Transcript of Dean Guterman’s Report Back Monday, November 23, 2015 4:30 - 5:30 pm, SSA Lobby
The following is a transcript from the first 45 minutes of the first report-back event/community forum hosted by Dean Guterman in response to the report submitted by the summer Task Force for Radical Transformation and the spring 2015 petition “From Good Intentions to Meaningful Action.” We will follow up with video – and with the remaining ten minutes of transcript – shortly.
UPDATE: watch the Community Forum video HERE
UPDATE: full video transcription now available below and HERE. Visit “Forum Transcripts and Videos” section for all contents (photos too!) of community forums.
[CAMERA STARTS] Dean Guterman: …and then also we will open to a longer set of discussions and opportunities for you to share your experiences. And we are joined by Karlene Burrell-McRae who is the… I don’t know the exact title. But it’s from the Center of identity and Exclusion… uh Inclusion, right? Right? That’s right. OMSA. Office of Multicultural Student Affairs. Is it still called that?
Karlene Burrell-McRae: That is one of the offices.
Dean Guterman: One of the offices, sure. Karlene will help us in facilitating the Q & A and the discussion amongst us. We appreciate you helping us out. Karlene did a wonderful job last spring, in facilitating a community conversation near the end of the year. Okay so, Celia did you want to say a couple of additional things?
Dean Bergman: Sure. Hi everyone, I am Celia Bergman. I didn’t get to meet the first year students at orientation so I am very very happy. You haven’t really seen a lot of me yet but you will probably see more of me now that I am back from China, getting back in the groove here. I just want to take a couple of minutes and actually, there is a nice warning sign here up on the window that this session is being videotaped and recorded and Dominique, can you raise your hand over there? There she is. So, please take note of that, if you are going to speak when it comes to the Q & A please take note that you will be recorded, okay?
Also Joe is also taking some notes and compiling those notes and making sure that that is available. And when we get to the Q & A and as Dean Guterman said, Karlene will help facilitate that portion. We do have time constraints but we would like to provide an opportunity for anyone who doesn’t have an opportunity to actually stand up and ask a question, to make a comment. We are going to pass around some note cards and ask that you please fill out the note cards. We will collect those, make sure that we take a look at all of your questions and feedback put it together with some answers, and then disseminate that to the community as well. We want to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to have their voice heard, okay? Alright. Back to Dean Guterman.
Dean Guterman: I just want to say also that during the Q & A, I mentioned that Professor Samuels is here to check in about the task force. So if there are specific questions regarding the report, Professor Samuels or other members of the task force, please feel free to speak up in response to that. If there are questions around climate or programming, Dean Bergman can certainly speak to that. Questions around curriculum, Deputy Dean and Professor Tina Rzepnicki and I, of course, are happy to weigh in.
So, many of you are first-years so let me give you a little bit of background from my point of view of why we’re at this point, and why we’re here. I’m sure there are others that will share their viewpoints as well. As you may know, my email that went out about a week and a half ago referred to a student petition that was circulated last year that was very astute, very thoughtful, and essentially said that while we have good intentions particularly around issues of difference, diversity, power, and privilege, that we are essentially not walking the walk, that is that in the curriculum of the school, in the climate of the school, we talk about justice, we talk about humane society and advancing a humane society. But the students who signed the petition last year essentially said to us ‘You can do better and you should do better.’
And if fact, I agree with that. So that’s a starting point, but I should say that the story goes further back. I won’t go into too much detail, but there have been versions of this conversation at this school for a while. And I also want to go back to, not way back, but this school was founded and our mission statement says that we do have foremost, front center, values on advancing social justice and on advancing a humane society. That is in our mission statement. It is embedded within the genetics of this institution. The founding mothers of this school came from Hull House, as you know, and wanted to create an institution that not only worked passionately and tirelessly to do that, but that did so by professionalizing social work, did so by advancing how we actually affect those charges is through rigorous analysis, through thoughtful, deliberate action, through testing our ideas, through bringing evidence to bear, because if we align all of those ways of thinking and formulating our approaches, then our work is going to be more impactful. Our work is going to be more valuable. It’s going to at the end of the day serve the cause best in advancing social justice and humane society.
Now that, of course, is something that we believe in, we affirm, and we try and realize and renew that aspiration every single day in this school, into the present, and it is something that we do need to continuously work on. Are we there? Are we a perfect institution? I would say, we’re not there yet. But we should continue to strive tirelessly to do that, and I would say, as I think I’ve said in my email, that we’re really works in progress, as are all of us, I think, that we’re all striving to effect those very important aspirations. In effect, I think part of, in my view, of why students last year pulled together a petition and received many signatures from their colleagues, from fellow students and alums and faculty, is because while internally we have been discussing and concerning ourselves with issues of power and privilege and oppression, sometimes we effect that –
Student: We’re not starting this off on the right foot. My name is Peter and I’m a student representative of the Elephant. And before you continue, we need you to acknowledge that nothing has changed. First-years are entering into the same environment second-years entered into last year. Students are still being harmed here, and this is because you are not acknowledging that this is a structural issue.
Student: As you can see on this wall over here, we have what first-years have shared with us about our experiences here. I’m going to read a few just to provide us with some context on what’s been going on in the first year: ‘As a pastor on the South Side of Chicago, the communities I serve experience poverty, violence, death, police brutality daily. It is paramount that these conversations are wrestled with and reflections of these issues be continued and expressed. However, this institution closest to the community is not doing this, and the students are not seeing this yet.’ ‘Discussions around de-centering whiteness, especially discussions in the anti-oppressive frameworks class’ is also something that should be highlighted. ‘As a first year student, race was a topic in many of the classes but it wasn’t until Week 8 that we even talked about race specifically within the culture of SSA.’
Student: Dean Guterman, we represent students who are really disappointed, and we find it kind of ridiculous that you’ve convened this community meeting without consulting the very students you mentioned who put together this petition and worked in the ad hoc committee with some of the faculty members. We would like to acknowledge that you did send an email to the leaders of these certain student groups that are represented here today, two hours ago while most were in class, and you invited us to talk with you after one of these meetings. While that is nice, we are really really upset with you for not having consulted any of these students ahead of time in shaping this conversation.
Student: The plan is to give you back the floor now, but everybody in this room needs to acknowledge that students are still being harmed, and that’s because we believe the administration has not been thoughtful at all about your own identities in saying that we don’t have a structural problem and saying what ‘academic freedom’ is meant to serve, what that means from you as a white male leader of this institution. I also think it’s important that when you give us the commitments that we’re moving forward with, people need to walk away knowing who they’re going to be able to hold accountable for these things, and when we’re going to see them. Second-years will not accept being weeded out.
Dean Guterman: Thank you. Thank you for that. I intended to speak to issues of structural oppression and race, and I would like to have a chance to be able to talk about plans. You’re right that things have not changed overnight, that’s true. And there are plans, and there are things that we have done and begun to roll out, and there will be more things we will roll out. And if you’ll give me a chance, I think I’ll tell you why we’re in a problematic state that feels injurious –
Student: We’re not talking about overnight. It’s been six months. You had all summer to convene a meeting. And it’s been years. You’ve been here for years. It’s not overnight. You don’t get to represent it that way.
Dean Guterman: Okay, I appreciate that. Okay, so urgency is of the day. I totally appreciate that. We’re pushing on a number of things, and again if you’ll let me talk about some steps, I’m more than happy to talk about things we’re rolling out, things we are changing on, and things that we’ll continue to do, okay? And again what I also want to do is provide opportunities to hear more not only from student groups (who, yes, I do very much want to meet) and from students who were represented on the task force report, which I did meet with, immediately after. You were at the meeting, as were a number of you. So I have met with student groups and I will continue to –
Student: By when, Dean Guterman? When is your deadline? Who will be carrying these things out?
Dean Guterman: Which things?
Student: You say you hope to address these issues. By when and by whom? We saw your email of recommendations, but there were no deadlines. There was no designation as to who was going to carry those things out.
Dean Guterman: Again, I appreciate that. So we were going to nail down some deadlines on some of the action steps. So, if you will let me talk, I would appreciate – Just give me a moment and I’ll be happy to hear your questions and comments. So, remember, on September 30th I – Let me go back. At the end of the school year, when I asked for a task force of students, faculty and staff to come and put together recommendations that included how we arrange our internal school so we can better take up these concerns, because I don’t think we’re well-positioned to do that. And the task force worked very hard over the summer, which I very much want to acknowledge. They worked very hard over the summer and put together a very thorough report that you’ve all received now. As of September 30th, I received it. And what I did is I brought the report to the full faculty of the school, because while you’re asking me to be the one to respond, the school is governed by the full faculty of SSA. I’m the leader here in the sense that I’m the chief academic officer, but decision-making and policy is set by the faculty of the school.
Student: So then why don’t all of your professors know about the anti-oppressive cohorts? All of them don’t know about it. We’ve had them say that in classes. If they’re governing, why don’t they know?
Dean Guterman: Can we take that into the Q & A or discussion? I don’t know whether that’s true and I can’t respond to it. I won’t respond to it. I prefer to take that to the Q & A please. Okay? So following from the task force’s report which had recommendations with it, the task force itself recommended that this be responsive to a fuller scope of SSA constituents than were represented in the task force. Which is why we’re having the meeting here, because I wanted to provide an opportunity for students to share their viewpoints, and not just within the task force itself. So if you’ll give me a moment to review briefly what was in the report itself and the recommendations following from the report that we have run and vetted with faculty and with the senior administration of the school:
First of all, as I said earlier, I don’t think the organization can respond quickly enough, can respond robustly enough to the concerns that you are taking up. And as Dean of the school, I think we need to build in an organizational platform to be able to move robustly, and we don’t have that. I’m in agreement with you on that. So what we will do as we move forward is setting up a standing committee of the School of Social Service Administration, and it will be staffed with faculty, students, and staff who will take up these concerns. We’ll take up the report of the summer task force, and we’ll take up the concerns you all are raising tonight and that were raised before. That will add the organizational heft; that will add the clout for us to be able to move assertively forward, as you’re asking us to do tonight. And I appreciate that.
One of the first assignments of this task force, if you will, will be to identify, to begin the search for a senior administrative person who will implement and help move forward on the agenda around issues of difference, diversity, oppression, and so forth, both in the curriculum and in the climate at SSA.
Second, as I mentioned in my email, I’ve already asked the curriculum policy committee to take up this content in the structure of the curriculum of SSA. So right now, like last year, the Curriculum Policy Committee was reviewing the structure of the curriculum and now I’ve asked them to be sure to fold into their revisions and considerations how we take up issues of difference, diversity, power, privilege, in the content of the courses and in the structure of the curriculum.
Thirdly, we have now placed students on the Curriculum Policy Committee, so that students’ voices can be heard as they’re being heard tonight, in the deliberation of the curriculum itself, so that as we are actually moving forward in revising the curriculum, students can inform and apprise in that process.
Fourth, as I mentioned in my email, we’re planning trainings and faculty development opportunities. And right now we’re in the middle of planning our annual faculty retreat, and that will be the primary target of conversation. But it’s not just going to be a one-off conversation in how the faculty take up these concerns; it’s how we teach in the classroom. And that will be the beginning of a number of faculty development opportunities.
Fifth, as I’ve said in my email, I’ve asked that the Dean of Students Celia Bergman to begin a review and a revision of student grievance procedures so that the due process steps and procedures are clarified, so that they’re fair, so that they’re transparent, so that the grievance review process is rigorous and fair.
Sixth, as you know and have heard about recently, a student-run Election and Rules Committee completed its work reviewing and substantially clarifying rules and procedures around government and student elections. Last year there was some contention around that, and we wanted to review, revise, and make sure the procedures were far more clear and explicit so that disputes will be much more easy to manage.
And finally, as I said in the beginning, we will create other community venues around opportunities for students to come together to share what’s on their minds and to continue conversations. There’s a few that are in the works that Dean Bergman may want to mention . You’ve received an email about it recently. So we’re working on a series of additional community opportunities for you all to discuss. Okay?
But I do want to do want to go back to – I understand that we need to do something now. I hear you. I understand the sense of urgency. I appreciate you putting a fire under our feet. But we’re moving – Maybe we’re not moving as quickly as you’d wish us to, and I understand that. An institution like this does take some time. We are a deliberative body. I know you may not be sympathetic to that, some of you who have spoken, but we want to do this right. We want to this in a way that is enduring for SSA. And we don’t want to just rush in a way that’s going to end up creating more problems than solutions.
Student: By when and by whom?
Students: By when and by whom!
Student: By when and by whom?
Students: By when and by whom!
Student: By when and by whom?
Students: By when and by whom!
Dean Guterman: What part of it?
Student: All of it. When and who?
Dean Guterman: I’ll go through some details. So, as I mentioned briefly, the important point about setting up the organizational piece is the committee, and we’ll compose that so that they’re ready to go by the next quarter. Okay?
It will take a little while for, um – Let me phrase it this way. Hiring a senior administrator requires going from a job description, which there was a draft of in the report, to posting the position, then resumes, then doing interviews. That will take a few weeks to play out, to identify and hire that person. We want to get the right person in. I understand the whim to want to move now. You want to nail me down to dates. I get that. But we also want to do this in a way where we get the right person in.
The Curriculum Policy Committee, I’ve already charged with that, with going through and taking up diversity content. Do you want to talk about timing, Tina?
Tina Rzepnicki: Well, we’re in the process of reviewing our curriculum, and have begun the conversations both within the committee and outside the committee between meetings to figure out how to best incorporate, how to best infuse content relevant to issues of oppression, discrimination, and privilege. So we’ve already started talking about that. Students have been involved in those conversations. We meet again next months, and we just had a meeting in November. It was the second meeting of the quarter. We only meet monthly but there’s a lot of work that’s done between our meetings that hopefully will move us forward in an efficient way.
Dean Guterman: So we’ve included students in the Curriculum Policy Committee. That’s something we’ve already done. We are planning our faculty retreat. I’m actually meeting with the Deputy Dean of Faculty Development Harold Pollack, and tomorrow we will set a date for the faculty retreat. It will probably occur in the winter. Dean Bergman, do you want to talk about our review of student grievances and procedures and the timing of that?
Dean Bergman: Sure. Well, I’m actually really looking forward to working with the new standing committee on policy revision. And I’ve been gathering materials from other academic institutions here at the University of Chicago as well as our peer institutions, specifically on grievance, both academic as well as non-academic. The Law School has some great materials on this as well. So I’m really looking forward to the work with that standing committee. So once that standing committee is formed, we can get up and running with some of the policy revisions.
Dean Guterman: On the review of the Election and Rules Committee, that committee has already completed its work. We have moved on a few things. Without a doubt. And we will continue to move forward on more things. As Dean Bergman mentioned, there are also some community forums that are being scheduled in the future. So I think that at this point, I think that’s what I wanted to report back to you. And Karlene, did you want to help us facilitate the discussion now, even though we’ve already had some?
Karlene Burrell-McRae: Well, good evening again. I’m Karlene. What’s interesting in sitting here in this moment is understanding and appreciating?
Students: Karlene, can you talk into the mic? We can’t hear you.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: Can you hear me now? Okay. Thank you. …is yet again, as I think I said months ago, is having to acknowledge the pain and frustration of the students.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: I think it’s also important for us as administrators again to not be surprised that our students are doing what they’re doing. I don’t know any institution or significant movements that happen without significant push. And the truth is, perhaps it shouldn’t be the case but this is where we live. Right? This is where we live. So let’s just sort of name that and be present in that. I certainly appreciate and I think I can say on all of us that we do appreciate the pushing. And I think I said when I was here, for those of us who are first-years, that even though I’m on the other side of the Midway, we all have some responsibility to bear in this. It is not just what sits on this side of the Midway. And so all of us have to find more innovative ways to be able to make sure that what you all are coming into, all of you are getting. What we say you’re getting, you’re getting. And if you’re not getting it, obviously, that we are continuing to listen to what it is you all are offering and finding ways to share what is being done.
And if it can’t be done, to be able to say that too and why. Because that’s also part of this narrative. Some of what it is we need and want may not happen. But we ought to be able to offer and be transparent about that. So I appreciate those of you who have already stood. I have to say, I think the activism is important. And we can’t and ought not to silence. So I do appreciate your willingness to be here and to stand and to continue to share because if we don’t do this, I’m not sure where we will be. So I want to start out that way and say, you all have half an hour left and my understanding of it is that you all have classmates that have class at 5:30 so it’s a hard stop for some of you. But if other of you want to yet again share where they’re at, add additional constructive criticism of where we ought to be, I think this is the continued time to do that. And I’m going to ask that people just be mindful so we can keep this moving.
Student: We just wanted to share a few statements from a first-year student who didn’t feel the forum was a safe place to share this vulnerability. These are around structural issues at SSA: ‘SSA as an institution is not committed to anti-oppression values. This is a problem, since it is part of our ethical code. In my experience we spend so much time devoted to “vulnerable” populations without those voices in the classroom. And we never address ways to dismantle white supremacy in our practice. We teach to and for white students. We need to change this. In class we have been told that issues around privilege and oppression can’t be the main focus, because there are too many other subjects to tackle. This makes no sense. Students need practical skills addressing privilege, power, and oppression in their work. Furthermore, students are aware that certain professors were met with resistance when they tried to integrate anti-oppressive practice values in their classroom. What kind of message does that send students? Students are hungry for this perspective in the classroom. They desire a more critical lens than what is being offered. Why not give it to them?’
Student: And I will be continuing this statement: ‘SSA has no transgender awareness or competency for its students nor for in teaching students how to work with trans individuals. I have been mispronouned multiple times by my field officer, which was why she is unable to advocate for me in my homophobic field placement. SSA gave the wrong university health insurance to the wrong gender marker, so my insurance does not cover necessary care. SSA has so many resources and access to knowledge that this is really quite ridiculous. Professors have no idea how to teach students how to support transgender individuals in the field. Professors either ignore the questions students ask surrounding the transgender community and/or teach on a gender binary in their classrooms. Finally, after being in the field for a number of years I have seen the damage many social workers do in the transgender community and communities of color. These issues aren’t isolated in SSA. SSA is sending out into the world without the proper tools. And then those students are hurting many of the communities they came to support. SSA needs to address these issues with haste.’
Karlene Burrell-McRae: There isn’t a particular question there, but I wondered if there were some comments that you’d like to make around what was just said.
Dean Guterman: I think right now is an opportunity to do more listening. I appreciate the comments. They’re very, very important. And you’re reinforcing for us what we need to do more of. And I appreciate that.
Student: So part of this is a statement and the other part is a question. Coming to SSA, I think I have had certain professors who have actually empowered me to speak up when I told them about experiencing microaggressions, and I really did appreciate that. Had not these professors told me to keep speaking up, I would not have taken the opportunity to do it. But I also want to point out that I think the curriculum is also a way of censorship. It’s predominantly white. It implies that there are not social workers who are Asian, who are Middle Eastern, who are black, who are latino, who are trans, who are sexual minorities that have significantly contributed to the field of social work. And I feel like that’s very problematic. And I wonder: Is there a lack of self-awareness on the committee side of people’s identities, since maybe their identities don’t fall in line with one of those things? That when the curriculum is being made people are only thinking from their perspective or from their line of experience. And my question is, I’ve noticed that bell hooks is used for two of my classes, but it’s the same exact article! And I’m like, she has written how many different things, you know? But none of the white authors are used in the same classes for the same purposes. So again I feel like it’s a form of censorship. I don’t know if it’s intentional or not but as a student of color, it feels like my voice is being silenced.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: I hate to put folks on the spot, but there are administrators and faculty members that are here, so as you hear students make comments or ask questions…Yes it’s a moment to listen, but you have a lot of people here. I think there are a lot of opportunities for you to respond in some ways.
Gina Samuels: So my answer to your question could be three hours, so I’ll try to make this quick. I think it comes from a lot of places. I think censorship is one place. I think identities, lack of knowledge, lack of using diverse scholarship and ways of knowing in our own research is how then we show up in the classroom. So I think, what happens with the bell hooks thing is something like this happens, then a list of readings happens, and professors think they can just solve this problem if I just use this reading so I’ll use it all the time, and then I’m safe. So I think it’s an oversimplification and a misunderstanding of what the problem really is. And that much of what you all talk about as a classroom problem is actually a bigger and deeper problem of who we are and where we are in our development, that then trickles out to you. And then you see it in the classroom. But it’s far deeper than just how we teach. And so while I don’t believe in trickle down economy in other contexts, I do think there’s something to be said about what really is the core issue here. And how that then shows up in everything that we do. And it’s far bigger than just fixing things with a reading list.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: Can I ask you then to say what you think the core issue is?
Gina Samuels: I think the core issue is the racism, the sexism, the homophobia inside of us –
Student: Thank you for naming that!
Gina Samuels: – and how we show up in our scholarship and how we show up with each other and how we show up as colleagues. And then how we show up to you in the classroom.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: Thank you.
Student: So Dean Guterman, one of the recommendations in the task force was the need for an assessment, the need for an evaluation of SSA. I was wondering if you could speak to that, and when this will be done? A needs assessment was one of the recommendations in the task force report. And the other thing is in the last meeting we talked about shared governance. And I appreciate that students are part of the Curriculum committee, but I wonder how that will look in the other committees. And that students aren’t just advisors to the committees but could be a part of the shared governance of this institution. As students that come here, I think we need to be a part of the table. Personally, that’s how I feel. You want us to advise you. You want to get our input. But you don’t want us to be at the table.
Dean Guterman: I wouldn’t agree with that last comment, that we wouldn’t want you to be at the table. We do want you to be at the table. That’s why we started with bringing students onto the Curriculum Policy Committee, the new standing committee, we will have students on that committee. So we want students on that committee. We want students to advise and to be a part of the decision-making, part of the process of identifying new strategies and implementing new strategies. So I hear what you’re saying about governance, and I think is part of why we’re including students now on committees that we weren’t before.
Student: Can we spend some time where we will part of the school governance, though, and not just a part of the Curriculum committee, but the actual governance of the school?
Dean Guterman: The school is governed by committees.
Student: That’s what I’m asking. When can we have representation on the different what is called “faculty” committees, which hopefully will change. Are we going to be able to serve on those committees?
Dean Guterman: Yes, on the committees that I mentioned, that’s right. There are committees like making decisions about tenure that the university would not permit students to sit on that committee. They certainly would permit students to advise and provide input, but the university just simply would not permit that. So whether you’re comfortable with that or not, that’s just the world we live in.
On the issue of the needs assessment, my view of that is that this standing committee that will have students on it, and faculty and staff, will take that up, to do an audit or a needs assessment or whatever that language is, to study what are the problems, to identify where are we falling short in a concrete, evidence-informed way. So that would be part of that committee too, to take that up. I don’t think that we’re properly arrayed. And I think that that committee would be the right body to do that.
Student: How will the committee be selected and will students who serve on it be compensated and will the faculty who sit on it only be faculty of color? We see this constant cycle in institutions where the burden is often placed on students of color and faculty of color to address institutional, structural problems. My concern, and I’m sure the concern of many others is also…[CAMERA STOPPED]
[CAMERA STARTED BACK UP] Dean Guterman: …It’s all work that we do to advance the governance of the school.
Student: Yeah, it’s real social work that we’re not getting paid for.
Dean Guterman: You’re right. It’s a service to this school and a service to the students.
Student: But we’re the only ones paying to be here. What are you talking about? You guys are getting paid to be here. We are paying to be here. We are going into debt to be here. So you talking about us not getting compensated is a completely different issue than you not requiring people who are already paid to be here to do their job.
Karlene Burrell-McRae: If you give me one moment, this person has been waiting to speak.
Student: If you leave the future of this school to a committee of ten or twelve people, it’s not going to work.
Dean Guterman: I know that.
Student: So solutions to issues within SSA cannot only be solved by people within SSA. This is why the Elephant and why the organizations that co-signed the petition, and why the summer task force we were a part of asked for an external needs assessment –
Student: – to identify structural issues. So I guess I’m just asking you: How are you planning on fixing our structural issues?
Dean Guterman: That’s a grand question, in which there’s lost of sub-steps, right? There are many issues that have been raised, clearly, and there are multiple strategies to address them. So whether the evaluator is external or internal, that’s a good question. I know the committee recommended an external audit, an external evaluator, and I certainly think that’s something worth considering. I think there are advantages and disadvantages to that, but I also want to hear colleagues weigh in on it as well. Not only the report of the summer task force, but I also want to hear others’ voices on that. But I think that’s a tough question: What’s the best? Who should do that?
Karlene Burrell-McRae: May I ask if that came up at all when you had your faculty meeting, in terms of the assessment piece and whether it’s internal or external?
Gina Samuels: I think one of the challenges of answering that question is that the faculty were given that report on a Monday for a Wednesday meeting. And so many of the faculty arrived to that meeting not having been moved to respond to that. So we haven’t truly had the opportunity as a faculty to be able to really read it, to really engage in all the items.
Student: Excuse me. Why is that, since you had the report already?
Dean Guterman: As I said earlier, what I was doing was sending…vetting the report to different segments of the SSA community, so I was –
Student: I understand that, but I’m saying, if you had the report for weeks, how long did it take you to vet, knowing that your faculty was meeting, if they were only going to have two days to read a 50-page report?
Dean Guterman: Because I wanted to get feedback from the senior administrators of the school first, so we could then frame and present it to the core faculty –
Student: But if the faculty govern the school –
Dean Guterman: I’m sorry, can I please finish? Please? The faculty are also going to take this up in the faculty retreat. We’ve talked about doing this at the retreat.
Student: I just don’t feel like it was a fair expectation to give them two days to read the report, so that you could have a meaningful discussion about it. And that’s the part I’m confused about. Was your intention not to have a full, meaningful discussion at that meeting?
Student: So I just want to go back to the question that was presented by the transgender student. I think it was brushed under the table. So specifically for me, I actually experienced my own form of microaggressions within the first week here. And I actually had to go out on my own to discuss it with someone else. However for me, I want to ask three questions I think are really important to be addressed, not swept under the rug or not answered but actually have a few answers, like actually right now. Because specifically, my money as a transgender student on this campus, on this space right now, is just as important as everyone else’s.
So what kind of training are staff and faculty being provided with when it comes to interfacing with students regarding their gender identity and gender expression?
Dean Guterman: I can tell you. That’s one of the places where we’re not where we should be. There’s not training yet but we will build that in. So I appreciate you asking that question.
Student: I’m just going to ask another question because I haven’t quite –
Karlene Burrell-McRae: Go for it.
Student: How are faculty and staff reflecting on their own privileges and biases? I think that part needs to happen. I think it’s really interesting how I’m in an anti-oppressive frameworks class and I’m doing a lot of reflecting, however the faculty that are teaching it haven’t even done the reflecting. That speaks volumes. Are you even reflecting on your own power and privilege when it comes to teaching us with your own materials?
Jessica Darrow: I believe that right now I am checking myself, and my bias and my privileges, and sort of my place and orientation. Not necessarily because of my leadership here or my training that I’ve had - I haven’t actually had any training to lead in the classroom. My training came from being a student here and now it’s coming from you all, and your bravery and your pushing and your demand is what’s around me to check my power, privilege and assess myself. And so far, that’s kind of it. I have models from amazing faculty that I did take classes with. I was also a student of Gina Samuels. I was a student of people who didn’t do it as well and that was part of my training. And now it’s you guys all insisting that I do more. And so I’m looking to my peers and my leadership to say “give me more” because I’m a new teacher and I need to get better.
Beth Ann Jacob: Hi all, for those of you who don’t know me, my name is Beth Ann Jacob. I am a cisgender female. I have been affiliated with SSA on and off for about 22 years. I was a PhD student here for about 9 years and now I am a full-time lecturer. I do want you to know that I echo everything that Jessica just said, that the bulk of what I would consider my profound learning experiences as an educator have come in the last year and a half from being here, from my students, from being challenged in the classroom for trying to have the humility to shut up and listen and teach with not teach at. And to answer very specifically your question, for those of you who wrote your identity paper in your 301 sections, I actually wrote one myself. I think all of us who gave that assignment have gone through the process of having to force ourselves to write that paper. I”m trying to work through the degree to which I want to share that. I’m rather convinced after today that I maybe should make that a public document over break, but I appreciate your question. Again, I’m here with tremendous sadness that much of what we have done has failed you. But I am as committed as I can be to being an ally in the position that I hold.
Student: So my last question, it’s actually a rhetorical question in fact. Why do students have to experience violence at SSA and also experience it at our field placements?
Dr. Karlene Burrell-McRae: Because I’m thinking of time, I’m going to give this person the last comment or statement or question to make.
Student: So I actually want to direct my question more towards first year students. It’s kind of a two piece. First, I want to know, as first year students coming into this meeting, how aware did you feel of the issues that are going on at SSA as in the administration telling you, or just overall how did yall feel coming into this meeting?
Student: I feel very blind walking in here. I’ve heard some stuff here and there from students mostly. But coming here, I feel like I’ve walked into this room and it’s laden with tension and frustration and hurt and pain. I’m just sitting here wondering if we want different things. It seems like we want the same thing. The problem seems to lie in the timing. Hearing you say “by when and by whom” seems like it’s been a long way per you second years. I almost wonder if there was like three things you were like “this could change, this could change, this could change,” like very specific things you would want to see change, I wonder if the staff would disagree and say “No we want those things to remain the same.”
Student: So I don’t have an answer to that because I’m a first year. I’m going to go ahead and ask my second part to first years again as well, and obviously to the administration if you feel the need. How do we hold accountable our administration and really keep that in mind, and just acknowledging that resistance doesn’t mean we are completely shutting them down. It’s agreeing that we want to see change and we are going to demand change and fight for that change by any means necessary honestly.
Student: Hi everybody. I’m a first year student as well. I think (inaudible) question get’s to the point that there’s a lot that happened last year that folks don’t know this year. I had the fortune of taking a lot of classes in the spring and winter quarter last year. One of the questions I have is, and I think that it might actually be to his point. We now have a very real source of information. The Elephant has basically put together a realsocialwork.tumblr.org site. A comp site that has a detailed background and history as a way of keeping the information going over the course of the past year and that’s a way we can keep as a catalogue for the future. My question is would the administration be willing to the same kind of thing, placing something on the website of the Social Service Administration site so that they are 1) keeping themselves accountable for the work they’re saying they’re going to do, and 2) not only that but also very specifically timelines and requirements over who is going to do what, and 3) to convince the sort of continuing of lets meet, get together, asking the same questions over and over again, pulls to the very forefront for everyone to have a sense of transparency and communication over what’s going on.
Guterman: Yes, we’ll post the statement, we’ll post the steps as we’re going forward on the website so that there’s transparency so you can hold us accountable. Second question was, I’m sorry.
Student: That is the question. Basically (inaudible) from what I understand the (inaudible) document, it’s not synthetic. So as we ask questions, as you say “we’re working on this right here,” sort of making that catalogue that here on Monday November 23rd 2015 we said we are working on this as a way of keeping us accountable.
Guterman: Yeah, we’ll put that on our website and put updates and so forth. The Elephant has its website and hopefully they’ll be in alignment. We’ll work to try to align them.
Student: They won’t be because you lie.
Guterman: Alright well I understand there is some upset feelings. I understand (inaudible). So we’ll try. I’m sorry but we’ll try.
Dr. Karlene Burrell-McRae: I will say in thinking about closing, the piece that continues to resonate is this - where many of us continue to keep talking about - is this idea of distrust right. I think that is something to name, it is a feeling, there’s a sense of not trusting. It is hard to say, for folks who continue to sit in misery, to be patient. I think we have to recognize that and we have to hold to that. What I would say is that at the end of the day we are gonna have to wait and see, right? It doesn’t feel good, but I think the only way is to continue to communicate with each other that the only way we’re gonna see any kind of trust is to see movement, is to see movement. It is fair to say that there are some things that are not going to move as fast as we want them to move even though people continue to be negatively impacted by them. But I do think we’re all here because we want to hold each other accountable. I know that’s why I came back over here since April. I do think collectively we are working to try to move the envelope. So I appreciate the continued suggestions even though I equally acknowledge that yall are not being paid for it, that’s always the quandary right, in terms of having to make these offerings. But what I do think, what I have to believe is that you all have made a beautiful point of how important this moment continues to be and that we can’t just sit still and have to sort of have to keep this moving. I continue to look forward to where we are going to end up collectively, how we are going to be thinking about faculty of color, how we are going to think about continued requirements or expectations, where expertise is coming from other spaces, how we’re able to bring in folks who may not look like us that still care deeply about the work. There are many of them here at SSA, so how do we draw in folks because people don’t always have to look like us to show that they care deeply about issues of social justice. So I’m going to encourage us to also hold onto that, as an administrator and also as a social worker, to continue to be reminded that we too must continue to self-reflect. That’s something else we should all be walking out of here with. We’re always moving but we also need to sort of pause and do some reflection of both the good we’re doing but also the harm we could be imposing on the very people that we’re trying to partner and work with. I thank you for coming and for sharing. Let’s hope we can have additional movement the next time we meet together. Good night.
