Sadly, here at UCLA, one of the most diverse campuses in the
nation, minority-themed classes are devoid of diversity.
Queering American History, Social Organization of Black
Communities, and Chicana/Chicano Folklore are among the
identity-themed classes offered this quarter at UCLA. But most
likely you are not taking any of them, unless of course you are a
member of the group the class studies.
Based on personal experience and conversations with others who
have taken these courses, identity-themed classes are some of the
least diverse at UCLA.
The reasons for this are twofold. First, professors tend to
teach these classes in a manner which assumes the entire class
belongs to the group being studied.
Second, UCLA does not have a diversity component to its General
Education requirements. In order to increase diversity in
minority-themed classes, the highly presumptuous nature of the
classes must change, and a diversity requirement must be added to
the GE curriculum.
When you are sitting in your Chicano politics class (however
unlikely this may be unless you are Chicano) and the Latino
professor says, “We have historically been oppressed by white
people,” what does that mean? Who is “we”? Is it
the professor and his friends? Possibly, but then you look around
the class and you realize that “we” means the entire
class except for you and a few others.
Professors of such classes need to avoid the pitfall of lumping
all of their students into one group. Adding personal experiences
to a lecture is always effective, but professors should not assume
all students share their cultural backgrounds.
Professors should teach minority-themed classes in an objective
and unbiased manner. Your Chicano politics professor, for example,
should say, “the Latinos in the United States have
historically been oppressed by many white groups.”
After all, an Asian professor can be just as knowledgeable on
Chicano politics as a Latino, and an African American can
contribute greatly to the class. As it is, the few students
studying a group they don’t belong to feel uncomfortable
adding to discussions, as if they were intruding on a
membership-only club.
How comfortable would a Palestinian feel contributing to a
discussion in a Jewish Studies class that speaks of “our
plight as Jews?” The right to participate diminishes when
minority-themed courses assume the entire class belongs to the
group being studied. The result: Those who are not members of the
minority club are deterred from taking identity-themed classes, and
we all understand each other that much less.
A remedy to the lack of diversity in identity-themed classes is
a GE diversity requirement. Every other UC school has one, so
it’s about time UCLA catches up to the pack. Implementing a
diversity requirement would result in an influx of many different
groups into these classes. This would foster true diversity.
Maybe you don’t consider the lack of diversity in these
classes to be a problem. “This is the only forum minorities
have for discussing important issues in their communities,”
you might say. That may be true, but that goal can be accomplished
without alienating those in the class who do not belong to the
dominant group.
Increasing diversity in identity-themed classes enhances the
educational experience for all students. As beneficial as it is for
members of certain groups to learn about their backgrounds, the
students who have the most to gain from taking minority studies
classes are those who are not part of the group the class
examines.
Diversity is the mantra of this university, yet diversity is
systematically discouraged by the presumptuous nature of
minority-themed classes and the lack of a diversity requirement.
It’s about time this changes.
You don’t have to be queer to queer American history.