Kesten and crew unveil SCUnity report in Gaston
Posted by: Molly Redden in News, Vox Populi, tags: Brian Kesten, GUSA, SCUnity
It took fifteen months to compile, during which time it suffered royal controversy and headline wordplay, but the tome-of-a SCUnity report is finally here. Flanked by his SCUnity commission and his co-investigator Brian Cook (COL `10), project mastermind Brian Kesten (COL `10) presented the commission’s finding yesterday in Gaston Hall.
A full cover story by our own Kate Mays will appear in the Georgetown Voice tomorrow about SCUnity’s findings about discrimination and segregation at Georgetown, but to hold you over, here are some of the most interesting facts the commission found:
- NHS students (16% aware), MSB students (23%), and freshman (24%) are highly unaware of Georgetown’s bias reporting system
- Almost 80% of student have witnessed student discrimination at Georgetown and almost half have ignored it
- Students’ educational (implied, socioeconomic) backgrounds were not necessarily indicators for experience of prejudice or self segregation. Student experience was more likely to vary based on socioeconomic background, but educational background did not prove an effective lens through which to studying socioeconomic background.*
- Students who identify as LGBTQ are highly likely (82%) to feel self-segregated or the target of discrimination (54%)
- “Black students and white students stnad as polar opposites” when it comes to their experience of discrimination, racism, and alienation at Georgetown, with black students reporting having experienced each in far greater numbers than white students
- “Catholic students across nearly all questions exhibited the lowest percentage of discomfort and discrimination”
The presentation, which a five-piece local-highschooler jazz band opened with swinging aplomb, also included the SCUnity commission’s documentary. Georgetown students and faculty who talked about their experiences with discrimination and segregation faded on and off screen, including Kesten’s old running mate Kyle Williams (SFS `09).
Williams pointedly asked, “How do you do diversity?”
SCU’s Vice Chairman Brian Cook followed the documentary as the emotional high point of the presentation. Cook recalled experiencing stereotyping on his first move-in day at Georgetown.
“What team d’you play for, son?” his neighbor’s father asked him when he went to introduce himself. At the time, Cook said, he was, “Five foot ten, a bit chubby, and currently pre-med. There was no reason to ask me why I was an athlete except of course for the all-too-salient fact that I was black.”
Kesten’s remarks followed the report presentation, and I drank the koolaid at that point. His emotional committment to the project, his love-of-Georgetown motivation, and his earnestness in remedying what he sees as a disconcerting situation were all poignantly clear.
This fall, Kesten grew irate when some members of GUSA tried to deprive him of SCUnity leadership on the grounds that he was not an elected Senator. The Voice took their side. However, the breadth of the SCUnity report makes it clear just how much effort Kesten and his commission have put into this project. They’re the rightful glory-getters and he’s the rightful posterboy.
*Corrected Wednesday, January 27 at 1:12 p.m.
Entries (RSS)
Is there a pdf version of the report?
Not yet, but Brian tells me there will be shortly. He’s also posting the documentary on the SCUnity website. I’ll post links to both.
The report is now online in full. http://scunity.squarespace.com/researchreport/
Thanks anon! Vox always relies on the kindness of strangers
Glad to see Kesten followed the terms of the Senate bill creating the Student Commission for Unity and let the Senate see and vote on each recommendation in the final report. You know, just so it wouldn’t look like the Senate gave a rubber stamp in advance to let the Commission give the “GUSA-endorsed” seal of approval to make any recommendation it felt like.
Oh wait…
http://www.box.net/index.php?rm=box_download_shared_file&file_id=f_110295225&shared_name=h2r71s98ok
Fightin’ words, GUSA. Are there any specific recommendations you would have voted against or would have liked to have seen altered?
To be fair, the findings and recommendations come off as only formally ‘rubber stamped’ by GUSA. I’m not sure most students/fac are going to see them as the tacit will of the Senate.
The link dead ends. Can you post a different one?
I’ve been glancing through it – and a lot I agree with, I have to say. But that’s beside the point: he could’ve recommended _anything_, no matter how little supported or controversial.
And I think administrators _are_ going to see them as the tacit will of the Senate, or at least GUSA in general. Brian has been talking this up to deans, faculty and administrators. The report is called the “GUSA Student Commission for Unity.” To admins (if perhaps less so for students), the GUSA name carries respectability and seriousness – more than just a bunch of students on a Facebook group trying to make some recommendations. The GUSA name opens doors.
In all honesty, do you think that administrators would at least take second thought in looking at a recommendation if it was explicitly rejected by the Senate?
* * *
So, again, it’s not like I’m against the purposes of SCUnity, but I think it’s incredibly rude and offensive that Kesten – after receiving over $1,000 in funds for his research project, and getting the GUSA Senate’s approval to form a commission (because there was a significant amount of concern on just this issue) on the EXPLICIT basis that the Senate would get an up or down vote on each recommendation – intentionally ignored the Senate.
And here’s a more general link – http://public.box.net/GUSASenate
Go to Senate 2007-2008, then Senate 2007-2008, then Certified Legislation, then Bills, and the SCUnity bill is Bill 07-08-01.
[The site was an old attempt at getting an archive for all bills and resolutions passed... but, alas, kind of fell through the wayside.]
Fair enough, rules are rules, and that’s what he and everyone agreed to.
However, as for, “In all honesty, do you think that administrators would at least take second thought in looking at a recommendation if it was explicitly rejected by the Senate?”
I’m inclined to–I’m glad there was support behind it. But I doubt the administration would have poo-pooed the recommendations just because GUSA had rejected them. The report is thorough enough to speak to its own gravity.
Let the record show that no later than November 17, 2008, Senators, including the speaker and the chair of the finance and appropriations committee, were informed SCU was releasing its data and recommendations on January 27th. The Senate failed to put SCU on the docket until last week, when the recommendations were shared as the Senate. The recommendations had been finalized since December, they just needed to go before the Senate.
It is also worth noting that the Senate is now judging recommendations despite only one Senator joining a research team, and only a 4-6 attending its presentation.
[...] But Dowd’s briefing proved the agenda’s only straightforward issue. Besides an election bylaws snafu, the big-ticket item was a vote on whether or not to support Brian Kesten’s (COL ‘10) long-awaited and earnestly long-winded SCUnity initiatives. [...]