In a demonstration similar to past protests on the steps of Johnson Hall, students and community members Tuesday rallied to expose alarming incidents of racial, homophobic, sexist and other discriminatory behavior on campus.
Although alerting the University to these concerns was a significant act in itself, the coalition behind the protest, UO Action, went one step further: It submitted to University President Dave Frohnmayer four concrete demands.
Event organizers said they want the University Senate to pass the revised diversity plan next week, but said the demands are designed to address specific oversights in the plan. Their demands: to enhance the Bias Response Team, to create new ethnic studies and women and gender studies departments and new minors, to create a coordinator for students with disabilities and to create a staff advocate for residence hall residents.
First, we agree that the BRT lacks any real power to deal with issues of discrimination. Such incidents should be handled by the Office of Student Life. There is no clear way to give the BRT more authority without being redundant with Student Judicial Affairs.
The University should consider creating ethnic studies and women and gender studies departments to help increase the selection of multicultural classes and to help retain professors and students from underrepresented groups.
Establishing queer studies and disability studies minors would also be beneficial. However, the University would need to ensure that these departments and programs do not promote one specific set of ideological concerns and that they remain consistent with the University’s mission statement.
The University has established ways to help students with disabilities fully experience the University through Disability Services. A coordinator to help build community among students with disabilities might best be accomplished as an advocacy position under the ASUO Executive.
The chain of command within University Housing, consisting of resident assistants, complex directors and administrators, should already advocate for residents in the residence halls, as should the Residence Hall Association. Comprehensive and ongoing RA training about diversity could be improved, however.
Although we do not agree with every detail of the recommendations, these points represent specific, student-proposed ideas that deserve consideration by administrators and the student government. We commend UO Action for finding tangible suggestions to help address a complex and delicate issue.
Because the University operates in an open campus, no measures will ever completely ensure that no one says hateful comments around students. But the protesters’ accounts of threatening behavior underscore the need to ensure that students and educated about diversity and held accountable for treating other University community members inappropriately.