With UCF now claiming around a 25% Hispanic enrollment rate, which closely matches UCF's population demographics (we're #6, New Mexico is the largest, nearly 45%), we've long 'patted ourselves on-the-back' at our addressing minority opportunity.
So I'm curious if Whittaker's claim to make UCF enrollment grow to over 50% the 'under-represented,' is going to adequately address our fellow, Native and African-Americans, and not just help -- again, very laudable, but ... -- traditionally Hispanic-American growth?
It's great to have many first-generation graduates, and I don't want to downplay the importance of that in our fellow Hispanic communities. I'm just a little concerned that we're overlooking all minorities, especially the two (2) aforementioned in particular.
Thoughts? Views? Comments? Criticisms? Let's not drop into the common blame-duopoly pary rhetoric either. Let's be Floridians that care, Knights that want to see progress, and no longer just quote the Hispanic-American results as 'all minorities.'
I know some of you have ties to the UCF administration, so I'd love to hear what you're hearing.
[1] http://www.pewhispanic.org/states/state/fl/
And yet, it bothers me that we only seem to focus on Hispanic-Americans. I mean, let's face it, the US is becoming bi-lingual and one could make the strong argument that Hispanic-Americans, after facing discriminatory and other issues for a few generations, are now mirroring Irish-Americans a century earlier.
I.e., discriminated against, slowly took various positions of leadership, and then became leaders and normalized, if not a majority in many locales (like Boston and Chicago/mid-west in the case of the Irish).
Because while we're 'patting ourselves on the back' by claiming we've 'addressed minorities,' we're overlooking some of the longest-standing Americans who are still enrolling (let alone graduating) at half the rate of their demographics -- Native and African-Americans.
I.e., discriminated against, slowly took various positions of leadership, and then became leaders and normalized, if not a majority in many locales (like Boston and Chicago/mid-west in the case of the Irish).
Because while we're 'patting ourselves on the back' by claiming we've 'addressed minorities,' we're overlooking some of the longest-standing Americans who are still enrolling (let alone graduating) at half the rate of their demographics -- Native and African-Americans.
So I'm curious if Whittaker's claim to make UCF enrollment grow to over 50% the 'under-represented,' is going to adequately address our fellow, Native and African-Americans, and not just help -- again, very laudable, but ... -- traditionally Hispanic-American growth?
It's great to have many first-generation graduates, and I don't want to downplay the importance of that in our fellow Hispanic communities. I'm just a little concerned that we're overlooking all minorities, especially the two (2) aforementioned in particular.
The 4-year/DirectConnect has worked very well for some. But then there's the counter-argument that it's limiting them and/or racist, and we need more affirmative action to get more Native and African-Americans into UCF as Freshmen. There's a lot of politicking on this, which I won't touch.
I could care less what the strategy is, much less any 'political correctness' -- i.e., nothing upsets me more than 'affluent minorities' speaking for 'under-privileged minorities' (just like any affluent over poor) -- I just want to see the enrollment representation increased, and even more so, the graduation rates, especially of first-generation college graduates (and not just already privileged minorities, like anyone already privileged).
If it works, let's target it. But we need to target it for the sake of the future generations of our fellow Native and African-Americans. I feel we've overlooked them far too long, and have distracted ourselves by feeling good about how well our fellow Hispanic-American have done in the past couple of generations.
I could care less what the strategy is, much less any 'political correctness' -- i.e., nothing upsets me more than 'affluent minorities' speaking for 'under-privileged minorities' (just like any affluent over poor) -- I just want to see the enrollment representation increased, and even more so, the graduation rates, especially of first-generation college graduates (and not just already privileged minorities, like anyone already privileged).
If it works, let's target it. But we need to target it for the sake of the future generations of our fellow Native and African-Americans. I feel we've overlooked them far too long, and have distracted ourselves by feeling good about how well our fellow Hispanic-American have done in the past couple of generations.
Thoughts? Views? Comments? Criticisms? Let's not drop into the common blame-duopoly pary rhetoric either. Let's be Floridians that care, Knights that want to see progress, and no longer just quote the Hispanic-American results as 'all minorities.'
I know some of you have ties to the UCF administration, so I'd love to hear what you're hearing.
[1] http://www.pewhispanic.org/states/state/fl/