The Curriculum Committee is currently considering a proposal for a "Dynamics of Difference and Power" (DDP) requirement, which would address the dynamics of power between racial and gender groups within US society.

According to the DDP Overlay Requirement Proposal, "The [proposed] Dynamics of Difference and Power overlay requirement [would] address the power structures and dynamics students face in daily interactions, their experience at the college, and life in their greater community,"

"In order to fulfill the DDP requirement," the proposal continues, "a class must address one or more of the following in a way that relates to contemporary US culture: race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation, and/or religion."

The proposal was produced by the student-organized DDP committee and presented to the Curriculum Committee two weeks ago. The DDP committee consists of Alex Cho ‘01, Brian Schwartz ‘01, Kelly Fox ‘01, Lori Ramirez ‘03, Max Handler ‘01, Regan Douglass ‘02, and Sahar Rooholamini ‘01.

The Curriculum Committee, which consists of six faculty members, three students, two deans and Registrar Margaret Adorno, is reviewing the DDP and considering various amendments.

"The Curriculum Committee is in general agreement on the concept of DDP," committee member Jake Oken-berg ’02 stated.

"[The committee’s] main concern is with the logistics," Sun added. "There is the concern that some professors might be more burdened by the DDP requirement [than others]."

The position stated in the DDP’s proposal is that "[when] spread over the 80-90 classes that we believe would fulfill the DDP requirement, the burden of increased enrollment would become negligible… [However,] it is important to note that one of the primary goals of instituting the DDP requirement is increasing enrollment in DDP courses."

Another point of contention amongst the Curriculum Committee is whether the DDP requirement should be a new or revised PAC instead of an overlay, as proposed by the DDP committee.

"Some of the faculty in the Curriculum Committee have voiced concern about another overlay," Sun explained. "Some of the people [on the committee] are for [making it] a PAC."

For her part, Adorno feels that "[DDP] isn’t a skill per se, thus it doesn’t belong in [the] PACs. I would see it as an overlay."

Each system of implementation has its arguments. The DDP committee feels that the overlay would be better suited to a system where some students feel that there are already too many requirements.

According to the DDP proposal, "The DDP requirement [would be] an unusually interdisciplinary one. Therefore it [would be] possible to fulfill this requirement while simultaneously fulfilling a PAC, and we appreciate the less burdensome qualities of an overlay requirement."

There is also discussion concerning the proper timeline of action on the DDP proposal. "Tinkering with the PAC system has its own set of problems," Adorno explained. "When the PAC system was instituted in 1994, it was set up [to be subject to] a ten-year review."

"The earliest I see this happening would be for 2002-20003 incoming students," Sun estimated.

Before any changes are made to the official proposal, the Curriculum Committee plans to hold a faculty forum later this semester or early next year in order to generate feedback on the proposal.

"The Curriculum Committee couldn’t bring the best or most viable proposal to the faculty [for a vote] without broad consultation [of the faculty]," Adorno explained.

The Curriculum Committee will consider faculty recommendations before creating an official DDP proposal. This official proposal will go before the Executive Committee, which sets the agenda for the proposal. The final DDP proposal will then go before the faculty for a vote; the DDP proposal will be implemented only if a majority of faculty approve the requirement.

Despite the progress made in implementing the proposal, Sun is cautious about assuming it will actually be adopted by the faculty.

"I would strongly put the caution sign up [about thinking DDP will definitely pass]," Sun warned. "Just because people are talking about [DDP, that] doesn’t mean its going to happen.

"I see this still as a tough fight," he continued. "But if students voice their opinion [for DDP], I see this as possible."

In a 1999 poll, 56 percent of 262 students were in favor of a some form of non-PAC overlay (with 23 percent opposed and 21 percent undecided), according to the DDP proposal.

"I believe that dynamics of difference and power are an important part of a liberal arts education, not to mention life in the world today," Douglass explained. "I would like to see Pomona make a commitment to increased discussions, readings, dialogues, and heightened awareness of difference and power in a permanent way, [by] writing it into the curriculum."

Sun concurred with the DDP’s role in heightening and improving discussion about difference within the Pomona campus.

"[The administration and RHS] tried for years to extend this discussion [of power], but the problem I see is that the people who should be exposed to this issue the most are not the ones attending these activities," he stated.

According to Schwartz, DDP is one of the results of "A Call To Action," a document, presented to the administration in 1995, which demanded that the school pay more attention to multicultural and race-specific issues. Since that time, students have been working on the proposal to present to the Curriculum Committee in hopes of implementing the new DDP requirement.