Diversity is a notoriously sticky issue on campus, and the university deserves to be commended for its continual willingness to grapple with it.
The recent addition of a ""Bias Incident/Harassment Reporting"" systemA-A-—which seeks to investigate instances of bias and discrimination—adds to an already lengthy list of initiatives, including Plan 2008 and Interim Dean of Students Lori Berquam's ""Think"" campaign. It also presents two main problems, though.
First, the bias reporting system itself is flawed. Initially, the system was touted for its anonymity, a change administrators thought would ease student fears about coming forward with information or complaints.
Amid criticism about how an anonymous system would affect the legitimacy of complaints, however, the system has changed.
Now, students are encouraged—though not required—to include contact information when filing reports on bias or harassment, and in reality only those reports filed with contact information receive a follow-up from the administration. In essence, the option to file an anonymous report may as well not exist—a change that essentially leaves the university back at square one.
The new system also faces the potential for serious problems in the case of an open records request. Though the university stands behind the confidentiality of all original reports that are made, there is little it could do in the face of an open records request.
Thus, all reports filed are ultimately open to the public, regardless of the legitimacy of the original complaint or the outcome of any subsequent investigation. In addition, there is potential for misinterpretations to result in permanent damage to a student's record.
Also, the new system highlights an over-arching flaw in the university's diversity efforts as a whole: their disjointedness.
Between Plan 2008, the ""Think"" campaign and the new bias reporting systems, there are too many initiatives currently being pursued in the name of ""diversity"" or identifying ""bias.""
For the student body to feel comfortable with these efforts, the university needs to offer both a clarification and consolidation of their various projects. Until then, a biased reporting system will remain as just one more ambiguous ""diversity effort"" that students know little about.
