Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The organizational/structural component of diversity in higher education recently has been described as a central aspect of the campus racial climate. This dimension refers to the core structures, the policies, and the decision-making processes that guide the day-to-day business of colleges and universities. Examples of the organizational/structural dimension of campus climate include institutional definitions of merit; decisions regarding the curriculum, faculty hiring, and tenure policies; admissions policies and practices; budget and resource allocations; and other organizational decision-making policies and practices. This entry provides a broad overview of the organizational context for promoting diversity in higher education and the importance of considering these issues in striving to create inclusive campus racial climates.

The Campus Racial Climate and Organizational/Structural Diversity

Discussions of campus diversity tend to focus on the racial composition of institutions (i.e., the numerical and proportional representative of students, faculty, and staff from different racial/ethnic groups). While this aspect of the campus climate is important to consider, it is necessary to frame diversity more broadly and holistically. Recent work on the campus racial climate considers compositional diversity, but also the historical legacy of inclusion/exclusion on campus; an institution's psychological climate (how diverse constituents perceive and experience the campus environment); an institution's behavioral climate (the nature of campus intergroup relations); and the organizational/structural context for diversity on campus. This framework extends definitions of diversity beyond numeric representation by recognizing that the campus racial climate is characterized by the interplay of these different dimensions.

The Organizational/Structural Context for Diversity

The organizational/structural context for diversity was recently added to the campus racial climate framework first posited in 1998 by Sylvia Hurtado and colleagues. The original formulation was a critical review of empirical research that examined how different aspects of campus diversity influenced student learning and development. The initial framework did not include the organizational/structural context for diversity because this dimension did not have a similar empirical foundation in the existing literature as the other four. Thus, the organizational/structural dimension of climate was initially conceptualized as part of a campus's historical legacy of inclusion/exclusion.

Jeffrey Milem and colleagues later argued that the original conception of the campus racial climate could not account for several of the day-to-day operations of institutions of higher education such as tenure decisions or budget allocations. To this end, they offered a conceptually grounded addition to the campus racial climate that encapsulated the organizational/structural features of a university and the extent to which these practices do or do not utilize diversity as integral to their function. There is a small but growing empirical basis examining the organizational/structural dimension of campus diversity. For example, racially homogenous faculty search committees tend not to hire candidates who are of a different racial/ethnic background. Types of financial aid awarded differentially impact college choice patterns by race. Whether or not admissions policies are race conscious directly impacts an institution's ability to recruit, admit, and retain racially diverse cohorts of students. Ultimately, institutions have evolved over time in ways that privilege some groups to the detriment of others.

Organizational Culture and Institutional Racism

The organizational/structural dimension of the campus racial climate derives from scholarship on organizational theory and behavior. The culture of an organization can be understood as the consistent, collective historical and contemporary organizational behavioral patterns that become self-replicating. Thus, institutional cultures are usually stable and tend to reinforce the status quo. A form of institutional inertia exists, especially regarding issues of diversity and inclusion, that makes it extremely difficult to institute changes in these areas. The climate of an institution tends to be more malleable and is understood as involving perceptions of the organizations' behaviors. Culture and climate are closely related; the stronger the organizational culture, the more consistent the institutional climate.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading