








|
Advancing a Tradition of Social
Justice
Building on its Quaker traditions, Haverford College has been able to reach
broad campus consensus on its commitment to diversity. Haverford has emphasized
the importance of community values and consensus building as it has revised and
developed its multicultural curricular requirements and as it worked to amend
its student-defined honor code.
Haverford has had a diversity requirement since 1984, and the history of
this requirement exemplifies the importance of continued community dialogue
about curricular purposes and strategies. Students could fulfill the original
1984 requirement by completing a course on (1) the history, perspectives, or
cultures of non-Western peoples, U.S. minorities, or women or (2) the nature,
history, and workings of prejudice. However, when a committee reviewed this
requirement, two significant facts emerged. Over 150 courses had been
developed over the decade for category one. By contrast, very few courses on
prejudice had been developed. As a result of this finding, in 1990, faculty
members adopted a new "Social Justice Requirement" that focuses not on a
particular culture or group but on the critical analysis of prejudice and
discrimination.
Leaders at Haverford also wanted to move beyond the single course to "making
diversity an intrinsic and inescapable part of all majors." The need for
campuswide faculty, staff, and student development around issues of diversity
was also recognized and addressed.
With an initial Ford Foundation grant and later an additional grant from
Philip Morris, Haverford sponsored two interdisciplinary faculty seminars to
support the development of new or revised "social justice" courses. Faculty
members particularly valued working with colleagues across departmental lines
and focusing on shared concerns about pedagogy. Fostering interdisciplinary
dialogue about comprehensive diversity goals and especially multicultural
requirements is crucial to building campuswide consensus and ongoing commitment
to diversity issues. Haverford has institutionalized diversity training
programs for students, faculty, and administrators to foster the mediation,
communication, and pedagogical skills essential for these campuswide academic
and student life efforts.
There has also been an ongoing dialogue led by Haverford students about the
school's Honor Code. The Honor Code enjoins students not only to govern their
own lives with honesty and a sense of responsibility for others but also to
engage in debates about the intersection of personal and institutional values
and, ultimately, about the values that shape society. Since the 1980s, during
the yearly ratification process through which they commit themselves to
maintaining the Honor Code, students have attempted to define and redefine how
it addresses issues of racism, sexism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism. Over the
course of these yearly discussions, students decided against establishing a
speech code and, instead, have ratified an Honor Code that calls for mutual
respect and the recognition of human dignity in all. The Honor Code
ratification process engaged students in a continuing process of understanding
each other--surely a primary responsibility of colleges in a diverse
democracy.
An evaluator of the Ford grant notes further that "Haverford has been as
successful in its ability to create as many diversity courses as it has and
have as rich a conversation as it does because diversity is integral to the
college's mission." It was "extremely important that [the] campus have a
variety of forums and arenas where students can carry on their developmental
issues beyond the classrooms."
|
Social Justice Requirement (revised in
1990)
Students must take one course that focuses on one or
both of the following:
1. The nature, workings, and consequences of prejudice
and discrimination, including those which arise from confrontations with
radical difference, otherness, or foreignness;
2. Efforts at social and cultural change directed
against, and cultural achievements that overcome, prejudice and
discrimination.
|
back to top
|