“When life gives you lemons, make lemonade” is a common phrase used to inspire optimism despite facing adversity. The purpose of this chapter is to acknowledge the prevalence and burden of cultural taxation (the figurative lemon) in academia and to illustrate how faculty of color can design and teach race-related courses that help to develop global citizens who think critically and value reflexivity and diversity (make lemonade). In doing so, faculty can promote social justice while helping to erode the status quo related to this taxation. Based on the findings of a qualitative research study, the authors outline various perspectives from students who report experiencing personal transformations as a result of taking a graduate level class related to diversity and social justice. The chapter also focuses on the experiences of the faculty member who taught the class as part of the curriculum in an Adult Education doctoral program in the USA.
TopIntroduction
Many institutions of higher education in the United States have had to deal with challenges related to diversity, which has become especially apparent within the current socio-political climate in the United States. Chang (2002) emphasizes that historically, some postsecondary institutions did not willingly support diversity-related efforts. However, federally mandated interventions and policies, like Affirmative Action, have driven the development of institutional practices that address diversity. The scope of institutional actions ranges from offering the minimal federally mandated support for diversity practices, to the development of inclusive environments both inside and outside the classroom, in more progressive institutions. In response, and in some cases preemptively, universities across the country are acknowledging diversity as an important component of their intellectual mission and many are even promoting it as one of their institutional core values. Interestingly, according to Watson (1998), much of the espoused value of diversity is not reflective of their institutional practices. Nonetheless, in support of some diversity efforts, there is evidence that there is an increased thrust to recruit faculty of color across varying institutional types (Robinson, Byrd, Louis, & Bonner, 2013), even if due in part by internal and external pressures (Smith, Turner, Osei-Kofi, & Richards, 2004). This does not mean, though, that all problems related to recruiting and retaining diverse scholars have been solved.
Notwithstanding some admirable efforts to recruit faculty members from diverse backgrounds, scholars of color are still in the minority in America’s colleges and universities (Turner, Gonzalez, & Wood, 2008). This minority standard is even more exacerbated in the nation’s predominantly White institutions (PWIs), much in part because scholars of color tend to work at community colleges and historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) (Alex-Assensoh, 2003). Further, persistent attacks on affirmative action have not made scholars of color welcome, especially as they face additional burdens related to diversity implementation across their campuses.
Over the past two decades or so, PWIs have furthered the “language of diversity” (Brayboy, 2003, p. 72) by relying upon faculty of color to help implement diversity in their institutions. Regrettably, the literature on diversity implementation in higher education points to a preponderance of marginalization of scholars of color who are often tasked with the responsibility to serve as cheerleaders for diversity initiatives (Brayboy, 2003). Additionally, there tends to be an unequal distribution of service requirements for faculty of color in comparison to White colleagues. This continues to become more apparent as institutions attempt to diversify campuses. While on this mission to diversify, faculty of color often become inundated with requests to complete service activities, particularly serving as the ethnic representation on committees (Johnson, Kuykendall, & Laird, 2005). Such requests can cause other faculty requirements such as research and teaching to suffer, and potentially affect job satisfaction and the likelihood of promotion and tenure for junior faculty.
Brayboy (2003) refers to the challenge of hidden service agendas when Black faculty serve as the token voice of color for dealing with issues of race and ethnicity. Padilla (1994) described this overall uneven workload as cultural taxation, an imposition of situations by administration based upon race or cultural fit. Indeed, while service requirements tend to be higher for faculty of color, beyond having an uneven workload, Joseph and Hirshfield (2011) also report that faculty of color tend to face assumptions by colleagues that they would conduct race-related research. Moreover, scholars of color are expected to serve on diversity-related committees, advocate for students of color and teach race-related courses.