Roots of the Equity Gap

Roots of the Equity Gap

Roots of the Equity Gap

At MSUM, we discovered the equity gap to be rooted in three distinct components: academic, financial, and environmental. These components are consistent with the literature in which academic, financial, and environmental considerations are explained through less access to quality academic experiences (Frye et al., 2021; Noguera, 2001; Shannon & Bylsma, 2002), internalized stereotypes (Massey et al., 2002; Rath et al., 2007), and hostile campus climates (Bowman et al., 2021; Hurtado et al., 2012).

Less Access to Quality Academic Experiences

Systemic racism within institutional structures has led to financial constraints and therefore low-quality educational experiences for many people of color (Frye et al., 2021; Noguera, 2001; Shannon & Bylsma, 2002). For example, the racial wage gap in American society contributes to lower socioeconomic status for people of color, especially for Black women. In fact, the average Black woman must work 19 months to earn the same amount of money that the average White male makes in 12 months (AAUW, 2019). In some cases, this leads to a trickle effect in which lower income results in housing in lower income areas with lower quality schools. Over time, such intersections of race and class, which result in different educational experiences, lead to a gap in performance outcomes between DSC and DWS.

At MSUM, intersections between race and class and their impact on the gap became prevalent through initial analyses of student data. For example, per demographic data from Institutional Research in 2018, it was discovered that 30% of students with academic, financial, or conduct holds on their transcripts were DSC, despite the fact that DSC represented only 16% of the overall enrollment. Since transcript holds keep students from registering for the subsequent academic semester, and it became clear that we had restricted access to quality academic experiences to a subpopulation of students with more academic and financial barriers instead of adopting an equity lens.

Internalized Stereotypes

Additionally, students of color may internalize racial stereotypes engrained in society (Massey et al., 2002; Rath et al., 2007). For example, a young Black athlete who attended schools with predominantly White children was told by a classmate that the reason for his athletic success was that “Black people have an extra tendon in their leg.” From that point forward, he questioned the source of his athletic ability, perceived himself as having an unfair advantage, and felt apprehensive about doing “too well.” Students of color who internalize racial stereotypes (i.e., uneducated, incompetent, lazy, or criminal) may question their true skills and abilities, adversely affecting their performance in school and contributing to the equity gap. For example, underrepresented students in Frye et al. (2021) referenced that they “didn’t go to the best schools” or were unable to afford AP courses, which contributed to a sense of “educational inadequacy” (p. 8). One student in the study claimed, “You have this idea in your head everybody knows the information and you are the only one that doesn’t know it . . . And there are just a few that constantly participate and do know it and that convince you that just means everybody knows but you. You feel discouraged to even think that you are capable and compare yourself to other students . . . reemphasizes the idea that you don’t belong in that class” (p. 8).

The campus climate assessment conducted at MSUM in 2017 reflects that some of our students of color battled both discriminatory attitudes and marginalization because of societal stereotypes. For example, one student stated, “I don’t feel welcome at MSU. My experience at the dormitory wasn’t a good one. I was told by the white students, “Black aren’t wanted here! It’s so sad to have people like that on this campus.” Other students felt marginalized because of their racial identity. One person noted, “Minorities are not accepted in the educational programs here; the procedure of selecting people with good grades is not true but is racially biased. All the programs, at most have one black person accepted, and hundreds apply.” Another student noticed this lack of representation amongst employees as well: “I would like to see a more diverse staff/faculty. The lack of people who look like me is detrimental to my confidence.” These quotes convey the additional burdens DSC must overcome to be successful at a predominantly White institution.

Hostile Campus Climates

Finally, students of color often face hostile campus climates, especially at predominantly White institutions (Hurtado et al., 2012). Such hostility may cause students of color to question their institution’s support of them (Bowman et al., 2021) and/or interfere with their ability to learn and succeed in the classroom.

Results of the 2017 campus climate assessment at MSUM showed that while most employees and students rated the University as a welcoming community, the rate was lower for employees and students of color. The study found that employees and students of color appreciated that the university had a Women’scenter, LGBTQ Center, and a Multi-Cultural Center staffed by full-time employees. However, as noted with the testimonials included above, some DSC did not feel at all welcomed or represented on the campus, which has the potential to adversely affect their academic performance.