UPDATE: University of Michigan’s Discrimination Against Professor Emily Lawsin
FACT SHEET: THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN’S DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PROFESSOR EMILY LAWSIN
For the past 18 years, Emily Lawsin has been an influential Asian American scholar and teacher as a full-time faculty member in the Department of Women’s Studies and Department of American Culture at the University of Michigan. Professor Lawsin is an expert in the study of women of color, Filipino Americans, immigration, feminism, and community activism. With her classes in high demand and regularly oversubscribed, she has received multiple awards and recognitions for her teaching and public service. On a campus where students of color are severely underrepresented and regularly report enduring a hostile climate, Professor Lawsin is a much sought out and cherished mentor. She is an acclaimed poet and widely hailed for her public speaking, social justice work in Detroit, and national advocacy on behalf of Filipino Americans and Asian American women.
EMPLOYMENT STATUS: U-M DISTORTS LAWSIN’S RECORDS AND DISREGARDS UNIVERSITY PROCEDURES
Professor Lawsin’s “Level IV” lecturer status, the highest rank for lecturers within the university system, guarantees a “presumption of renewal.”. This is the closest thing to tenure. Therefore, her two departments took an extraordinarily adverse action when they twice voted to recommend her termination in November 2017 and February 2018. The College of LSA did vote to terminate her in March 2018.
Revoking her right to a “presumption of renewal,” Professor Lawsin’s departments conducted her most recent review as though to build a case against her renewal. They overlooked overwhelming evidence of her scholarly merit. Distorting her record and repeatedly violating multiple university guidelines and procedures, the departments have issued the following so-called core evidence against Professor Lawsin:
a) The departments claim that Professor Lawsin focuses too much on “the Filipino experience” in her classes.
b) When taking sick/medical leave that was fully reviewed and approved by the university, Professor Lawsin was then accused of causing a “disruption” to her classes. The departments further cite a drop in student course ratings as evidence against her — when, at that time, Professor Lawsin was ordered off work by her doctor during a high-risk pregnancy and gave birth to a child with Down syndrome and potentially life-threatening health conditions.
c) The department chairs exposed Professor Lawsin to discrimination and retaliation by adding improper and inflammatory “supplemental” materials to her review file that disclosed her medical history and included extensive personal correspondence highlighting policy disagreements she had with current and former department chairs.
RACE/GENDER DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION
Professor Lawsin has made multiple complaints to university officials indicating a hostile race climate at U-M and a pattern of racial discrimination in faculty retention within the College of LSA. The Department of American Culture has terminated or failed to retain 20 faculty of color since just before she was hired, leaving white employees overrepresented among the senior faculty and leadership. U-M has gone to great lengths to disregard this revolving door of faculty of color and deny its relationship to disparate treatment.
The department stigmatized the most vocal graduate students and faculty of color, deeming them the source of the “climate problem.” On the other hand, it promoted white faculty who were the subject of complaints of racial insensitivity or complicit in covering up harassment of people of color. Departmental leaders introduced biases in PhD admissions against “queer of color” and undocumented students. To prevent an honest and transparent discussion of its problems, the department censored and distorted official climate studies and reviews, while secretly communicating a narrative rooted in white fragility to senior administrators.
U-M’s FLAWED RESPONSES TO SEXUAL ASSAULT AND HARASSMENT
Based on surveys and assessments endorsed by the administration, over 3,000 students are sexually assaulted each school year at the University of Michigan. However, U-M’s Office for Institutional Equity found only five student sexual assault violations in the past year. Moreover, senior administrators have pressured the Department of Women’s Studies to stand by U-M’s failed actions and policies to combat sexual assault and harassment. Professor Lawsin has been subject to retaliation for her proactive advocacy to address these alarming problems. In Fall 2015—before the #MeToo campaign went viral or the Larry Nassar scandal at Michigan State University was exposed—Professor Lawsin, as an elected member of the Women’s Studies executive committee, made a motion for the department to issue a solidarity statement with sexual assault survivors and call for more effective action from the university. Contradicting its mission stating that it is “dedicated” to feminist “activism” and committed to “challenge power inequities,” the Department of Women’s Studies rejected her resolution, effectively covering up UM’s flawed responses to sexual assault and harassment.
UNDERMINING ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER AMERICAN STUDIES
Professor Lawsin played a central role in rebuilding the Asian/Pacific Islander American Studies Program, which has been repeatedly undermined by loss of faculty, decline of public events, and the refusal of U-M leaders to appoint a director with research and teaching experience in the field. Professor Lawsin has presented evidence that senior administrators and faculty have violated U-M procedures and bylaws in appointing directors and marginalizing her presence within the program. Students and alumni, who have been shut out of meaningful involvement in the program, have circulated an open letter calling for faculty hires, resources, accountability, and external review. Representative Stephanie Chang, alumnus and elected member of the Michigan State House of Representatives, has also issued a pointed statementx in response.
ONGOING CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE
Every attempt Professor Lawsin made to have these matters investigated or redressed by her supervisors and senior university administrators resulted in dismissive or retaliatory action. One department chair scolded her in writing for using a “tone” characterized as “uncollegial and troubling.” At the same time, department chairs endorsed senior faculty writing emails and making statements defaming Professor Lawsin behind her back.
For these reasons, Professor Lawsin was moved to file a civil rights lawsuit against the University of Michigan in December 2016. The case, currently in discovery, effectively functions like a class action lawsuit. Vowing to fight “vigorously” against the legal complaint, U-M is actively repudiating the civil rights of faculty of color at the same time that President Mark Schlissel is directly engaged in extended negotiations to uphold the rights of white supremacist Richard Spencer. Professor Lawsin and co-plaintiff Scott Kurashige are working to expose university-wide practices and the conduct of senior administrative leaders to scrutiny within the justice system. They are seeking transformative structural changes to ensure equity and inclusion for all members of protected classes.
For more information:
74-page complaint—filed in Washtenaw County Circuit Court on December 5, 2016
To sign the petition in support of A/PIA Studies: https://www.change.org/p/fully-restore-university-of-michigan-s-asian-pacific-islander-american-studies
Update on Kurashige and Lawsin v. University of Michigan
On December 2, the lawsuit brought forth by Professors Scott Kurashige and Emily Lawsin went to trial. After several weeks of arguments and cross-examination, we are now awaiting the final verdict to be delivered by the jury. We share a direct update from the students who have been closely monitoring the court proceedings below. Please stay tuned for updates on the lawsuit.
A Message from University of Michigan A/PIA Student Activists:
After closing arguments on Wednesday, the jury will resume at 8:30AM on Friday to continue deliberating whether the University is guilty of multiple counts of misconduct regarding discrimination against Emily Lawsin and Scott Kurashige. The #UmichIsComplicit campaign would like to take this waiting period to thank every single student, community member, and alumni that has contributed to a powerful presence in court, on social media, in the news, at events, and many other countless measures to support Professor Lawsin and Professor Kurashige. The impact of student pressure on the University during this case was evident, which is a small win that we should celebrate.
Overall, the University’s closing arguments were filled with false statements that held no water and only served to propagate white supremacy and ableism: stating that the University adhering to the disability act is them being “generous,” and alleging that there was absolutely no discrimination at all - citing that it is not possible for people in American Culture to be discriminatory or racist because their work is “fighting for minorities and their plights.”
Further, University lawyers used some of their limited time to attempt to discredit student advocates who have been involved in these A/PIA Studies “personnel affairs,” which is fallacious when most of this campaign’s organizers are enrolled in A/PIA Studies, hold Asian American identities, and/ or are our allies. The A/PIA Studies program’s existence and growth has been and is in direct tandem to Asian American and Pacific Islander student activism, so discrediting student advocates in A/PIA Studies personnel affairs is a fallacious attack that displays a lack of understanding on how to support our program. Student activism founded HolidAPA, created the minor, has led to most every faculty expansion, including the present push for ethnic studies sub majors - though much of this work has been claimed by the University. The University’s attempt at erasure and to discredit student activism organized around A/PIA studies is not only fallacious, but also indicative of the Administration’s hypocrisy. If the students that have taken classes and minored in A/PIA Studies do not have a stake in discrimination regarding faculty that have taught and mentored individuals in the program, then the vast presence of faculty in court is completely unwarranted.
Yesterday, high ranking faculty, from former and current American Culture chair Gregory Dowd and Film, Television, & Media chair Yeidy Rivero, sat in the courtroom stands while laughing out loud to each other as our lawyer was detailing the emotional and financial damages regarding Professor Lawsin, according to multiple student accounts. From the chair of the American Culture department that houses the A/PIA Studies program, to the chair for the Film department that neither Professor Lawsin nor Professor Kurashige are affiliated to, this Administrative faculty’s exhibition of this racially charged behavior in front of A/PIA Studies students is inappropriate, especially when the University lawyers invalidate student advocates. We have been watching those who have been fighting against us and this case, and we will not forget. It is an expectation of Asian American and Pacific Islander submission to think that we would not have merit in resisting these strong, widespread institutional forces that are working against us.
The University’s contradictory strategies to manipulate A/PIA Studies were uncovered through their lawyers’ closing arguments today, which would not have been possible without the willingness of students to support this campaign for years, including now through the time of classes ending and finals. Instead of wondering why students were pushed to act, the University attempted to submit our own statements and social media posts into evidence, arguing that we were being puppeteered by Professors Lawsin and Kurashige. We have been strong advocates because Professors Emily Lawsin and Scott Kurashige are undoubtedly fighting for students, despite the accusations and arguments from the University. It is the University that is hurting students, specifically A/PIA Studies students, through this process. And as we have discovered from the depositions, students are being hurt throughout our campus at the actions and inactions of our administration. We must be prioritized, and we must continue to stand in solidarity and fight alongside faculty who fight for us. The verdict is no longer in our hands, but regardless of the result, we celebrate the education and passion that has resulted from student activism, and we look forward to continuing to work together against a University that is against us: and in support of those in our community.
University of Michigan continues pattern of rewarding faculty and staff who have been charged with discrimination
The University of Michigan Regents recently approved the surprise appointment of Anne Curzan to be the head dean of LSA (Effective Sept. 1, 2019). Curzan had previously been Associate Dean for Humanities in LSA where she oversaw American Culture (AC). She also oversaw Professor Emily Lawsin's failed lecturer review (because the associate dean of Social Sciences was from Women's Studies and had to recuse herself). Curzan played a central role in the improper appointment of John Kuwada to be A/PIA Studies director, covered up the violations of bylaws in his appointment, told the faculty on LSA's executive committee to ignore Emily Lawsin's legitimate complaint because she had a lawsuit against UM, then admitted in a smoking gun email that she was abusing attorney-client privilege to cover-up the cover-up.
All this makes Curzan's appointment, which is scheduled to take effect on September 1st, incredibly controversial and improper. Additionally, when LSA promoted Curzan to be head Dean, they moved the chair of American Culture (Alexandra Stern) into Curzan's former position as Associate Dean for Humanities (the first time anyone from AC has held this position, so it is not a coincidence), and they brought back Gregory Dowd (who removed Scott Kurashige as director of A/PIA Studies) to be interim chair of AC. Such actions suggest that U-M only trusts white people who have been charged with discrimination to be in leadership positions.
The following summarizes information related to Curzan’s misconduct in the public record:
Under Curzan’s Leadership, LSA Retaliated Against Professor Emily Lawsin
Curzan’s favorable treatment of the white male faculty member who admitted to sexual misconduct stands in stark contrast to her treatment of Professor Emily Lawsin, a women of color who is an expert on race and gender and has been highly sought out as a mentor by students of color. After Professor Lawsin made complaints of a hostile race climate and discrimination against herself and other minoritized faculty and students, Curzan played a central role in imposing discipline and moves to terminate Professor Lawsin based on fabricated allegations and flagrant violations of LSA procedure. Curzan and the department chairs who reported to her insisted that the bogus disciplinary actions against Professor Lawsin were central to her review for contract renewal in 2017-18 and that they overshadowed her excellent scholarly record. As a result, LSA denied her standard 5-year reappointment, meaning that she is subject to dismissal in 2020 and was denied even the normal raise she was due to receive.
Curzan Helped Cover Up Discrimination and Misconduct Within American Culture
After Professor Lawsin attempted to initiate a formal investigation into the discrimination and hostile climate that she and many others endured, Curzan played an integral role in the sham “administrative review” of American Culture and A/PIA Studies during the 2015-16 academic year. Violating University procedures for investigations and standards of neutrality, this sham review doctored statistical evidence to cover-up racial disparities in faculty retention and reported that whites complained of being bullied within Ethnic Studies programs. The sham review, whose conclusions Curzan fully endorsed, also covered-up all evidence of complaints against white department chairs and senior faculty that had been raised by numerous sources, while reporting in a Trump-style, knee-jerk reaction that Professor Lawsin and her partner were the ones responsible for the hostile climate within American Culture and A/PIA Studies.
Curzan Promoted White Faculty Charged with Discrimination
In the aftermath of the sham review of American Culture, multiple faculty and students currently or formerly affiliated with the department have come forward to deliver sworn testimony and written statements to the problems with discrimination and hostile climate that Curzan has refused to acknowledge or remedy.
Kristin Hass was charged by multiple PhD students of color and faculty of color with abusive, discriminatory and/or retaliatory conduct as an instructor (2009-10), chair of PhD admissions (2012-13), and Director of Graduate Studies (2012-15). Curzan rewarded Hass with a promotion to a leadership position within LSA, where Hass now oversees millions of dollars of grants for the Humanities Collaboratory. On top of the serious complaints from people of color, Hass’s academic record is marked by noticeable lapses, which should disqualify from continued employment, let alone leadership, within the University. Hass has never published a journal article throughout her entire academic career. Most disturbingly, Hass admitted under cross-examination that she was Improperly enrolled in the University’s American Culture PhD program for 2-3 years prior to completing her B.A. degree and that she has never previously disclosed this wanton violation of academic integrity and misrepresentation of credentials.
As American Culture chair from 2007 to 2013, Gregory Dowd was extensively criticized by AC faculty for his “nontransparent and undemocratic leadership” and chaged with discriminating against multiple faculty of color seeking retention offers. In his treatment of women he outranked, Dowd was prone to be “insensitive,” “hostile,” “argumentative,” “visibly angered,” “very upset,” and to raise his voice with no awareness of the power imbalance. Curzan recently appointed Dowd to return as interim chair of American Culture, marking 12 consecutive years of white faculty chairing a department whose faculty and PhD students are majority people of color.
Curzan Undermined the Asian/Pacific Islander American Studies Program
Through 2013, the University of Michigan’s Asian/Pacific Islander American (A/PIA) Studies Program was recognized nationally as a leader in its areas of scholarship and was widely supported by students and alumni. However, the program suffered severe losses of senior faculty and a sharp decline in activity after LSA to silence A/PIA faculty and students who reported problems with discrimination and a hostile climate. Curzan’s retaliatory acts have occurred in response to Professor Lawsin’s exposure of LSA’s misconduct regarding A/PIA Studies. In particular, Curzan acted to ensure that LSA’s Executive Committee approved the appointment of a Director of A/PIA Studies whom the University admits has no record of research or teaching experience in the field and, in fact, “doesn't know the content of the courses” in the program he directed.
Curzan Has Undermined Faculty Governance
The University’s principles of Shared Governance state that the faculty hold “primary responsibility” to make “fundamental” academic decisions based on scholarly knowledge and expertise. There now exist in the public record smoking gun emails that Curzan, in May 2017, directed the faculty elected to serve on LSA’s Executive Committee to ignore evidence that Professor Lawsin presented, which demonstrated that the Director of A/PIA Studies was being appointed in flagrant violation of bylaws and fundamental academic standards. Curzan drew attention to the fact that Professor Lawsin had a “pending lawsuit” against, a fact which was wholly improper for her to introduce into an academic deliberation and also irrelevant to determining whether the information Professor Lawsin reported was accurate. Curzan was, in effect, steering the Executive Committee away from academic considerations and forcing them to consider the University’s interest in defending against a lawsuit.
Curzan Abused Attorney-Client Privilege to Cover Up Her Misconduct
When Curzan informed the LSA Executive Committee of Professor Lawsin’s “pending lawsuit,” she went an egregious step further by explicitly stating that she had “cc-ed Christine Gerdes, who is representing UM.” Gerdes, who is now “Special Counsel to the Provost,” was then an attorney in the Office of General Counsel assigned to monitor Professor Lawsin and combat any complaint she issued. In a correlated email written to Gerdes (and LSA’s James Burkel, a lawyer by training who served as a labor relations official assigned to monitor Professor Lawsin) on May 27, 2017, Curzan disclosed that her purpose in copying Gerdes on the email was to “make it privileged.” This was later ruled by the court to be an improper assertion of attorney-client privilege, which is the only reason this email is now in the public record. Even moreso, Curzan’s action was monumentally unethical—the obvious implication being that she feared exposing her misconduct to public records requests or legal discovery. Notably absent from their exchange is any discussion about how the A/PIA director appointment would impact students or the quality of education at the University. Finally, Curzan in amoral language implied that it was routine for her to “make” emails privileged in this way. As such, it is likely she has more skeletons in the closet.
Curzan Has Failed Survivors of Racism and Hate Crimes
Following the wave of racist hate crimes that struck on campus during Trump’s presidential campaign and after his election, students of color pushed the Department of Women’s Studies to issue a statement of solidarity with students of color and a call for the University to take effective against the many forms of racism that are prevalent within the institution. While Curzan was responsible for oversight of Women’s Studies, LSA banned the department from posting or circulating the anti-racism statement or anything deemed to be too political. Given her weak-kneed response to a major outbreak of racist terror, there is ample reason to fear that Curzan will continue to violate free speech and academic freedom by suppressing calls for action to combat racism and other forms of oppression within the University.
Alumni Voices: An Open Letter to the University of Michigan Leadership
By Veronica Garcia, MA, LCSW University of Michigan, Class of 2010 Oakland, CA
Emily Lawsin was my first meaningful connection as a transplant to Ann Arbor from southern California. She introduced me to other student activists and community organizers and provided a refuge from the hostile racial climate of the university. I have benefited from her generosity of spirit, fierce commitment to community and social justice, creativity, and intellect in profound ways.
2008 photo of the A/PIA Heritage Month Board, including A/PIA Studies Minors Veronica Garcia (second from right) and Aisa Villarosa (second from left)
Through Emily, I had the opportunity to mentor Filipino youth in Detroit, develop closer relationships with my own family though training and practice in oral history taking, and sharpen my community organizing skills. My experience as an A/PIA Studies minor was formative to my personal growth and intellectual development, ultimately providing me with a strong foundation in critical analysis and community organizing that I still hold today as a social worker and psychotherapist in the Bay Area. My relationship with Emily continued after graduation; while I was a graduate student at UC Berkeley, she and her partner, Scott Kurashige (whose treatment by the University was similarly disturbing and unjust) supported my organizing of a landmark meeting between the late Grace Lee Boggs and Angela Davis. Over 1,500 people flocked to the UC Berkeley campus (and thousands more streamed the event online) to learn about revolution from two of the movements most influential leaders. Emily and Scott’s dogged commitment to praxis and social justice have inspired students and awakened activism in people far beyond Ann Arbor.
Emily and her colleagues in A/PIA Studies provided a protective and nurturing space from which I could learn and grow despite the psychological toll of daily microaggessions and occasions of outright racism and misogyny from LSA faculty and other students. Emily’s firing and the systematic dismantling of A/PIA Studies has robbed future generations of Michigan students of their right to a generative and supportive education. As an alumni, I hope that the University will take seriously its commitment to social justice, equity, and inclusion by ending its harassment of Emily Lawsin and support meaningful efforts to re-establish Michigan A/PIA Studies as a nationally renowned academic and community-based program.
Written by Veronica Garcia, MA, LCSW University of Michigan, Class of 2010 Oakland, CA
A/PIA community rallies after Lawsin contract renewal denied by 'U'
“I think the pattern of discrimination and filing things on faculty of color or students of color who speak up is a growing problem that stretches back years and years,” Lawsin said. “But the University would like to cover that up.”
Read the full article at the Michigan Daily here.
The Michigan Daily is investigating other claims of racial prejudice in the American Culture department and throughout the University, including Kurashige’s experience with the administration. Look for additional articles on the topic to follow next semester.
Fact-Checking UM’s National Center for Institutional Diversity Podcast ‘Myths and Legends’
We recently came across the “Myths and Legends” podcast produced by University of Michigan’s National Center for Institutional Diversity (NCID), which purports to summarize the history of Asian American Studies at the University of Michigan. Upon listening to the podcast, we found glaring errors and omissions about how Asian/Pacific Islander American Studies has evolved. This is alarming in light of the program’s current decline and gives evidence to the active promotion of falsehoods about its history.
Alumni and current students have launched a campaign to fully restore A/PIA Studies.
Below, we fact-check several statements expressed in the podcast.
“After building the program for 10 years, both professors left the University of Michigan in 1999. Dr. Stillman, being the only tenured faculty member at that time, stepped up to fill the role of director for the program.”
FALSE: Dr. Stillman was one of multiple tenured faculty associates affiliated with the A/PA Studies Program. Only in the process of becoming director did she become a core faculty member.
“Six hiring offers were made with three new hires in 2000 leading to the rebirth of the A/PIA program.”
FALSE: The authors need to clarify their claim, but it is at best misleading and at worst false. Phillip Akutsu was hired in 1999 and joined the faculty in 2000. Scott Kurashige and Emily Lawsin were hired and joined the faculty in 2000. Susan Najita was hired in 2000 and joined the faculty in 2001. One of these four faculty members is being excluded from the record. To clarify, three faculty joined the faculty in 2000 (Akutsu, Kurashige, Lawsin). Three faculty were hired in 2000 (Kurashige, Lawsin, Najita).
ERASED FROM HISTORY: There is no mention by name within the text, timeline, or audio podcast of most of the key A/PIA Studies faculty who were integral to the development of the program from 2000 to 2013. This is a glaring omission.
“1994: Paperwork completed to name program (Asian / Pacific American Studies Program).”
TRUE: However, this fact exposes the errant date that the official website for the U-M Asian/Pacific Islander American Studies Program lists for its founding: “Established in 1989, the Asian/Pacific Islander American (A/PIA) Studies program is one of four ethnic studies programs housed within the Department of American Culture.”
“2000: Program Enhancement Initiative active on campus, which enabled A/PIA to be considered a tenure home for faculty members. Enabled the department to extend additional faculty offers.”
FALSE: A/PIA Studies is neither an enhanced program nor department, and it has never served as a tenure home for faculty members. The College of LSA has explicitly rejected proposals from A/PIA Studies faculty and students to make the program a department and a tenure home. The College of LSA has forced A/PIA Studies to be dependent on one or more sponsoring academic units (e.g. Psychology Department) to make faculty hires. This has repeatedly created roadblocks to faculty hires, as a wide range of departments—often times ignorant of scholarly concerns in the field or hostile to A/PIA Studies—have been granted veto power over any A/PIA Studies faculty hire. Most departments at U-M have never hired—or even seriously considered for hire—any faculty member with expertise in A/PIA Studies to date.
“2012: Amy Stillman returns to position of A/PIA director”
FALSE: Amy Stillman was not director in 2012. Scott Kurashige was director in 2012, and this was during the highest period of student minor declarations in A/PIA Studies, alumni involvement, fundraising, and public programs.
Reverse the decline of UM’s A/PIA Studies Program and sign the petition to fully restore A/PIA Studies.
University of Michigan LSA Dean Promotes Ignorance of A/PIAs
If you are worried that the dissemination of “alternative facts” is undermining intelligent discourse and threatening our democracy, we advise you to pay closer to attention to LSA’s attempts to eliminate and distort the history of Asian/Pacific Islander Americans (A/PIA) at U-M.
Recently (Friday, March 10), LSA Dean Andrew Martin sent an email for mass distribution in which he announced “the first-ever campus-wide convening of students, faculty, and staff for an afternoon of informal meet-and-greet networking, information sharing, and structured conversations on issues of concern to Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities across campus.”
Apparently, Dean Martin has just discovered the A/PIA community the same way Columbus “discovered” America. The flyer Martin attached says the summit will discuss the “History of APIAs at U-M.” However, his misleading announcement suggests this will be a whitewashing of history.
As members of a network of A/PIA alumni and former student leaders, we are here to tell Martin that our community has convened dozens of campus-wide gatherings of student, staff, and faculty for over four decades. Not coincidentally, overcoming LSA’s lack of support for A/PIA Studies and lack of awareness of A/PIA concerns has been a central impetus for these regular convenings.
To erase the history of A/PIA organizing at U-M is to ignore the collective struggles we have fought against Eurocentrism, hate crimes, and institutional racism, while fighting for ethnic studies, affirmative action, and social justice. This erasure reinforces the model minority stereotype of Asians as passive and conservative, thus fostering divisions between the A/PIA community and other communities of color.
In recent years, A/PIA students, faculty, and staff organized a series of campus-wide summits, conferences, and events in response to LSA’s failure to retain A/PIA Studies faculty, which reached a crisis point starting in 2011. Within an eight-month period, the United Asian American Organizations, the A/PIA Studies Program, and Multi-ethnic Studies Affairs convened two summits, one strategy session, one community conversation, and an Asian American activism conference, where five hundred attendees addressed both campus and community issues.
Participants included prominent A/PIA scholars, artists, organizers, and off-campus leaders, including a U.S. congressman and a state senator. Two presenters have since been elected to the Michigan House of Representatives and Philadelphia City Council. These gatherings also addressed the lack of space for A/PIA and student of color organizations on campus, as well as the problem of a hostile campus climate.
To pretend that events of this magnitude never happened demonstrates either profound audacity or a supreme level of ignorance that should disqualify oneself from leadership in education. But why is LSA trying so hard to erase this history? We have some ideas:
When students don’t know how vibrant A/PIA Studies used to be, it is easier for LSA to pretend as if its new diversity plan is breaking new ground rather than peddling old rhetoric.
Setting low expectations makes it easier for LSA to defend its poor decision-making regarding leadership choices for the A/PIA Studies Program and Department of American Culture, which lost 20 faculty of color from 1997 to 2016.
Dean Martin and LSA are covering up their own roles in undermining faculty of color and ethnic studies. The university is currently the defendant in a landmark suit by two highly successful, award-winning faculty, who cite U-M’s own documents to reveal how prior LSA deans and senior faculty opposed ethnic studies and favored white professors with thin resumes to lead American Culture.
If he wants to believe he is so committed to diversity and the A/PIA community, Dean Martin should retract this alternative facts and implement the five demands we presented in November 2016, and reinstate Professors Kurashige and Lawsin immediately, giving them the resources needed to restore A/PIA Studies at U-M. If he will not do this, we challenge Martin—a quantitative researcher—to show us the data that on A/PIA Studies activity (e.g. student enrollment and involvement, fundraising, public events, local/national awards, media coverage) before and after Professor Kurashige’s termination and explain the discrepancy.
(A version of this statement is also featured in the Michigan in Color section of the Michigan Daily)
I’m taking a great class this semester through the American Culture department at UMich that talks about subcultures in America, fondly nicknamed “Beats, Hippies, Punks.” A lot of what I’ve learned so far is from the “OGs” of the enlightenment movement, one of them being Thoreau. If you’re familiar with him, you’d know that he preached minimalism, individuality, and the denial of mainstream…
