Survey Shows Split on DDP Requirement

By Lori DesRochers
News Associate

For the last ten years, Pomona College administrators and students have been debating the necessity of an additional graduation requirement related to the study of difference and power dynamics.

Last spring, enrolled students were asked in a survey if they agreed with the statement that the college should require students to take a course that addressed issues of race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic class, sexual orientation and religion in relationship to the exercise of power. The data showed deep divisions amongst students.

Overall, 53 percent of students agreed with the statement and 47 percent of students disagreed, but opinions differed by factors of gender, race/ethnicity and year in college. Specifically, students who disagreed with the requirement tended to be male and white, while those who agreed with the requirement tended to be female and students of color.

This information was gathered as part of a larger online survey given by the Consortium on Financing Higher Education, and 848 of the 1401 enrolled students responded. Of those students, 766 replied to the question regarding the requirement. “We were very excited about the response rate and feel that the distribution of respondents reflects the college as a whole,” said Jose Moreno from the Office of Institutional Research. The survey asked students about the general principles of the Dynamics of Difference and Power (DDP) proposal.

Ninety percent of students who identified as Black, 71 percent of Foreign students, 67 percent of students who identified as Asian and Hispanic, and 58 percent of students who identified as other, multiracial or declined to identify with an racial or ethnic groups agreed with the requirement. Only 47 percent of students who identified themselves as White shared this opinion.

Dean of Students Anne Quinley was hardly surprised with these findings. “They’re sort of what you would predict. Students of color who live with issues of race all the time would be interested in people paying attention to issues of race,” she said.

With regard to gender, 62 percent of students who identified as female and 42 percent of students who identified as male agreed with the statement. “It’s an issue of privilege. It’s so comfortable to not have to talk about issues of race or difference, but if you’re Latino or Asian or female or transgender, it’s something that you have to deal with every single day,” said Andres Lopez ‘04. “You always have to be wary of statistics, but these results make sense.”

In relation to year in college, 67 percent of fourth year students agreed while only 39 percent of sophomores agreed, and first and third-year students hovered around 55 percent. Daren Mooko, Director of the Asian American Resource Center, speculated on the reasons for these discrepancies. He suggested that fourth year students are the ones who “have the most information about Pomona,” and are then in a better position to express what is a necessary part of their education. Also, Mooko suggested that studying abroad as upperclassmen might give students a better opportunity for reflection on their educational needs resulting in their opinions on DDP.

It is unclear whether or not the results of this survey will help to determine the future for DDP, but it is certain to frame the debate of the next two years. When the PAC system of ten general education requirements and two skill overlays was implemented in 1994, it called for a ten-year review. In 2001, the faculty’s Curriculum Committee, the group charged with this review, heeded a student request to include a discussion of DDP in their report due out in April. There report will be the basis of the debate in the faculty, who will ultimate decide these issues next year. The possibilities for implementing DDP include adding it as an additional PAC, or simply adding it as an another overlay, like the writing intensive and speaking intensive requirements. The decision of whether and how to implement DDP will be made by a majority vote of the faculty in ’04-’05.

The DDP proposal has its roots in student generated proposal over a decade ago. Proponents of DDP contend that the unearned social, economic and institutional benefits that are granted to some groups at the expense of others is inherent but often unspoken. They argue that classes specific to DDP will help students to recognize and acknowledge the systems of power and privilege that govern their lives. Detractors contend that some faculty members will then be burdened with the additional weight of DDP courses, and that new faculty members and courses will need to be added. Others object at a more philosophical level. Critics say that DDP will politicize the curriculum or will contribute to divisions amongst students at Pomona.

It is unclear how student opinion will factor into the final decision. Dean Quinley sees the issue as one that is largely in the hands of the faculty. “The faculty own the curriculum, and I think that many faculty of color worry about having a requirement like this,” she said. “This has been on the table since 1994, and I don’t think it has been student sentiment that has kept it from happening.”