"Cosmetic Diversity": University Websites and the Transformation of Race Categories

• In Event: 25.039 - Critical Explorations of the Discourses Shaping "Diversity Work" at Historically and Predominantly White Public Institutions

Abstract

An ethno-racially diverse student body is an element of status and prestige for colleges and universities (Warikoo, 2016; Stevens, 2009; Leong, 2013). As a result, universities are under pressure to have, or at least appear to have, diverse student populations. This circumstance is manifested in the wide variation in ethno-racial categories universities use to (re)present their campus populations on their public websites. This wide variation is not surprising given that understandings about race are fluid and socially constructed (Omi & Winant, 2015; Bonilla-Silva, 1999; Smedley & Smedley, 2005). However, as universities create systems of ethno-racial presentation for purposes beyond simply reporting their demographics, they also obscure the actual levels of diversity on campus while presenting a superficially appealing, cosmetic diversity. The heart of the problem is the persistent underrepresentation of students of color in higher education; we argue that the fuzzying of ethno-racial categories to enhance the appearance of diversity is a noteworthy symptom of that problem.
In order to better understand the relationship between university marketing strategies and discourses contributing to the experience of minoritized students, we analyzed the race/ethnicity tables and figures featured prominently on the websites of 158 colleges and universities. These representations were then analyzed as artifacts of the discourse taking place when higher education institutions translate standard federal ethno-racial categories into representations enhancing the appearance of diversity on their campuses. Our analysis was framed by Omi and Winant’s (2015) concept of racial formation which argues that social organizations are shaped by and actively transform the ways we collectively think about race and racial categories. Adopting their lens, we investigated the interaction between the university (an organization with a strong incentive to present ethno-racial student diversity) and the website categories describing student body diversity (subsequent (re)presentations of racial understandings). Omi and Winant understand racial understanding to be formed via racial projects which are “attempts both to shape the ways in which social structures are racially signified and the ways that racial meanings are embedded in social structures” (p. 125). Racial projects connect the ways race is given meaning within society to the functions that those meanings ultimately influence.
We found institutions undertake three practices to enhance the appearance of campus diversity: omission, aggregation and addition of ethno-racial categories. Interestingly, universities with the lowest levels of student diversity were the most likely to engage in these practices. We understand these practices to be organizational level racial projects. That is, universities are actively transforming “the content and importance of racial categories” (p. 61) in service of their diversity goals by representing their student body data in nonstandard ways.
In this symposium, this paper serves as a guide for interrogating institutional data use and discourse in strategic marketing materials. By contemplating possible motivations for and broader impacts of university websites’ chosen ethno-racial categories, we encourage individuals and institutions to acknowledge these cosmetic representations and, further, to identify ways campus policies and practices could better promote the goal of creating the diverse environments the reported “cosmetic” numbers strive to represent.

Authors

• Ashley N. Patterson, The Pennsylvania State University

• Karly Ford, The Pennsylvania State University