
only private institution
in this panel, so a
little bit about that.
We have seen our undergraduate
population now become
about the same as SUNY Buffalo.
About 55% students of color.
So a remarkable transformation
over that period of time.
And so the immediate aftermath
of this moment in some ways
energizes us, brings momentum,
brings urgency to the work
that we were about
already, because
of the students
and the neighbors
that we have the privilege to
have as part of our community.
And for me, personally,
the aftermath
of the murder, whether
it was the peaceful
protests where our
students-- especially
our black and brown
students-- were
putting their bodies on the
line out in these protests.
And then with the violence that
was unraveling all around us,
and however that
was being caused.
The looting-- I happen to live
in a presidential home which
is just a block off of
Lake Street, which was sort
of the epicenter of this work.
So this brings us
to a point where,
I think at Augsburg where--
given our location,
our place, given
our population, our
demographic, our student body--
the urgency here, it's raw.
I think that's really the
way I would describe it.
It's raw in that our
students, they want action.
They want to know that
our commitment to being
an anti-racist place-- which
we've claimed and aspired
to going back 10, 12 years in
terms of even at our highest
level of governance--
they want to see that in action.
They want to know what
difference it's going to make.
And I know we're
going have a chance
to talk about some specific
initiatives here as part
of our conversation.
But I think that's the
feeling I'm getting personally
is that this is the moment
that Kate described,
where the students
we have the privilege
to serve in the neighborhoods
that we have a privilege
to be a part of, now
demand this of us.
And I know that I'm spending a
huge amount of my time trying
to think about what
I as a president
can do appropriately to create
the space for that to happen.
To challenge our community
to live into its aspirations.
And I think that that is made
only more urgent by where
we happen to be located.
Though I know this
has also had an impact
on lots of other cities
across the country.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
OK and I look forward
to hearing about Augsburg's
pivot over that 150 year
history.
From serving your
originally intended students
that it was built to
serve, to the student body
that you describe today.
I'd like to go next
to Chancellor Kristin
Sobolik of University
of Missouri-St. Louis,
not far from Ferguson,
Missouri, which
saw a very similar
set of circumstances
erupt in social unrest
just a few years ago.
And what you've seen since
then and a snapshot of what
the campus looks
like today might
be quite illustrative, perhaps,
in telling us what we might
foresee in Minneapolis, or not.
And so I'll toss that question
to you, Chancellor Sobolik.
KRISTIN SOBOLIK:
Yeah, thank you, Fred.
I appreciate the
question, and being
invited to be a part of this
important panel discussion
today.
The University of
Missouri-St. Louis
is a younger institution,
founded in 1963,
and in fact we're listed
on the US News & World
Report for our top performers
for social mobility.
We are one of the most
diverse institutions
in the state of Missouri.
And our diverse student
population is here in Ferguson.
And we're also a part
of St. Louis, which
has a long history of
structural and legalized racism
and segregation.
And of course that's similar
to what some other cities have,
but to see that happening right
here in St. Louis even today.
And we as an anchor
institution need
to really lean in
and make sure that we
are helping move that forward.
But to talk about what Kate
had said about a tipping point
with George Floyd's murder.
And now going forward from
six years ago in Ferguson
we had Michael Brown's killing--
and in fact just this Sunday
was the sixth anniversary
of his death in Ferguson--
and taking a look
at what has happened
in those six years
between Ferguson
and the killing of George Floyd.
And being somewhat,
in essence, chagrined
and upset at what hasn't
necessarily happened.
Where we're at now.
As an anchor institution
it's important for us
to be leaders in our community.
And we are in a unique position
to provide those resources
and opportunities and
leadership to advance
the cause of racial equity
in our own community.
As well as serve as
examples for others.
Because we know we
aren't alone in this.
But what has happened--
I think UMSL has been a leader
as an anchor institution.
But what we see that has
happened in the last six years
with Ferguson is
that we have been
able to accomplish some things,
but not what we want to.
And some of the
one-time initiatives
haven't necessarily
led us where we want.
Whereas the more structural
foundational anchor
institution initiatives have.
But what's important
too is as we
are leaning into our community
and being that leader,
we need to look at our
own internal community
on our campus.
And analyze where we are.
So making sure that
we're leaning in
and we're engaging
and empowering
diverse voices across the
institution has been important.
But not much has
been accomplished
that we have wanted to.
So these are some key points.
I think it really sets the
parameters and some guidelines
for where we want to be.
And I think it's
important as leaders
that we make sure that
we are moving forward.
We don't miss these
opportunities.
We provide the
foundational structure
that's going to be important
for moving forward,
so that in another
six years we're not
having these same discussions.
And we have not
accomplished what
we need to as an institution,
as an anchor institution,
as a region, and as a nation.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
And I'm hoping
that as we get
moving here today we
can get into some
specifics of things
that might have been triggered
by the Michael Brown incident.
Six years on where
do they stand?
And what have you
learned, essentially,
in trying to enact change
in the wake of what
happened in Ferguson.
And I hope to come back
to that in a little bit.
Thank you so much.
And we'll go to our final
panelist on the West Coast.
Unique person to whom we can
say good morning on this campus.
And it's President
Thomas Parham,
who is at California State
University, Dominguez Hills.
One of the things
that really struck me
about your many
writings is the notion
of in all of this
talk of change, what
are we willing to sacrifice?
And that really, I think,
resonates with a lot of people.
What are we willing
to sacrifice?
And you've shared in the past
your own agitation at Penn,
for example, for
a curriculum that
would enable you to
groom more culturally
competent PhDs in psychology.
And I'm just wondering, how do
you exhort people to sacrifice?
And define it in the context
of the George Floyd aftermath.
THOMAS PARHAM: So
Fred, thanks for that.
And let me say welcome to
all of our participants.
I want to first of
all begin my remarks
by thanking CUMU, both Bobbie
Laur and Davorah Lieberman, who
exercised a good deal
of decision making
and really hosting a forum
like this, which I think is
such an important conversation.
It was clear when Du Bois argued
that race would be the most
anxiety provoking issue
in America, particularly,
it would be the central
issue in the 20th century.
I think it is in
the 21st as well.
So anytime we can come together
as colleagues and community
to have these kind of
broad conversations
I think it's always important.
I also want to
bring you greetings
all the way from California.
George Floyd, or Mike Brown,
or Philando Castile, or Sandra
Bland, or Breonna
Taylor, or Ahmaud Arbery,
or Amadou Diallo,
and Abner Louima.
And it doesn't
matter where you go.
Latasha Harlins.
From east to west,
north to south,
those murders of
black bodies really
have a ripple effect
all the way across here.
But I want to bring
you greetings really
from the California State
University system, which
is the largest system of
public higher education in all
of America.
That we're real proud of,
but a very diverse place.
So we want to bring
greetings like that.
Now when you talk about
the question of what
are we prepared to
sacrifice, I think
it's important if we can
get into just a little bit
of a deep structure
analysis on this
because our title and topic
about where do we go from here
is not just a
fancy catch phrase.
But it was more
really taken from some
of the writings of one of my
heroes Dr. Martin Luther King.
And it's important because
context informs content,
as my vice president reminds me,
that where do we go from here
was a theme and a question
that Dr. King asked himself
when he looked at the
situation in America.
He's coming off of 1964
and the Civil Rights Act.
1965 and the Voting Rights Act.
And in 1966 he takes
a retrospective
look to find out that
things hadn't changed much.
So when he wrote the text
and it was published in '67
it was really a
retrospective look
to say where do we go from here
because given all the advances
that we were making with civil
rights legislation et cetera,
the country still
hadn't changed.
And there were a couple
pieces that were about that.
One is that the country was very
much involved in an empathic
demonstration of, "Oh, we
empathize with those poor folk
who are being oppressed. "
Because they were looking
at the films in Birmingham.
At the Bull Connors
and George Wallaces.
And National Guard escorting
people to schools, et cetera.
And they could see just
the hard redneck racism
that was blatantly there.
But there was a
difference, King argued,
between the empathy
that people showed
and the quality that people
were willing to embrace.
Because they were addressing
the question of empathy--
"Aren't we sad for these
poor folk who are oppressed."
But nobody really
thought about what does
that mean in terms of equity.
How do we create a
society that manifests
equality in a different way.
And so it raises the
question, as you first
introduced Fred, which is what
are we as a community prepared
to sacrifice?
Also I think I should remind
our viewers this morning
that the empathy I think
that happens a lot--
particularly in the news media
that you are so familiar with--
when we have Ferguson, when
we have Minneapolis and George
Floyd, the media is
directing their attention
to people who look like me
and to black and brown bodies.
To people who are oppressed.
To people who are homeless.
To people who are whatever.
To ask them really,
"How do you feel?"
And really the challenge is
not to know in this moment
how do people feel about
their own oppression.
You know we are angry.
You know that we are hurt.
You know that we are outraged.
You know that we are nauseated.
You know that we are--
as Fannie Lou Hamer would
argue-- sick and tired
of being sick and tired.
But what I want to know is--
I want to turn the
focus a little bit
and invite our institutions
around the country
to think about--
the challenge is not simply
to gauge the opinions
of your people of color.
But rather I want to
turn the attention
to brothers and sisters
in the white community.
Because what I've argued in
my writings, as you know,
is that racism fundamentally
is not black people's problem.
It's not Latin people's problem.
It's not Asian people's problem.
It's not Native American
people's problem.
It is white people's problem.
And we have to get our
brothers and sisters
in the white community to
ask the question of one,
how do you bear witness to
the suffering of black bodies?
Sit in silence and still
maintain your humanity.
And if we could get some people
to begin to address that,
then I think we begin to
move the needle along.
Because what we've
done over time is
we still haven't
fundamentally come to terms
with the notion of
what is a desegregated
versus an integrated
environment.
We look at our institutions
and we say wow,
but we've made so much progress.
Well you may have 5, 10,
or 15% of this, that,
or the other population.
But Judy Rosener and Marilyn
Loden in their text Workforce
America remind us-- back in '91
I think when they wrote that
if my memory is correct--
that diversity is not
simply about demographics.
It is a question of whether
the policies and practices
of the institutions
or agencies have
changed as a function of the
changes in the demographics.
And what the people
in the streets
are now demanding that we
interrogate as institutions.
And educational institutions
can't insulate ourself
from that conversation.
Do we really understand that we
are not just in the community
but of the community?
And are we prepared to look
at the institutional policies
and practices to see whether
or not this toxicity of racism
has infected what
we do in the world.
That's what we have
to be able to look at.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: I'll stick
with you then as we go forward
and dive a little more
deeply into specifics.
When you bring your leadership
and your scholarship
that you just shared
with us to your campus,
tell us about how that
has been ricocheting.
And any specifics that you
have brought to the fore
on your campus,
especially when it comes
to bringing white allies
into this pursuit of equity
on your campus and specifically.
THOMAS PARHAM: So part of
that discussion is happening
I think with our students.
When the George Floyd
situation occurred
I put together a town hall
and along with my team--
no leader really
thrives in the absence
of members of their team
really working with them.
And we put together
a town hall just
to allow people to
cathart and see how
people were feeling about that.
But following up on
that I've instituted
what I started out
calling "a task force
on racial reconciliation."
That has now been renamed
by the co-chairs--
the chair of our Africana
Studies and the chair
of our Mervyn Dymally Institute
on campus, Dr. Nicol and Samad,
respectively--
"the task force on
anti-racism in the academy."
And so we have a group
of folk, multicultural,
who are now beginning to
interrogate the policies
and practices on a campus
like Dominguez Hills.
Which is interesting because we
come out and were founded out
of the social justice roots.
We were originally
founded in a place
that is Palos Verdes,
a very upper-class
and upper-middle-class.
But after the Watts rebellion
it was moved to the Dominguez
Ranch, right, when the
government came down--
this is Edmund G. Brown--
and said that we want
to create a gateway
in the door of opportunity
for the residents
of the urban core, South
Central Los Angeles.
But I've tried to
argue with my campus
that we can't simply
be passive participants
to our own historical legacy.
What we have to do is
be actively engaged
and trying to make sure that
we look at closing the gap.
There's always a gap
in the human condition
between aspiration
and actualization.
And so as we look to try to be
a more better institution then
part of the challenge is for
us to try to look at saying,
how can we interrogate our
own policies and practices?
How can we look
at our curriculum?
How can we look at ways in
which we're creating a more
culturally competent
graduate to take
their place in the workforce?
How are we looking at faculty?
How are we looking at
diversifying our own folk?
What are the
programmatic initiatives?
How are we engaged
in the community?
How are we brokering the
conversations between police
and the campus community and
the surrounding community?
About how do we come together
as a community entity?
Those are the rightful places
that academic institutions
ought to be assuming, and
those are some of the things
that we are doing on the
campus of California State
University, Dominguez Hills.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
OK I'd like to go
to President Pribbenow
in Minneapolis,
and you've mentioned that
the big roadblock on campuses
is the whole system of
tenure promotion, control
of curriculum, and
then it's much easier
to do diversity initiatives
in the student affairs realm
rather than on
the academic side.
Talk a little bit
about how you've
attempted to move
the needle when
it comes to bringing
change and diversity
and equity on the academic
side when things seem so etched
in stone and tradition-bound.
And for many good reasons you
have these systems in place,
but they're obviously resistant
to change in many ways.
Can you talk a
little bit about how
you've dealt with
that on your campus
and then others can
jump in as well.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: Thanks, Fred.
And I think you
referenced this earlier,
just to remind
folks a little bit
about the threads
that have actually
led to our historic
identity as an institution.
We were founded by
Norwegians back in 1869.
We are a institution affiliated
with the evangelical Lutheran
Church in America,
which happens to be
the most white denomination
in the country.
We have been shaped by a
kind of Western liberal arts
tradition at the core
of our academic program.
And the truth is
we're a majority
institution in the middle of
an immigrant neighborhood.
So you take all those
threads and they actually
represent whiteness in all of
its field glory, if you will.
And I'm a 63-year-old
white guy who
happens to now be finishing
his 15th year as president
and has the gift to
be able to do that.
And so I take Thomas's
challenge quite personally
to be quite honest.
It's exactly the
right challenge.
This racism is my problem.
It is our problem as
an institution that
in fact needs to
do this deep dive
and needs to change
the way we do business.
And I think this is
what you're pointing to.
Just a quick example--
I think there has to be
leadership courage around some
of the inherited
traditions and practices
that have in fact
shaped the academy.
And this has in some ways has
nothing to do with our faith
or of Northern
European backgrounds.
This has to do with the
traditional academic structure
that we all probably all have
inherited in some fashion,
whether it's in curriculum
or whether it's in things
like tenure and promotion.
Give you just a quick example
of some of that courage.
We had a situation where, as I
think most of your colleagues
know, most of the
hiring of faculty
is done at the departmental
level, certainly
with the involvement of
a wider circle of folks.
But those departments tend to
want to replicate themselves.
I don't think that'll
surprise any of us.
That is part of what they
do when they lose somebody--
retires or moves on--
they think about themselves
and how they would continue
to benefit from the status quo.
And I think that what
it takes on occasion
is for leadership to step in and
say no that's not good enough.
We can do things
like change the way
we train them on bias and
discrimination in the hiring
questions they ask and
the kind of systems
they set up to do that.
That's one step.
But even with that,
we will find as we
did just several years
ago at Augsburg where
the department will
have two really
find candidates, probably
equal in their ability
to do the job as
it's been described,
who represent two
different profiles.
One being the more traditional
status quo of that department.
The other being someone
who was actually
dedicated more to our commitment
to experiential education.
To social justice.
The recommendation
from the department
is to hire the one who
replicates the status quo.
The other one comes in
second in their vote.
A provost-- my provost, a very
wise and experienced person--
steps in and says, "No, we're
going to hire the other one."
That breaks the traditions.
That breaks the
inherited traditions
of how these things
tend to be handled.
And when you do that
the truth is you
get the result of
bringing somebody
of a more diverse background
in, which is one step.
But you also get the message
to the broader community
that we've got to change
the way we do business.
Otherwise we will
not fundamentally
change those policies,
practices, protocols
that have been
defined by, again,
these inherited traditions.
So just a really
simple example, I
think, of the kind
of both courage
it takes, but also
the willingness
to step into this work
in a different way.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: It's
not exactly an open arms
embrace and welcome
for the person who
gets the job eventually,
and has to go
into a potentially very hostile
and unwelcoming environment.
Systemically how do
you address that?
And after all
others can weigh in.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: I would just
say that it's a great question
and certainly an important one.
I think as we've built a more
diverse faculty in response
to our changing profile
of our student body
we've also built
some strong networks
of support and mentorship
across the institutions
that help to support folks.
I'm not saying it's easy.
I think you're right.
There certainly can
be some backlash
on those kind of decisions.
But I think there's also a
growing sense of accountability
to the willingness
to think differently
about how we go forward.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: How does
that resonate with others?
How about SUNY Buffalo?
I mean Dr. Conway-Turner.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER: Absolutely.
I think that bringing on diverse
individuals to your campus
is certainly a first step.
But it's really
the cultural change
that needs to occur so
that once the person comes
on board that they
feel comfortable
and that this is a place
where they can thrive as well.
And that's a harder lift.
As difficult as is to
recruit outstanding folks--
to change the culture so
that they feel a part of it.
And I think that as leaders
throughout the CUMU network--
and our very
diverse environments
that we're a part of--
that we have to help
model that appreciation
for making those changes, those
cultural changes on our campus.
And one of the things
that I think is important
is embracing feeling
uncomfortable.
So a change does not
generally occur when everybody
is feeling comfortable.
So you have to
embrace that it is
OK to have difficult
conversations around racism,
structural racism, the
things you've been doing.
We've been around for 150
years, our campus, as well.
So things that you've been
doing for many, many years
if they are not
actually helping people
feel comfortable on
their campus then
you need different traditions.
You need to incorporate
different traditions.
And so I think that as higher
education institutions,
as leaders, we have to
give people the license
to have those
uncomfortable discussions
and to do things differently
than they've done before.
And that will help to
elevate a voice that
perhaps feels that no one
wants to hear from them.
Right now post the George
Floyd tipping point,
there are many different
new discussions
happening on campus
among faculty,
among staff, among
students to really
give legs to the
social justice that we
have been talking about.
Those are not easy discussions.
I can tell you there have been
some stumbles along the way
where people step into a space
and people misunderstand them,
or they really reflect some
bias in the discussion.
We've got to be willing to have
those discussions otherwise
white allies will not be
able to understand how
to be part of this discussion.
So it can't just be the
black and brown people,
as Thomas said, that are
having the discussion.
It's got to be everybody.
And so the comfort--
with uncomfortable discussions--
the comfort with having someone
say things that really need
to be called into question,
we've got to develop that.
We've got to develop
on our campus.
And from the rich
discussions we're
having now it's really
beginning to happen.
And it's all because of the
tipping point that we're in.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: One of
the things that I learned
a lot in the coverage of
development work in poverty
alleviation is bringing
change will never work
and behavior mod
will never happen
when people are shamed into it.
And I am just wondering whether
you can weigh in-- any one
of our four panelists,
or all of you--
on how you get the buy-in
from people who represent,
in whatever way, the
tradition or the status
quo whose earnestness and
good faith you have to assume.
And it's probably true
for the most part.
How do you get the buy-in
to suggest that yes there's
a bit of sacrifice?
Or perhaps the pie can
be enlarged as opposed
to divvied in smaller wedges.
Who wants to take
that one on first?
Go ahead.
THOMAS PARHAM: So one
of the things I would
I would say in
answer to that, Fred,
is that the goal of closing
the gap between aspiration
and actualization is
not a function of having
to shame or denigrate anybody.
I mean one of the fundamental
things I try to teach--
not only people in seminars
I write, or students I teach,
or even patients I've
seen over my life--
is self affirmation should never
be contingent upon denigrating
anybody.
And so part of what we have to
do is get to the deep structure
to first of all help
people learn that.
The other fundamental lesson we
have to help people understand
is that because you
stand up to say,
"I am pro something"
does not mean that you
are anti something else.
That is a mindset that
people have adopted.
That whenever you stand up
and say, "I'm pro-feminist"
you must be anti-male.
When I say, "Black lives matter"
it must mean that white lives
don't.
That's the kind of
intellectual gobbledygook
that people deal with all the
time that is really not true.
And so part of it is just
trying to help appeal
to the goodness of folk.
I mean the out-and-out
hood-wearing,
card-carrying Klan members in
the world are relatively small.
I think most of the human
condition is very, very good.
So part of my approach
would be to try
to appeal to the
goodness in people
to say that I believe you want
to be the best you can be.
And so the discussion is really
about trying to help facilitate
closing the gap.
And Kate is exactly right.
Freud used to have
a concept called--
that I'm blanking on now that
I'll remember in a moment,
but lay folk have a
much better expression--
Freud called a law of inertia.
But lay folks say, "If it
ain't broke, don't fix it."
If you can't make people
uncomfortable with what
it is they're
doing, then there's
no motivation to change.
Change comes from inside.
And so believing that people
have the out-and-out best
interest at heart of wanting
to be the best person, the best
institution they can be,
then part of our posture
has to be how do we help
you do what you already say
you want to do and believe in.
But you are struggling
with because I
can look at the gap between
what you say and what you do.
And the gap is too big.
And how do we help you close it.
That I think is a posture
that I would invite
us to think about assuming.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
Anybody have an anecdote
that might illustrate the
point of inclusiveness
in its grander sense of
bringing everybody together
and to see their
the better angels?
Any specific examples?
And I realized that
one may not immediately
pop to mind, but
especially recently.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: I
think that I might just
offer a quick sense--
I have the gift of--
I can use theological
language sometimes
in the context of my leadership.
On this what you're
really pointing
to is the difference
between people falling back
into a lens of scarcity
in everything they do.
That everything is about
loss as opposed to the notion
that we can actually
create abundance.
Very quick example--
when we started
to see the transformation
of our student body,
it's not that Augsburg didn't
have a commitment to diversity
but in fact hadn't seen the
kind of change in that profile
up until about 15 years ago.
So initially faculty were
like, "What's happening here?
This is changing.
This is changing the
nature of the classroom."
And what started to shift
there in the narrative
and in the culture
was the recognition
that those students
that were coming
to us from these different
backgrounds and different life
experiences were actually
bringing knowledge.
Bringing a ways of knowing.
Bringing life experiences
that actually enhance
the content of the classroom.
Made it a richer, more
robust learning environment.
And so in some ways
liberal arts we
get stuck in a particular
way of looking,
but in fact at its
base the liberal arts
is about what
Parker Palmer calls
"the grace of great things."
This notion that we
come around an issue
we bring our different
perspectives to bear.
And so very much in
keeping with that tradition
this notion of abundance
shows you that you actually
can create something.
And I'll quote our great
late Senator Paul Wellstone,
"We all get better when
we all get better."
I mean that was his motto.
And that's in some ways I think
a more positive way of talking.
But I think again shaming
is not the way to do that.
It's about trying to show
people evidence of abundance.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
I'm just going
to go back a little bit
to some of the things
that I heard in your
opening remarks.
And one of the things
that you mentioned,
Kate, was this whole notion
of having come to a point
and you say, "We
have not come along
as we thought we
might have come along
in the past half century."
And then go to St.
Louis and ask you,
Kristen, whether you
can tell us a little bit
about the proximity in
both time and geography
to a major triggering incident
like the Michael Brown one,
to say specifically
have you witnessed
changes on your campus
that are meaningful?
Are you seeing a lot of
complexity, texture, et cetera?
Give us a snapshot of what
the campus looks like today
that you might not have
witnessed a few years ago
pre-Michael Brown.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER:
So I think you
wanted me to start
with a few reflections.
I think that what's happening
is that people thought
we were farther along than we
were in the issue of breaking
down racism.
And the reality of
today has shown us
that we have a lot
more work to do.
But we have done some work
and we have changed some minds
and we have moved
ahead in some ways.
And one example was when the
George Floyd murder occurred
I called on my foundation
board to immediately develop
a scholarship in his name.
So that's the kind of
thing that sometimes
takes weeks to discuss.
We've got this person versus
that person, and whether--
It happened immediately.
And I think that that is
the moment that we're in.
That there are things that
are now clearer to members
of the community so that
it seems like, of course--
of course we need to
memorialize this event.
Of course we need
to symbolize that we
are going to be a better
institution than we
were before.
And of course, we're going
to establish a scholarship
immediately without
any discussion.
A unanimous vote,
and it was done.
A second example is that
my archivist found out
just a few weeks ago that one
of our buildings on our campus
is named for someone who
enslaved African-Americans.
We did not know this, so he
brought it to the forefront.
Once again the trustees
met the same week.
We removed the name.
We now will make sure that
when the building is renamed
it will be named for
someone who we really feel
is a hero or shero in our world.
So things are happening.
There is a lot more to be
done, but what I'm seeing
is that the speed
of which people
are willing to make
some changes has really
increased in the moment.
And that's why I say we've
got to capitalize on it.
And we've got to continue
to use this moment as a time
to make significant change
that will be lasting.
That we can't miss a moment.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
A perfect segue
to you, Chancellor
Sobolik, about what
is the arc of such an
opportunity before life
retreats to a pace that it
had before that opportunity?
KRISTIN SOBOLIK: Taking
a look at the discussions
that we've been
having on our campus,
we don't want to get life back
to the pace that it was before.
We can't step back into the
old ways of doing things.
And this is an opportunity for
all of us, both in our campus
and externally to our
campus, to address
some major structural issues.
And so the arc I think
is here, and it's
structural which
will be sustainable
as well as the cultural issues.
I'm a new chancellor.
I have been here I think four
months at the institution.
So I'm analyzing a lot of
what has been happening here
at the University of
Missouri-St. Louis.
All the great things.
And what we have seen and
what I hear people talk about
is, with regards to
Ferguson, how integral we
were in helping that community.
Because that community is us.
That community
through those times--
for example we provided
hundreds of hours of services
to area students and
teachers at that time,
and clergy residents.
We have a center
for trauma recovery.
But some of those
things have remained.
But keeping that
engagement in the community
is what we're trying to focus on
now so that we don't step back.
And being an anchor
institution we're very infused.
However internally now I think
putting inclusive excellence--
which is a part of our strategic
plan and we talk about it all
the time--
making sure that that is
what we're focused on.
So that it becomes a
fabric of our institution.
If we talk about it--
if we as leaders,
I think Paul talked
about leadership courage.
Making sure that we are speaking
about inclusive excellence.
We are talking
what we need to do.
And then infusing those
into conversations.
And then it becomes a
part of the reality.
I also wanted to reiterate
what had been said previously
is that we can't
be afraid to have
these difficult conversations.
And I think now people
are stepping forward
and are much more willing to be
in those uncomfortable spaces.
To have those difficult
conversations.
Because once you
open up that space
it is interesting and
generally positive
to see what actually happens.
And those sometimes have been
conversations or spaces that
haven't been open previously.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
How about some examples
of things that your eyes have
been opened to in the George
Floyd aftermath, or even
in the Michael brown,
although you're
a new chancellor?
I mean are there examples of
things you look at and say
gosh, we should have
been doing this all along
and we haven't been.
Visit failures, if that's
the right word for them,
and share a little bit.
By show of hands.
OK go ahead
KRISTIN SOBOLIK:
OK so for example
I have one internally
and externally.
But I'll start
with the external.
Being an anchor institution
and how involved
we are in the community,
one of the things
that I feel with St.
Louis, again being new,
is that we are very divided.
And we're not only
divided with regards
to the politics
and the economics,
but we're divided with
regards to the institutions
and the support structures,
the framework, of St. Louis.
So we being the
anchor institution
we should not just focus on
our immediate neighborhood.
We, I think, need to reach out
more and engage with the larger
institutions and
frameworks within St. Louis
to make positive change
across the region.
And I don't know why we
haven't done that as much.
I know that we're
new, and I think
we've relied on being new
to the scene for too long.
So it's time for us
to take our leadership
role as that institution
that is for change.
That is the diverse institution.
That is the public
institution in St. Louis.
And reach out to
our regional chamber
more, to the civic progress,
to the governmental structures.
And we haven't done that.
I guess you maybe
want a failure,
but it's an opportunity
for the future.
And it's past time for us
to seize that opportunity.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Any
other sort of swift kicks?
KATE CONWAY-TURNER:
Yes what I would say
is that we, unlike
Kristin, have been doing
a lot of work in the community.
But I think that our task
now is the internal work.
The curriculum.
The curriculum is
very hard to move.
And we have made some
marginal changes over time.
But already this
summer there have
been faculty coming
together to talk
about real significant changes
and pivots in the curriculum,
so that social justice
issues become something that
permeates each and
every student that
goes through Buffalo State.
So that's always been hard.
I mean they'll have every
fact I've [INAUDIBLE]..
This is not just
the whole state.
Is that you can
spend weeks, months,
years talking about
revisions to the curriculum,
and then you end up having
some very small tweaks.
And so I'm really thinking
that at this moment in time
there will be some
significant changes, based
on the energy and the passion
that I'm hearing from faculty,
around the need for
our students to be
better prepared in
understanding the real history.
The broad diverse history.
And not just the
Euro-American tradition.
And so I think that this is
going to be a moment that we
can really sort of make some
major curricular changes
to general education that have
been resistant to change--
of all of the five institutions
that I've served in--
has always been very difficult.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: And I
want to go to President Parham
next because it brings
to mind your agitation
as a young scholar, untenured
at the time at Penn,
for a curricular change
which has been instituted now
at Penn as you have pointed out.
But what about the
pace of change?
Did it take too long?
I mean that is a huge
factor as well, is it not?
Change needs to happen
at a particular pace.
How do you measure it?
And how do you decide
that it's adequate?
Can you shed a little
bit of light stemming
from your own experience.
THOMAS PARHAM: Thanks
for the question, Fred.
It's a great point because one
of the other pieces that Dr.
King observed in that Where
Do We Go From Here text
was not only what were
people prepared to sacrifice
in the context of trying
to push equality in terms
of the whole society, but
for the more radical element
among the people in the streets.
Were they prepared for
the pace of change?
And the pace of change at that
point was very, very slow.
So for me as a
young scholar when
I entered the University
of Pennsylvania--
this is early '80s now.
1982.
I'm a brand new PhD,
27 years of age.
And I'm told--
I didn't know this
before I went.
I don't know if I'd have went
there if I knew this in advance
but-- and I probably would have.
I loved being at Penn.
It was a great institution.
It still is.
But it was in a space of being
the first African-American
academic psychologist the
University of Pennsylvania
ever hired.
So as I'm now part of a faculty
who is training counseling
psychologists to go out
and deliver services--
these are masters and
doctoral level clinicians that
we're training in
that department--
I asked a question as a simple
query in a faculty meeting
to say, excuse me, but we
live in a city this 44% Black.
Philadelphia had just gotten
its first black mayor then,
in Wilson Goode, from the
days of Frank Rizzo who
was known to have a
whole different posture.
And I said the American
Psychological Association
whose ethical standards
that we adhere to
suggests that one
should not practice
outside of one's competence.
So how do we train
doctoral students
to go out and render
psychological services
and care to a
population and you have
no courses in
African-American psychology,
or any multicultural counseling.
Somebody help me
understand that.
And even colleagues who
were friends whispered to me
and they said, "By
the way, that's
not a way to make tenure."
So part of the challenge that
I had to be able to navigate
was not just I think the
correctness of the argument,
but also what was I prepared to
sacrifice in order to use that.
Because what most
of us do is not
have a question about what
is the right thing to do.
Most people can know that.
I think most people have a
pretty good moral compass.
But it's what are you prepared
to sacrifice and give up when
you get to those positions?
And so for me what's
dangling into my nose
as a young scholar is- will you
make tenure and get promoted?
What's dangling at
the end of my nose
is- you're an Ivy
League professor now,
can you keep your job?
And maybe I was
confident enough,
perhaps even arrogant
enough, to believe
that as long as I'm right
and do my scholarship,
I would be there.
Sheldon Hackney was
the president then.
Tom Ehrlich was the provost.
Wonderful individuals.
Both of them white males.
Very much had a social
justice conscience
when they were there.
And in fact, even
in my wife, who
happened to be the
Affirmative Action
Officer at the University
of Pennsylvania
back at the time, who was
doing some magnificent work out
of the president's office and
trying to help the institution
to be more better.
And stopping those
kind of surges
you were talking about earlier.
Those are the things I think
that were going on then.
It just allowed us to raise
the question about what
we were prepared to sacrifice.
And I'm reminded always about
the words of the great Algerian
psychiatrist Frantz Fanon, Fred.
Because what Fanon argued,
which is a question
for all of our participants
on the Zoom call
today and the webinar.
Which is- if each generation
has an opportunity
to fulfill its legacy
or betray it, then part
of what we have to get up
every day and do as presidents,
and as deans, and as
administrators, and as provost,
and as department chairs,
and as faculty is are we
prepared to fulfill or
betray the legacy that we've
been blessed to inherit?
In my life, Fred, if
I go back in history
it would cost me my life
if I knew how to read
and the slave master found out.
Literally cost me my life.
So I go to work every
day with a mindset that
says how dare me not be
willing to sacrifice something
like tenure or a job, and
believe that I somehow
can't get a job in any old
place around in America.
Because I'm too afraid
and scared to do that.
The ancestors who came over in
the hulls of those slave ships,
right, were the
best of what we had
to allow us to survive and
assume this place of mastery
over the world
that we now occupy.
I can't do any less.
And I think our
institutions can't do less.
But the fear is real.
And the consequences are real.
The question is are we
prepared to just sacrifice
what it is that we have
in front of us in order
to try to push
the margin, to try
to create a more better
society and a better union?
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: I want
to get to the question
however of gauging the pace of
change and its appropriateness.
Is it going to take
a generational shift?
Is there patience for it?
It will never
happen at that rate.
So I mean what is an
acceptable change of pace?
I mean how do we get beyond
the tyranny of incrementalism
if you will, of
cosmetic changes?
Or changes that happen in the
wake of very emotive incidents
like George Floyd.
How do we sustain them?
And how do we measure
whether they're
changing at a pace that points
in the direction of equity?
PAUL PRIBBENOW: I might
just weigh in on that
because I want to go
back to Kate's point
about there are certain things
that we are able to do now
quickly because of this moment.
I think as a president
what I am focused on
is thinking about what are those
things that we can do quickly
that actually plant
a seed that actually
will grow into something
sustainable for the future.
That's why I see this moment
as particularly poignant
because we have a
chance to do that.
And I'll give you
a quick example--
two quick examples.
For us we had a
proposal that had
been moving through its process
over the past 10 or 11 months
to create a new Critical
Race and Ethnicity Studies
program at our institution.
Something our students
have been asking for.
That could have taken years.
But when it came forward
at this moment, I said yes.
Provost said yes.
We agreed to hire three faculty
members, and by the time
we get to this
point next year we
will have a Critical
Race and Ethnic--
I mean that's unheard of in
the context of the academy.
We do a lot of interfaith work
because of our neighborhood,
and we're doing
remarkable work right now
on the intersectionality of
race and religion especially
with our Muslim neighbors.
Thinking about racism
and Islamophobia.
That's work that is being
energized by this moment.
Again going back
to a combination
of where we are in
place, but also I
mean that's work that
had been coming along
and it wasn't that we
weren't doing good work.
But it's now has a whole
new sense of urgency to it.
Funding coming in to
help support that.
And that's the kind of thing
that I think from a leadership
standpoint to think
strategically about where
you can plant those seeds now in
this moment to allow something
to grow and become sustainable.
That is-- you know this, Fred--
that is remarkable
in the context
of a higher education setting.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER: I want
to just build on that point.
I agree with everything
that Paul said.
That this is the moment when
you can really plant the seeds.
But also we're all
in the industry
of looking toward the
future with our students.
So it's going to
also be sustained
if we do what we need to do
to make sure our students are
prepared to lead in
courageous authentic ways
as they move forward.
And so to me that's what
gets me up every day
and gives me energy,
is to realize
our students are the future.
And that we have the opportunity
of planting the seeds
in our students to make
those tremendous differences
and sustain them.
And so that's really a blessing
to be in higher education.
Because right in front
of us in our classes
we see how we can actually
make this continue on.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: May I
just jump in on that topic
because I think that's
really great, Kate.
Because of our population and
because the Twin Cities have
so many large corporations,
Fortune 500 corporations,
I've actually had more
access to HR offices
in some of these
big companies than I
might have had 20
years ago, because they
see our students as the future.
And I've got to tell you--
for all the equity
of work that we've
done, the inclusion work
we've done with our students,
with our faculty and staff
over the past decade-- when
I walk into those
offices and they
talk to me about our
students being prepared,
I have to ask them, "Are
you prepared for them?
Are you, a corporation,
are you prepared
for a student who in
fact has been shaped
to think about these questions?
Has been equipped and
educated to come in and make
change happen?
Are you ready?"
And I hope that one of the
things that's coming out
of this moment is I hope
that the corporations
and the businesses
that are claiming
to take this moment seriously
will take it seriously, and do
what they have to do to become
spaces where our good students
who come out shaped and
educated, informed to be
able to care about
these issues, in fact
are going to find a place
where they can pursue
that work in a healthy way.
And I just think there's a
real interesting moment here
that we can't control.
But I think that
we can certainly
encourage with our colleagues
in the business community.
THOMAS PARHAM: Fred I would also
add to what Kate and Paul have
just said, because I think there
are a convergence of factors
right now that make this
specific point in time,
at least in my lifetime
on this planet, different.
Because people are
much more engaged
and motivated to change.
I mean when we go back to
the George Floyd's situation,
you go to almost the
depths of despair looking
at the inhumanity that was
reflected on to George Floyd
by that police officer.
And not just him
but the other three
who stood around and looked
and watched and acted
like somehow that was OK.
That's just the level
of human degradation
there is just something.
But you go to the
height of feeling
empowered when you
look at Black Lives
Matter activists in
the street joined
by Latinx folk, and Asian
folk, and white folk,
and old and young and seniors,
and men and women, and gay
and straight.
And there's a coalition of
people rising up to say,
yes Black Lives Matter
in the context of that.
I mean that's what's changing.
And so even for us here
in California for example.
As I put together this Race
and Reconciliation Task Force--
that later changed its name
just within the last month--
I have faculty saying I
want to be part of that
because in our department
of dance and theater
they had their own
task force where they
were working on this issue.
And in another department
they're looking at it.
And I challenged
the Academic Senate.
In our legislature
right now there's
a debate about whether we should
have an Assembly Bill 1460 that
talks about a mandate of an
ethnic studies course that
would impact the CSU.
Some other resistance
has not been
on the substance of
the bill, but rather
on the legislative intrusion
into the curricular affairs
that really are the
domain of the faculty.
But short of that it also is
an indictment of those of us
in higher education who haven't
done the job we should have
done, that would invite
the legislators to come in
and say look we'll
do the job for you
if you're not prepared to.
But what I've
challenged my team to do
and I've challenged
my Academic Senate,
I've challenged
different departments,
that even if the
bill were successful
one course does not a culturally
competent individual make.
And the level of cultural
ignorance in this country
is so pronounced
right now about people
who are culturally
different that we've
got to be able to train folks
who are much more culturally
competent.
So I've challenged
our faculty to say
I don't want to
follow the leader,
I want us to set the curve
on what it is that we ought
to be doing as an
academic institution
to create a new generation
of students who are more
culturally competent.
And it's in everybody's
best interest to do that.
I mean Fred, I have,
as my colleagues
here that are on this
panel, probably more
degrees and letters and
awards behind our name
than most people have
fingers and toes combined.
We've had blessed lives.
But if I take off my Dr. P
label and my coat and tie,
and I walk down in my
sweat suit, my Nike,
and I'm on the
street I see people
who will come and have literally
crossed the street when
they see me coming.
Will keep going, and
then we cross again
when they think it's safe.
Because on television the only
three images you can see is--
of a black man in
particular-- is you
either got to be an entertainer,
an athlete, or a criminal.
And I've got to believe
that if they thought
I was an entertainer
and an athlete somebody
would be running to
get my autograph.
What they're running
from is somebody
who they think is a predator.
So I can't be Dr.
Parham on the street,
or when I get
stopped by the police
and they say get
up against the wall
and throw a racial
epitaph in my way.
And growing up in LA that was
part and parcel of what LAPD
was like back in the day.
I've been in those spaces.
So I empathize with that.
But I think I've seen a
coalition and a coalescing
of different elements
now in society
that are going to accelerate
the pace of change,
if we're willing to do
and join with our younger
generation of people
who are really
showing amazing courage
right now at being
able to lead this fight.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: OK.
I would suggest to you as we
start to wrap up and wind down
that we are in a more polarized
time than you suggest.
And despite the coalitions
you see coming together
which are very, very visible and
arguably very powerful we are
in an election cycle in
an extremely politically
polarized time where we're
talking about housewives
in the suburbs--
the President of
the United States
has said he has pledged
to protect from low income
people and crime.
He's describing your
geography in many ways.
The geography of your campuses.
How do you navigate
the world outside
of the nurturant campus,
the bubble if you will,
that all of you have created?
And I'd like to go to
you, Chancelor Sobolik,
because you've
seen a lot of this.
You're in a fraught
environment in Missouri,
politically speaking.
How do you navigate the world
out there at a time like this?
KRISTIN SOBOLIK:
Getting back to what
Kate had said about the
leaders right now I think
are our students.
And the best way that
we need to lean in
to navigate that environment
is through our students.
When you take a
look at St. Louis
and the University of
Missouri-St. Louis,
75% of our students live
and work in St. Louis.
They have internships and
jobs out in the corporations
in the broader area.
And they're the
presidents and CEOs
and CFO of those corporations.
So having our
students on our campus
take that leadership role.
As they turn into alumni
they are out in the area.
And they are successful in
taking those leadership roles
and then coming
back and reaching in
to embrace our students.
I think that is one
of the best ways.
Is having our successful
students there.
Listening to them
and having them lead.
But it is beyond our
reaches of our campus.
I think that's where it
gets more treacherous.
And I think for us as leaders
we need to model the behavior
and be as positive as we can.
And making sure that
we are moving forward,
our institution.
And putting our inclusive
excellence speech and framework
where we go.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: I want
to dive a little more deeply
and personalize it a little bit.
As a white leader in a
politically polarized time,
in a racially polarized
time and race and politics
have mixed to toxic levels by
some descriptions arguably.
Can you give us some
personal insight
into what that is like
from your vantage point
as a white leader.
A white female
leader, if you will.
Anything that you can
share with us that gives us
a sense of perspective.
And I'd like others to weigh
in as well from where you sit
KRISTIN SOBOLIK: Well
as a white leader
I'm very aware of the
institution that I lead.
I'm very aware of my
privileged background
and where I sit not only as
a leader but as a white woman
within our organization.
So I lean and work
with and make sure I
am having a lot of conversations
with our leadership team.
That is a diverse team.
I'm making sure that I
am making conversations
and having input with
the region as well.
So I think what's most important
is to be very aware of yourself
and what your failings
are-- might be as a leader--
but what also your
strengths are.
And I think having an open mind.
Building very diverse teams.
Thinking about
inclusive excellence
as the fabric of
everything you do.
I think that has been
important for me as a leader.
I'm new as a chancellor.
So I'm excited to
learn about St. Louis.
Reading a lot about
the history, but also
relying on the people
who've been here
and can better help guide me.
And to understand the region.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: It's not
as easy as you make it sound,
is my guess.
What's been difficult about it?
KRISTIN SOBOLIK:
Well right now what's
been difficult is making
sure that I know who
what the different political
lay of the land is.
I had also previously
talked about the divisions
that we have in St. Louis.
We have a lot of municipalities
here in St. Louis County.
And the division between St.
Louis county and St. Louis city
has been interesting
to navigate.
But making sure that I'm
making the connections
for my institution.
We had a previous
chancellor before me
who had been chancellor
for 16 years.
And so I would say at this point
in time some of the biggest--
I guess hurdles or obstacles--
things that I focus on
in my everyday existence
is maintaining and reengaging
those important connections
for my institution
and for my students.
Particularly at a time
in which we are remote.
We have COVID times.
We have very tumultuous
times but at a time
when things are
changing exceedingly
quickly than previously
talked about just the time
frame for change.
Things are changing drastically
right now, which is amazing
considering that frankly
we aren't most of us
physically even on our
campus at this point in time.
So keeping up with that all.
Being as positive as
I can and making sure
that I'm listening
to thought leaders
not only across the
nation but particularly
within my institution.
So that's the most challenging
thing for me on any given day.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: One
of the guiding discussion
points that Bobbie
Laur laid out earlier
is the whole discussion of
addressing the institution.
Its efforts to change
an oppressive system
that the institution
itself helped
create in the first place.
And Paul Pribbenow,
tell us a little bit
about how you earn credibility
leading up to this moment.
I mean, how do you
earn credibility
in communities where
presumably that
wasn't abundant to begin with.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: Right.
Now it's a great question.
And Kristin-- to build
on what she said.
I mean this is first and
foremost personal work
that I have to do for myself.
I mean, I grew up in
situations of great privilege.
And I've had to come
to fully realize that.
And we put in place a whole
variety of tools on campus
to help our campus.
We require that every
faculty and staff
member take the IDI, which is
this Intercultural Development
Inventory.
We develop plans
to help them grow
in their intercultural
competence.
So there are things we
can do institutionally
but personally I am
having to do that work.
And I think that what I have
learned in these 15 years
at Augsburg is that both
personally and institutionally
you have to come to this work--
this important anti-racist
work-- with a
epistemological humility that
doesn't come naturally to
the academy, let's just say.
I always say that we have
to get over ourselves.
And I think about that
both internally in the ways
that this work gets done
and how we do navigate.
I mean so we're bringing
right now for example
our Chief inclusion
Officer and a team of folks
are interrogating every policy
and practice that we have
in place administratively
and academically
through the lens of equity.
And what they're
finding is again
a whole variety of inherited
traditions that just nobody
went back and looked
at, but they in fact
are obstacles to creating
the kind of anti-racist work
we have.
Kristin has pointed a
couple of different times
to Missouri-St. Louis'
role as an anchor.
That movement which many of us
are involved in through CUMU--
thank heavens for
their great support--
in fact has as its core an
epistemological humility that
as we come to the table with our
partners in the neighborhood--
and this is for me one of the
things that's certainly serving
us well at the moment--
with a sense of mutuality.
Not that I come with expertise
that I impose on my neighbors,
but I come with self-interest
but also seeking shared value.
And I think that's a very
powerful model for us
to think about in any
of the work we're doing
but especially in this time.
When I come alongside my
primarily Somali Muslim
neighbors we think together
about how we can create
a healthy safe neighborhood.
I've got to give up
something in order
to be a partner in that work.
To walk alongside and to
listen carefully to them.
And so I think that notion
of humility in the ways
that we approach
this work is just
critical on both the personal
and an institutional level.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: One of
my most vivid recollections
from years of doing
development work-- and this is
an anecdote I'll share from
years ago in South Sudan where
the Carter Center is
doing a lot of work
in the eradication of a
condition called Guinea worm.
And it is an
extremely distressed,
extremely remote and war
torn region of the world
and difficult to work in.
And the Carter Center
success, according
to its Medical
Director Don Hopkins,
is being a good listener.
And the one thing that he
said that really stuck with me
he said, "All of us as
humans, no matter what
our background, how
much we are educated,
have a sixth sense
for condescension."
And there's a lot of it
in the world out there.
And I suspect part of being
a good listener is that.
I'd like to hear from Presidents
Parham and Conway-Turner
on the issue of race at
a very personal level
as you come to the
table to negotiate
with the community at large and
try to build this mutuality.
Let's go with you first,
Dr. Conway-Turner.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER: And so
we're situated in a very diverse
community, right.
On one side is what's
called the west side, which
is a very international
immigrant community.
On the east side is a large
African-American community.
I grew up-- actually
Kristin knows--
I grew up near her
campus in Missouri
in a small town and
a very poor area.
And so I actually find it
myself easy to integrate
with my diverse
communities around me.
Both my lived experience as
an African-American woman,
lived experience
of a struggling--
in terms of poverty--
really allows me to relate well
with the diverse communities
that are around us.
What I find interesting
is not falling prey
to being naive about the
divisions that you mentioned
earlier.
We are an extremely politically
divisive country right now.
And I know that my
colleagues tell me
that people will say things
to them, my white colleagues,
that they would never say to me.
And so I have to
listen very carefully
to understand the undertone of
what may be the bent of someone
who really is seeming positive
toward what I'm talking about,
but in reality may not be.
And so it takes a different
kind of political savvy
and understanding when you're
a person of color that it is.
So we both have
work to be done when
we work with our communities and
representing our communities.
But I think it's different
work for someone who
happens to be in my package
than maybe Paul or Kristin have
to face.
But when I'm working with
people that feel differently
about my community
or diverse people
I really take an educator role.
And I want to give them
all the good evidence
of why they need to support
our diverse community.
And that I don't
give up on people.
And so maybe you don't
come to the table with me
on this issue, but I'll
keep working on you
and hopefully I can find
some common ground that
will allow you to support
our students, our community,
and the way that CUMU
campuses really do.
Reaching out and
becoming anchors.
But it is different
work when you're
a person of color than
when you're someone like--
and the dynamic is different.
And you don't always hear
the upfront things, so.
THOMAS PARHAM: Yeah I
would echo, I think--
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
That sounds very tiring.
KATE CONWAY-TURNER: I
sleep very well at night.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: A
lot of heavy lifting.
THOMAS PARHAM: It is.
It is heavy.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: We're
coming to the end of our time
very soon, but in short how
do you sustain the stamina.
Let's go to President
Parham on this.
And I suspect he
speaks for many people.
How do you sustain the
stamina and lead in the midst
of these polarized times?
THOMAS PARHAM: There's
an old gospel tune that's
a favorite of one of my
mentors Forest Mitchell
that talks about, "some time
I don't feel no ways tired."
And so when I think about
contextualizing struggle.
In my office I used
to keep a picture of--
in fact it's in my faculty
office at the University--
of the ancestors in
the slave dungeons
in Elmina in Cape Coast.
And I keep a picture of
Malcolm and Martin with me.
Because it always reminds me
as a leader to contextualize
struggle.
And so if you
understand what people
had to go through to
get you to this place,
then that provides me with
the internal motivation
to not be tired at
inconvenience, when for them
what they were dealing with
really cost them their life.
So it isn't for me even equal.
But engaging the
community is a tough one,
and I want to be
quick about this
because I know our
time is limited.
But what I try to do is assess--
One of my teachers,
the great Joe White,
an African-American
psychologist, taught me--
He said, "One, you should
never seek validation
from your oppressor."
One of the most fundamental
lessons that he taught me.
But he also said that any
system that you go into you
have to assess where are
your allies and where
your alligators.
And it didn't
matter whether I was
at the University of
California as a student,
or whether I was at WashU in
St. Louis as a graduate student,
or in Illinois in Carbondale.
Whether I was at Penn,
or back at Irvine,
and now Dominguez Hills.
Or down in the community of LA.
Across the basin there are
always allies and alligators.
So I try to stay away from the
alligators play to the allies.
Because there are plenty
of allies who are there.
So when I go to the LA Economic
Development Corporation,
when I go to the LA
Area Chamber of Commerce
and look at their
leadership, they're
willing to collaborate around
a whole range of things.
So I spend time with
the allies and not much
with the alligators.
But also people are looking--
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
[INAUDIBLE] the alligators?
THOMAS PARHAM: Say that again?
FRED DE SAM LAZARO: You have
to deal with the alligators,
don't you?
THOMAS PARHAM: Sometimes you
do, but sometimes you don't.
I think about the kind
of energy that is there.
Again my assumption,
right or wrongly,
is the out-and-out people
who are the hood-wearing,
card-carrying Klan members
in the world with the cone
on their head are very few.
That most of the people
there are fundamentally good.
And it's about inviting
them to do that.
The racists in the
world are not big.
It's there are not enough
anti-racists in the world who
are willing to
engage the struggle.
So I'm really playing
to that piece.
Even in the polarized
elections, you
have folk on the left and
folk on the deep right.
We're not in a fight for the
folk on the deep right, when
a president says I
could shoot somebody
in the middle of Times
Square and people will still
vote for me.
I can grab women
by their privates
and they will still vote for me.
That crowd is just hook, line,
and sinker in that space.
I'm in that middle space trying
to talk to those people who
at least have an open
mind to say look,
let's take a look
at how this works.
But I want to say
that for me we've
got to teach people,
one, to listen.
Cornel West reminds
us about listening
to the psychic scars, and
the ontological wounds,
and the existential
bruises that are
so much a part of the fabric of
our circumstance and situation.
If we can get our colleagues
to listen that's good.
Secondly, we want to invite our
colleagues to be risk takers.
They have to fundamentally
be risk takers.
Mental risk to
think differently.
Verbal risk to say something,
even if it's stupid.
And on the off-chance
that people
will trust that your
intent was honorable
even if you make a mistake.
And we also have to be
behavioral risk takers
to think about, as
all of our colleagues
said today, doing
something different.
And lastly, we've got to
be able to hold people
accountable in ways in
which we haven't been
holding them accountable
before for the change
we expect to see.
And it's that
accountability measure
I think that is the single most
important ingredient missing
from a lot of the Inclusive
Excellence and diversity
conversations that we have.
Because if any of us are
$100,000 in the hole in a year,
our jobs are on the line because
they value fiscal integrity.
But if somebody doesn't reach
a diversity goal, who cares?
That's what we
have to do is hold
people accountable for
the change we want to see.
FRED DE SAM LAZARO:
On that note,
we're going to have to bring
this session to a close
unfortunately.
And unless any of the other
three of your colleagues
have something that's just
itching to get off your chest,
I will say--
I don't see evidence
of that right now--
but I want to really thank you
for a spirited conversation
which, as I said, on the
CUMU platform can continue.
And it's an ongoing
one and I hope
that amongst yourselves you'll
have an exchange of ideas
to take this forward.
Stay tuned, as they say.
So once again Dr. Kristin
Sobolik, Dr. Paul Pribbenow,
Dr. Thomas Parham, and
Dr. Kate Conway-Turner,
thank you so much.
Thanks also to
Bobbie Laur at CUMU.
And to Debbie Dar and Mike
Mullen for enabling all of this
to come together.
Thank you so much
and all the best.
PAUL PRIBBENOW: Thank you.
THOMAS PARHAM: Thank you.
