University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Campus change agents: examining the experiences of cultural center scholar practitioners at a predominantly White institution

(USC Thesis Other)

Campus change agents: examining the experiences of cultural center scholar practitioners at a predominantly White institution

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 1
CAMPUS CHANGE AGENTS: EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES OF CULTURAL
CENTER SCHOLAR PRACITITIONERS AT A PREDOMINANTLY WHITE INSTITUTION

by

Rosalind D. Conerly

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2017

Copyright 2017 Rosalind D. Conerly

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 2
Acknowledgements
This has been the most challenging, life changing, reflective, yet rewarding, journey so far in my
academic and professional career. I have truly learned the art of discipline and sacrifice to ensure
that I was able to finish this degree. As a first-generation college student, I never thought that I
would earn a doctoral degree, so it is a blessing to be able to be an example to my friends, family
and students that this achievement is possible with discipline and hard work. It has truly taken a
village to get me to the finish line. Though I will not list everyone by name, please understand that
anyone who has offered me words of encouragement has contributed toward my achieving this
major milestone in my life.
Prayer and my relationship with God helped me continue to write in spite of life’s
hiccups and my mother, Marie Thomas, brother and sisters, sorors and close friends were my
constant cheerleaders. Though they didn’t understand everything I was going through, they
reminded me to stay strong and that they were proud of me. My family in the USC Center for
Black Cultural and Student Affairs, Dr. Corliss Bennett-McBride who encouraged me from day
one, my student staff and the countless students and colleagues who stopped by my office just to
ask how I was doing in the program gave me the extra push to keep going. My Doctors of
Adinkra (DofA) family at USC kept me sane since we all shared in this doctoral journey together
by holding each other accountable, but they also gave me an outlet to express the struggles I
battled with balancing school, personal relationships and being a practitioner. Thank you
beautiful women of DofA for all of the constant love and support!
Thank you to Dr. Tracy Tambascia, my dissertation chair, for keeping me focused on
finishing and giving me the extra push when I needed it. Thank you to my committee members,
Dr. Alan Green and Dr. Lori Patton-Davis, for being available if I needed you and for giving me
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 3
major feedback on how to frame my study. I would also like to thank Evelyn and the staff in the
Doctoral Support Center for the weekend writes and for helping me organize my last two
chapters. You were monumental in helping me make sense and to tell my story with the data.
Again, I am greatly appreciative of my village for your constant love and support through this
process.

Thank you!!

“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”
-Philippians 4:13

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 8
Minority Serving Institutions and Cultural Centers 8
Structural Diversity vs. Informal Interactional Diversity 9
Lack of Collaboration Between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs 11
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 12
Research Questions 13
Significance of the Study 13
Limitations 14
Delimitations 15
Assumptions 15
Definitions 16
Conclusion 20
Chapter Two: Literature Review 22
Students of Color, Enrollment and Retention in Higher Education 22
Legislation Affecting Access to Higher Education 22
Students of Color at Minority Serving Institutions 24
Students of Color at Predominantly White Institutions 25
Experiences of Students of Color at Predominantly White Institutions 27
Racial and Ethnic Campus Climate 27
Dimensions of Campus Culture 28
Assessing Campus Climate 29
Bias Related Incidents Related at Predominantly White Institutions 32
Racially Themed College Parties 33
Racial Microaggressions 34
Racial Microaggressions and the Experiences of Students of Color 35
Asian American Students and Racial Microaggressions 35
Latino Students and Racial Microaggressions 36
Black/African American Students and Racial Microaggressions 37
Native American Students and Racial Microaggressions 38
Cultural Centers at Predominantly White Institutions 39
Ethnic-Specific Cultural Centers 41
Theoretical Approaches 44
Tri-Sector Practitioners Model 44
Single Loop and Double Loop Learning 45
Microaggression Framework 46
Additional Theories Used by Cultural Centers Practitioners 46
Student Affairs and Cultural Center Staff 47
Traits and Skills of Student Affairs Staff 48
Cultural Center Practitioners 49
Conclusion 50
Chapter Three: Methodology 51
Qualitative Research Design 52
Site Selection 53
Population and Sample 55
Instrumentation/Sources of Evidence 56
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 5
Data Collection 58
Location 59
Anonymity and Protection of Data 60
Data Analysis 60
Validity 61
Role of the Researcher 62
Conclusion 62
Chapter Four: Presentation of Data and Themes 63
California University Cultural Centers 63
Black Cultural Center 65
Asian American Cultural Center 67
Native American Cultural Center 68
Latino Cultural Center 69
Cultural Center Organization Structure and Demographic Information 71
Table 1: Participant Demographics 71
Emerging Themes from Data 72
Advocacy 73
Advising 76
Partnerships with Stakeholders 78
Support for Practitioners 81
Longevity of Practitioners 83
Institutional History 84
Conclusion 85
Chapter Five: Overview, Discussion, Implications, Conclusion 86
Discussion 87
Research Question One 88
Sub Research Question 90
Conceptual Frameworks and Connections to Data 92
Single and Double Loop Learning 93
Tri-Sector Practitioners Model 94
Microaggressions Framework 98
Findings and Implications for Practice 100
Scholar Practitioner as a Campus Change Agent 101
Self-Care for Scholar Practitioners 102
Collaboration Between Student Affairs and Academic Affairs 103
Student Narratives 104
Campus Climate 104
Institutional History 105
Utilizing Data to Validate Practice 107
Evolution of Ethnic-Specific Cultural Centers 108
Institutional Accountability 109
Recommendations for Future Research 109
Conclusion 110
References 111
Appendix A: Interview Protocol 120
Appendix B: Institutional Review Board Info Sheet Template 122
Appendix C: Recruitment Email 124

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 6
List of Figures
Figure 1: Cultural Centers Organization Chart 72
Figure 2: Conceptual Frameworks 92

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 7
Abstract
This qualitative study examined the experiences of scholar practitioners who oversee
Black, Asian American, Latino and Native American cultural centers at a Predominantly White
Institution in the Western region of the United States. Participants were professional staff in
leadership roles at the centers. Current cultural center literature primarily focuses on the creation
of these centers and students who utilize these spaces. There is minimal literature available on
the experiences of practitioners in the centers and their interactions with students, staff and
faculty.
This study used three frameworks: Single and Double Loop Learning, Tri-Sector
Practitioners Model and a Microaggressions Framework to examine participants’ experiences
interacting with stakeholders. Findings revealed participants make meaning of their experiences
by partnering with stakeholders, connecting their work to their personal identities, being
cognizant of institutional history and utilizing student narratives.
This study informs the field of higher education by identifying how individuals in these
centers contribute to the academic and social integration of students of color at a PWI.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 8
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs) in higher education provide opportunities for
students from diverse racial, cultural, socioeconomic, religious and other backgrounds to gain
social capital and become productive citizens. The overarching goal is to provide these
opportunities for all students, but they do not all possesses the social or cultural capital to
succeed academically and socially in these types of environments, and campuses may not have
adequate support systems to help them succeed. As a result, cultural centers were created at
PWIs to assist with ensuring students of color successfully navigate the landscape of these
institutions. This study focused on the scholar practitioners who oversee cultural centers at a
PWI. Students or people of color, for the purpose of this study, included individuals who identify
as Black/African American, Latino, Asian American and Native American.
Minority Serving Institutions and Cultural Centers
The prevalent literature about students of color and their decreased levels of degree
attainment as compared to their White counterparts frames this issue as a deficit on the part of
the students. There is a lack of research that asserts how deficit-minded institutional agents and
institutional racism contribute to these students’ lack of success at PWIs (Bensimon, 2005). An
increasing number of historically PWIs are now designated as Minority Serving Institutions
(MSI) and receive millions of dollars in federal funding to improve facilities, academic and co-
curricular programs to support students of color (Mercer & Stedman, 2008). According to
Merisotis and McCarthy (2005), included in the category of MSIs are Majority Minority
Institutions (MMI), Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Hispanic Serving
Institutions (HSI), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCU), Asian American and Native
American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) and Native and Native Hawaiian
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 9
Serving Institutions (ANNHI). Institutions classified as a MMI receive funding, but may not be
prepared to ensure these students’ successful social and academic integration into the collegiate
environment. Students of color who attend these institutions may be first-generation college
students, have higher levels of financial need, and have differing cultural traditions than some of
their White counterparts (Merisotis & McCarthy, 2005). These institutions have additional
funding to ensure that outcomes for students of color are equitable and to also close the
attainment gap. Individuals interacting with these students may not understand how their lack of
understanding of cultural traditions and norms can be detrimental to these students.
Chief diversity officers and departments such as cultural centers, retention, diversity and
inclusion offices provide services and programs for students of color on some of these campuses.
These departments often provide students the opportunity to interact with administrators from
different racial and ethnic backgrounds. A study examined the mission statements of 10 HSIs in
five states, including California and New York. The study found that none of the institutions
included their designation as an HSI in their mission statement. More general language was used,
such as diversity, multicultural, and access, to describe the institution (Contreras, Malcolm, &
Bensimon, 2008). This study is one example of how additional work needs to be done to hold
institutions accountable for incorporating their MSI designation into the goals and strategic plan.
Structural Diversity vs. Informal Interactional Diversity
PWIs are increasing the number of students of color enrolled on their campuses,
especially those identified as MSIs. Having a diverse student body or structural diversity is one
way to succeed at having a diverse campus but numbers fail to describe the experiences or
interactions among students at the institution (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado & Gurin, 2002). Research
shows that students and the university community benefit from exposure to populations from
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 10
diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Graduates of universities with a diverse community
experience greater cognitive and social development (Gurin et al., 2002). The 1978 case Regents
of the University of California vs. Bakke ruled there is a governmental interest as well as
educational benefits from having a diverse student body. Students leave their universities better
prepared to participate as active citizens in a democratic society. Informal interactional diversity
takes this concept one step further and postulates that the key to meaningful experiences between
students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds is to provide informal opportunities for them
to engage with one another outside of the classroom (Gurin et al., 2002). These interactions assist
with students’ identity development because it causes disequilibrium and challenges students to
grow intellectually.
Cultural centers assist with fostering informal interactional diversity by providing
opportunities for students to meet one another outside of the classroom. For example, students of
color in the science, technology and engineering fields may not interact with many students of
color in their classes. Cultural centers provide a space where students can meet and establish
relationships in a more relaxed setting. These spaces have strong ties to student activism as well
as to the surrounding community. The Afro American Cultural Center at Yale University was
created in 1969. History on the center’s website describes that Black Panther meetings as well as
other community meetings with Black students from neighboring universities were held in the
original building, “The House” (Yale College, 2015). Students of color in the 1960s felt isolated
and lacked a sense of belonging at PWIs (Foote, 2005). This sentiment is still felt by students of
color, which has led to the continued creation of cultural centers at higher education institutions
across the country. These spaces are an important resource for students of color, and higher
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 11
education administrators should be aware of the role these centers and scholar practitioners play
in retaining students of color at their institutions.
There are multiple models of cultural centers prominent at PWIs. They range from
ethnic-specific, which focus programs and services on a specific ethnic group. This model also
creates opportunities for dialogues focused on specific ethnic groups. Intercultural, multicultural
and cross-cultural models aim to provide programs and services to all underrepresented ethnic
groups as well to provide opportunities for dialogue between the groups and the campus
community (Patton, 2006, 2010). Some institutions have multiple cultural center models, such as
multicultural and ethnic-specific. Ethnic-specific cultural centers that identified as Black/African
American, Latino, Asian American and Native American were the focus of this study. Cultural
center staff are seen as student affairs or academic affairs professionals or a combination of both
depending on where the center is situated at the institution. Since there is no consensus on where
the centers should be housed, it makes it difficult to study these practitioners. Jenkins (2010)
created the Tri-Sector Practitioners model that aims to assist cultural center scholar practitioners
create spaces that encourage cultural engagement and opportunities for more institutional
investment in these spaces. This model is divided into three focus areas, community building and
outreach, administrative practices and cultural programming (Jenkins, 2010). This model is a
first step at creating continuity among cultural center scholar practitioners so that assessment of
the models can be accomplished. This can, ultimately, lead to the development of best or
promising practices within the field of cultural centers.
Lack of Collaboration Between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs
Student affairs and academic affairs at PWIs are structured differently, and there are not
many opportunities for collaboration unless they are intentionally created. Faculty are
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 12
accustomed to working alone and primarily in their disciplines or collaborating with other
faculty in other departments. Student affairs scholar practitioners thrive on working
collaboratively with other departments and colleagues to create seminars, workshops and
programs (Smith & Williams, 2007). This lack of collaboration across campus can hinder the
academic and social success of students. Students of color who experience overt and covert
forms of racial discrimination, also known as racial microaggressions, can feel disconnected
from their institution (Harwood, Huntt, Mendenhall, & Lewis, 2012). Students who feel
disconnected tend to not seek out campus resources. They experience lower levels of academic
success, have feelings of isolation from the university community and are, at times, less likely to
participate in university-sponsored activities (Harwood et al, 2012; Sue, Bucceri, Lin, Nadal, &
Torino, 2007; Minikel-Lacocque, 2013). An established partnership between professors (in the
classroom) and student affairs (outside of the classroom) will enable both entities to work
together to ensure students receive the support they need to succeed socially and academically.
Statement of the Problem
There is little empirical research on cultural centers in higher education. Most of the
research focuses on the creation of the centers and the experiences of students who utilize these
spaces and not the scholar practitioners who oversee the day-to-day activities. There is limited
research available to inform the practice of these individuals and to assist with validating their
experiences at PWIs. Research on these individuals may assist in creating best or promising
practices for current and future cultural center scholar practitioners.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to better understand the experiences of scholar
practitioners who oversee the Black, Latino, Native American and Asian American cultural
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 13
centers at a private PWI in the western region of the United States. This study informed the field
of higher education by identifying how individuals in these centers contribute to the academic
and social integration of students of color at PWIs. This study also shed light on the differing
experiences of cultural center scholar practitioners and the relationships they create with
stakeholders at the institution and in the community to foster a more inclusive environment for
students of color.
Research Questions
The research questions that were used to guide the study are:
1. How do ethnic-specific cultural center scholar practitioners make meaning of their
experiences and foster relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the
community?
a. How do cultural center scholar practitioners utilize student narratives to inform
senior level administrators about the experiences of students of color at the
university?
Significance of the Study
This study is significant to the field of higher education because the enrollment of
students of color at PWIs continues to increase. Many of the faculty and administrators at PWIs
and MSIs lack the knowledge to assist these students with transitioning to and succeeding at their
institution. It is important to understand how scholar practitioners who oversee these centers can
assist in ensuring that students succeed socially and academically. This study aimed to also
showcase the value of creating informal and formal opportunities for students, faculty and staff
to engage in discourse about race and culture. Additional research in this area is significant since
many PWIs have ethnic-specific cultural centers on their campuses. Cultural center scholar
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 14
practitioners are an important population to study because they regularly interact with a large
number of students of color. They are privy to students’ positive and negative experiences and
are largely responsible for assisting with their identity development. This population provides
further insight on strategies for advocating for students of color. This study aimed to shed light
on the varied experiences and expertise of scholar practitioners who oversee ethnic-specific
cultural centers. As Jenkins (2010) highlighted,
Universities verbally espouse a commitment to these issues but do very little to ensure
staff can effectively manage, replicate, and create culture on a contemporary college
campus. These professionals require expertise in cultural studies, student development
and program implementation. And the field must begin to establish viable cultural
practice models that guide professional practice, including program development, office
management, and student advising. (p.138)
This qualitative study involved interviews and document analysis with institutional agents who
serve as leaders of the Black, Latino, Native American and Asian American cultural centers at
California University, an institution in the western region of the United States.
Limitations
There were several limitations to this study. The first limitation was that only one PWI
was used. The second limitation is the location of the institution in the western region of the
United States could have yielded findings that may not be found at an institution in another part
of the country. The third limitation was the small size of the sample. The sampling method used
was complete sampling, since the goal was to sample all professional leaders in the ethnic-
specific cultural centers. The last limitation was the time spent in the field conducting research.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 15
Additional data collection tools such as observations would have provided insight but were not
used due to the unobservable nature of the inquiry.
Delimitations
The focus of this study were ethnic-specific cultural centers at California University
(CU). Multicultural, intercultural and cross-cultural centers were not examined. Though all
models have similarities, there are distinct differences between ethnic-specific centers and other
models. This study examined scholar practitioners who oversee a Black, Latino, Asian American
and Native American cultural center. There are other ethnic-specific centers at CU, but these four
centers were the focus since they are the most common models found at institutions and have the
most literature available. This study focused specifically on scholar practitioners and excluded
undergraduate and graduate students who work in these spaces.
Assumptions
One assumption that guided the study was that all scholar practitioners were well versed
in the literature about cultural centers and incorporated this research into their daily practice.
Another assumption was that all ethnic-specific cultural scholar practitioners were supported in
their efforts to support students of color and educate their campus about issues related to social
justice, diversity, equity and inclusivity. The last assumption was that cultural center scholar
practitioners were underutilized when it comes to examining the experiences of students of color
at PWIs. These assumptions were based on the researcher’s informal observations and narratives
of cultural center scholar practitioners at various institutions.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 16
Definitions
Below is a list of terms that were used throughout the study.
Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institution - An institution with at last 20%
Native Alaskan and 10% Native Hawaiian undergraduate student enrollment (Mercer &
Stedman, 2008).
Asian American Cultural Center - A space comprised of full-time scholar practitioners and
student staff at a PWI that allows Asian American students to explore their racial and ethnic
identity development, activism and to establish networks with Asian American alumni, faculty
and staff. Emphasis in dismantling the model minority stereotype and providing opportunities for
mentoring are important components of these centers (Patton, 2010).
Asian American Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institution - These institutions
are comprised of at least 10% of Asian American and Pacific Islander students some that are also
identified as low-income. (National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander
Research in Education, 2011)
Black/African American Cultural Center - A space staffed by full-time scholar practitioners
and student staff at a PWI that allows Black/African American students to explore their racial
and ethnic identity development. These centers allow for Black students to learn about African
American culture as well as provide opportunities for leadership development, activism and
mentoring. Important components of these centers include connection to the local Black
community and establishing relationships with Black alumni, faculty, staff and students (Patton,
2010).
Campus Climate and Campus Culture - In this study, campus climate and campus culture will
be used interchangeably. They refer to student’s perceptions of their experiences both inside and
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 17
outside of the classroom. There are three components to this definition: 1) the perception of
participant’s view of a phenomenon which allows for the individual to make comparisons over
an extended period of time 2) a focus on current beliefs and behaviors 3) the concept is ever
changing (Hart & Fellabaum, 2008).
Community Center - Though some institutions refer to their cultural centers as community
centers, in this study, they were still classified as a cultural center.
Counterspace - Physical spaces at PWIs that are a retreat from the larger campus where students
of color experience racial microaggressions and other forms of discrimination. These are safe
spaces where students can build community and share strategies for combating challenges they
may face at their institution (Patton, McEwen, Rendón, & Howard ‐Hamilton, 2007; Patton,
2010).
Counterstories - Narratives that cast doubt on the accepted myths of marginalized groups
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2012)
Critical Race Theory - This theory focuses on the inequities found in racism, power and
privilege in the legal system and in society. It recognizes the racism is engrained into the fabric
of American culture and utilizes narratives to validate the experiences of marginalized
populations (Hiraldo, 2010; Delgado & Stefancic, 2012).
Cultural Center - A space created for students in the racial or ethnic minority at PWIs. These
centers were created to assist with the retention of these students as well as a space to discuss
social issues affecting marginalized communities (Patton 2010; Hefner, 2002)
Ethnicity - Group characteristics based on shared language, ancestry, national origin and other
characteristics (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012).
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 18
Ethnic-Specific Cultural Center - A model of cultural center at PWIs that was created to assist
with the retention and identity development of a specific ethnic group.
Hispanic Serving Institution - An institution that has at least 25% full-time undergraduate
students who identify as Hispanic (Mercer & Stedman, 2008).
Historically Black College and University - An institution established before 1964 with the
primary mission to educate African Americans. These institutions are eligible to receive Title III
funds of the Higher Education Act (Mercer & Stedman, 2008).
Informal Interactional Diversity - Institutions that frequently provide opportunities for students
from all racial and ethnic backgrounds to interact with one another (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, Gurin,
2002).
Latino Cultural Center - A space comprised of full-time scholar practitioners and student staff
at a PWI that allows Latino/a students to explore their racial and ethnic identity development.
This center also allows Latino students to engage in activism, leadership development,
community and alumni outreach as well as connect with other Latino/a faculty and staff.
Community and family outreach is an important component of this model of cultural center
(Patton, 2010).
Majority Minority Institution - these institutions are identified by the percentage of the student
population who is a racial or ethnic majority (Mercer & Stedman, 2008).
Minority Serving Institution - Institutions that are comprised of an undergraduate and graduate
student enrollment of a single or multiple ethnic groups that exceeds 50% of the overall student
population (Mercer & Stedman, 2008).
Native American/American Indian Cultural Center - A space comprised of full-time scholar
practitioners and student staff at a PWI that allows Native American students to explore their
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 19
racial and ethnic identity development. These centers address the high attrition rate of Native
American students as well as the cultural nuances of the various tribes. An important component
of these centers are the value of communal concerns (Patton, 2010).
Predominantly White Institution - A college or university where White students comprise 50%
or more of enrollment. Patterns and traditions at these institutions emulate Western European
universities (Lomotey, 2010).
Race - Individuals who share similar phenotype and other physical characteristics. Some
research suggests that race is socially constructed (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012).
Racial Microaggressions - Covert or overt forms of verbal, environmental or behavioral acts
based on race that can be classified as hostile or derogatory. Racial microaggressions are
categorized into three categories; microinsults (unconscious), microassaults (conscious) and
microinvalidations (unconscious) (Minikel-Lacocque, 2013).
Scholar Practitioner - An individual who bridges research and practice by grounding individual
practice in theory (Herbet, 2010; Short & Shindell, 2009).
Senior/Upper Level Administrators - Individuals such as a vice provost/president of student
affairs, or leaders in the university president’s cabinet.
Sense of Belonging - The extent to which students feel supported, respected and included by
individuals at their institution (Goodenow, 1992).
Student Affairs Practitioners - Individuals who administer a wide range of programs and
support services that include a service-oriented approach. The field is moving towards a more
collaborative partnership with faculty focused on student learning (Smith & Williams, 2007).
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 20
Structural Diversity - Students enrolled at a college or university from different ethnic and
racial groups. Numerical representation of this type of diversity is often emphasized at
institutions (Gurin et al., 2002).
Students of Color - In this study, the phrase “students of color” refers to those who identify as
Black/African American, Latino, Asian American or Native American.
Tribal College and University - Institutions identified under the Tribally Controlled College or
University Act of 1978. The title also applies to institutions identified in the Equity in Education
Land Grant Status Act of 1994 (Mercer & Stedman, 2008).
Conclusion
Research that examines the experiences of scholar practitioners in ethnic-specific cultural
centers is scarce. These counterspaces have been in existence for over 50 years and are still
emerging at institutions across the United States. These spaces are still needed to assist with the
support and development of students of color at PWIs (Patton, 2010). Scholar practitioners who
oversee these spaces are a blend of student affairs professionals and counselors and are experts in
a variety of fields. The subsequent chapter provides a literature review about the campus racial
climate at PWIs as well as research about the enrollment of students of color and an in-depth
history of cultural centers and student affairs practitioners. The literature differs on terminology
used to identify Black, Latino, Native American and Asian American individuals. Some research
use the terms students of color, people of color, or racially minoritized and some still use
minority as a term. The researcher recognizes that such terms have inherent political meaning
beyond their obvious use in everyday society. In this study students of color and people of color
are used to emphasize the reference to the race and ethnicity of these individuals unless the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 21
author references published research in which other terminology is used. This review is helpful
in creating context for the study of ethnic-specific cultural center scholar practitioners.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 22
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review provides additional insight into the experiences of students of color
at PWIs and how the campus climate contributes to these individuals’ positive and negative
experiences. Before delving into literature about the experiences of students of color at PWIs, it
is important to emphasize the role that cultural center scholar practitioners play in their success.
The end of the chapter presents a discussion of cultural centers, student affairs, and cultural
center practitioners to give additional context.
Students of Color, Enrollment and Retention in Higher Education
The history of students of color and enrollment and retention at PWIs in the United States
has been turbulent. There continues to be an increase in the enrollment of students of color at
PWIs across the country. Having a diverse student population and fostering cross-cultural
interactions can have a positive indirect effect on personal growth, purpose in life, recognition of
racism and civic engagement (Bowman, Brandenberger, Hill, & Lapsley, 2011). For the purpose
of this review “students/people of color” will be used in reference to individuals who identify as
Black/African American, Latino/Hispanic, Asian American and/or Native American.
Legislation Affecting Access to Higher Education
Brown vs. Board of Education was a landmark case that led to the desegregation of public
schools in the United States. This Supreme Court ruling stated that it was a violation of the Equal
Protection clause in the 14th Amendment (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954). Though the
origin of the case was a Black girl’s denial from an all-White elementary school in her
neighborhood, this case is still relevant to the current discourse on racially and ethnically diverse
students’ enrollment at PWIs (Zirkel, & Cantor, 2004). Ten years later, the Civil Rights Act of
1964 stated that discrimination against a person based on their race, color, religion, sexual
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 23
orientation or nationality was unconstitutional (Feagin, 1991). This landmark piece of legislation
eventually led to the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, which prohibits the racial
discrimination of students, faculty and staff (United States Department of Justice, 2012). All of
this legislation resulted in the increase of students enrolling in desegregated high schools and,
later, at institutions of higher education. In the years following the enacting of this legislation
there continues to be remnants of racial tension and discrimination related to admission at elite
PWIs. For a number of years, affirmative action assisted with ensuring that public universities
were admitting a diverse pool of students to competitive universities, which was supported and
disputed by multiple groups (Santos, Cabrera, & Fosnacht, 2010).
In California, Proposition 209 was passed in 1996 to ban public universities from using
race as a factor in college admission decisions. This led to the decrease in Black and Latino
student enrollment between 1995 and 1998 (Santos et al., 2010). At the University of Michigan,
the notion of ensuring that each incoming law school class was racially and ethnically diverse
was challenged in 2003 in Gratz v. Bollinger. A lawsuit was filed after a White applicant was
denied admission to the institution on the basis of race. The University of Michigan provided
solid evidence for the educational benefits of diversity as a key legal rationale for considering
race in college admissions (Bowman & Brandenberger, 2012). Some states and institutions still
defend the need for race to be considered in admissions decisions while others continue to view
the policy as reverse discrimination. A recent challenge to race-based admissions practices is the
2016 Supreme Court ruling in Fisher v. The University of Texas. Abigail Fisher, a prospective
student was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008 on the basis of not
having grades that met admissions standards and ensuring that the incoming class included an
ethnically and racially diverse group of students. Fisher, a White student, challenged this
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 24
practice, but, in 2016, the Supreme Court upheld the institution’s practices of race-conscious
admissions (Liptak, 2016).
Legislation created to increase access to education for students of color has also had an
impact on the creation of cultural centers in higher education. Once students are enrolled in these
institutions, they face navigating a new environment where they may not have many
opportunities to interact with individuals who look like them. Cultural centers assist students
with identifying others that share similar cultural values, traditions and beliefs.
Students of Color at Minority Serving Institutions
MSIs are higher education institutions that serve students of color who are highly
represented on their campus. MSIs have several categories based on federal education policies;
they also receive funding based on their MSI designation. These institutions all have different
missions, goals and purposes, but the one component they all hold in common is the high number
of students of color that comprise their student population (Gasman, Baez, & Turner, 2008).
Categories of MSIs include HBCUs, which were originally created to educate Black students;
MMIs, which are institutions comprised of one or more minority groups that total over 50% of
the undergraduate and graduate student population; HSIs, which are degree-granting universities
with over 25% full-time undergraduate Hispanic students enrolled; and TCUs, which are
accredited universities where over 50% of students are Native American (Gasman et al., 2008).
AANAPISIs are the newest designation of MSIs. These institutions have to enroll at least 10% of
a minority student population and must have a certain number of students classified as low-
income (National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education,
2011). Although some institutions can designate themselves as MSIs and/or MMIs, they may not
excel at supporting these students’ needs. There is limited research documenting the experiences
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 25
of students enrolled at HSIs and other MSIs. One study examined the experiences of Latino
students enrolled at an HSI to identify if students received similar services as a Black student
enrolled at an HBCU. The study found that the Latino students’ experiences were similar to
Latino students enrolled at a PWI (Nelson, Bridges, Morelon-Quainoo, Williams, & Holmes,
2007).
California State University, Los Angeles (Cal State LA) is designated as a HSI with over
53% of students enrolled identified as Hispanic. This institution is an example of how a campus
adapted to a changing student demographic. Cal State LA has programs that support the needs
and development of their majority student population as well as outreach to the surrounding
Hispanic community. Cal State LA has housed a high school on their campus since 1985 and
also opened the Harriet and Charles Luckman Fine Arts complex, a privately funded
multicultural space (California State University, Los Angeles, 2016). This institution also has
several ethnic-specific cultural centers that assist with the social and academic integration of
specific student populations as well as foster opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue. The trait
that makes Cal State LA unique is that the entire institution appears to be making a concerted
effort toward the support and development of students and prospective students of color.
Students of Color at Predominantly White Institutions
The inquiry as to how to better retain students of color at PWIs has been a popular
phenomenon for institutions and researchers to address, but even more attention should focus on
the attrition rate of students of color at PWIs. It would be difficult to address how to better retain
these students if we are unable to identify the challenges students face on their campuses. This
may be a more difficult issue to examine because it forces institutions to assess their current
practices to identify the gaps in the development and support for specific student populations.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 26
Attrition rates for students of color at PWIs vary and a number of factors are considered,
such as location, size and climate of the institution. These factors also vary depending on the
race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and other identities of students enrolled. Some of the
documented reasons students choose to leave their institutions are issues with financial aid,
location of the campus, roommate concerns, socioeconomic status, lack of motivation, and
campus climate (Aragon, 2000; Sherman, Giles, & Williams-Green, 1994). A study conducted in
the 1972-1973 academic term consisted of interviews with 785 Black students at 40 colleges and
PWIs across the United States. Some of the recommendations suggested that universities should
be more attentive to students’ needs and that Black students tended to believe that their
university was not in tune with their needs (Sherman et al., 1994). There are other issues that
lead to high attrition rates of students of color at PWIs that may not be documented as much as
the aforementioned concerns. Students who experience an unwelcome campus climate as well as
racial microaggressions are also more likely to leave the institution, but most institutions do not
verify why students choose to leave, so some of the key issues are left undocumented. Cultural
centers at PWIs assist students with addressing issues they may face at their institutions, such as
integrating into their new environment. Cultural nourishment is a termed coined to explain how
Latino college students combat experiences of marginalization on their campus (Patton, 2010).
Though it is a term coined for the Latino student experience, it could easily be applied to Black,
Asian American and Native American students. Students gain this nourishment by associating
with friends, family, staff and faculty who may share their language, as well as music, art and
other activities that affirm their cultural identity. Ethnic-specific cultural centers provide this
source of nourishment by providing a physical space for students to interact with individuals who
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 27
share similar cultural backgrounds as well as feeling like they do not have to assimilate to the
majority population at their institution.
Experiences of Students of Color at Predominantly White Institutions
The Diversity in Learning Environments Survey is a national assessment created to assist
public and private 4-year institutions with evaluating their campus climate and practices
(Hurtado & Ruiz, 2012). This survey focused on the experiences of students at PWIs in Texas
and California. Data from the 2012 survey showed that “60.4% of Underrepresented Minority
(URM) students on low diversity campuses reported being the target of verbal comments and this
is higher (67.2%) among Black students” (Hurtado & Ruiz, 2013, p. 3). The data also revealed
that, nationally, many instances of racially based discrimination are unreported with only 13% of
students reporting these cases to campus administrators (Hurtado & Ruiz, 2013). Respondents
reported that campuses that were more ethnically diverse were more welcoming for students, but
institutions need to create opportunities for diverse groups of students to interact with one
another inside and outside of the classroom.
There have been strides in higher education in terms of the increased number of students
of color enrolled at PWIs and institutions that are now designated as minority serving. Though
these students are admitted to these institutions and graduate, they still experience campus life
differently than their White counterparts (Hurtado & Ruiz, 2012). Cultural center scholar
practitioners assist with ensuring that students are connected to resources that will contribute
toward a more positive experience at the institution.
Racial and Ethnic Campus Climate
Campus climate at PWIs is a broad and at times intangible concept that is defined
differently by each institution. Some definitions focus solely on how students perceive their
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 28
interactions with others inside of the classroom (Woodard & Sims, 2000). Other definitions of
campus climate are broad and include interactions and perceptions within the larger campus
community that includes faculty, staff and students. Some definitions also used the terms campus
climate and campus culture interchangeably. Some researchers use differing definitions of
campus climate and campus culture, but, for the purpose of this literature review, campus climate
and campus culture are used interchangeably. Campus climate surveys can be instrumental when
examining the roles that all stakeholders play in fostering a welcoming environment for students
of color.
As the racial and ethnic campus climate at PWIs is discussed, it is important to note the
differing perceptions that the larger campus community may have about issues of diversity as it
relates to campus climate. Faculty and administrators may value the role that diversity plays at
the institution but may hold stereotypical views of why students of color do not succeed
(Bensimon, 2005). Cultural centers scholar practitioners at PWIs have a close pulse on the
campus climate of students of color due to the large number of students involved in programs in
their centers and also how closely these centers interact with individuals in other areas of the
university.
Dimensions of Campus Culture
Hart and Fellabaum (2008) identified four dimensions that are helpful to examine when
assessing campus culture. They are institutional history, structural diversity, psychological
climate and behavioral climate. Institutional history in the context of campus climate highlights
longstanding outdated policies that may prevent cross-cultural interaction or that may
unintentionally benefit particular groups over others. Structural diversity refers to PWIs’
increasing the ethnic and racial population of the campus, which is an important first step toward
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 29
improving campus climate. This has strong implications for a campus because, if there is an
increase in students of color, but there are no programs or policies in place to support them, they
may be unsatisfied with their college experience (Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, Hurtado, & Allen,
1998). The psychological dimension refers to how individuals perceive certain aspects of the
campus climate such as the institution’s views on racial discrimination, their stance on issues of
diversity and how university administrators respond to others from different racial and ethnic
groups (Milem et al., 1998). The behavioral dimension is the fourth and final concept to analyze
when assessing campus climate. This dimension examines reports of interactions including those
from different racial and ethnic populations. In this literature review the racial and ethnic climate
at PWIs is most relevant when analyzing why cultural centers were created at universities.
Assessing Campus Climate
Institutions understand the importance of assessing the overall campus climate to better
understand how students, faculty and staff are interacting with each other as well as how these
interactions are shaping experiences at the institution. Many institutions choose to disseminate
campus climate surveys to capture information anonymously. The majority of research that has
been conducted about campus climate has focused on the racial, ethnic as well as gender climate
at an institution (Hart & Fellabaum, 2008). The racial and ethnic campus climate of PWIs is the
primary focus of this literature review, since this aspect primarily identifies how the experiences
of students of color differ from those of their White counterparts. The Cooperative Institutional
Research Program (CIRP) is a longitudinal study of college students. A project within CIRP, The
Campus Racial Climate: Contexts of Conflict is the most widely referenced research in campus
climate at PWIs (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 1992). Initially, 34,323 students were
identified to participate in the survey; data were collected from 10,640 students who responded.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 30
A specific sampling technique was used to only capture data from White, Black African
American and Latino students from 116 PWIs (Hurtado, 1992). A major finding documented
that, among students of color who attended 4-year public and private institutions, one in four had
perceptions of some form of racial conflict. Their White counterparts reported lower levels of
racial conflict. The study also found that between 36% and 39% of respondents perceived a lack
of trust between students of color and university administrators (Harper & Hurtado, 2007;
Hurtado, 1992). Findings from this study can be helpful in demonstrating how PWIs can address
racial conflict and the lack of trust that students of color have with university administration
(Harper & Hurtado, 2007).
Impact of campus climate on students. Allen (1992) studied African American students
attending PWIs and HBCUs and found that campus climate was a major factor in their academic
success. The HBCU climate was more welcoming and provided more psychological and social
support, which enabled students to feel a stronger sense of community and have increased levels
of confidence and led them to excel academically (Allen, 1992). The African American students
who attended PWIs were a mixture of students who adapted and others who struggled to
integrate into the campus culture. Students who succeeded did so by establishing relationships
with White students and adjusting to differing cultural norms. Other students struggled with
forming relationships with their professors and often had to cope with multiple forms of
discrimination which led to feelings of isolation and a negative view of themselves which
hindered them from succeeding academically (Allen 1992).
Impact of campus climate on student affairs professionals. Research on the
experiences of student affairs professionals is limited. This career field is vast and includes
individuals ranging from advisors, residence life, cultural center practitioners to sorority and
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 31
fraternity life staff. Each of these individuals hold differing views of the campus culture based on
the population of students and colleagues they interact with on a daily basis. Garcia (2015)
published a study that examined how student affairs professionals perceive the campus racial
climate at an HSI. Though the study focused on the experiences of 15 student affairs
professionals, the findings contribute to literature in this area. The findings showed that
participants tended to express the importance of compositional diversity or the presence of
students, staff and faculty of color at their institution (Garcia, 2015). It also revealed the
microclimate or department where they worked had a significant influence on how they viewed
the racial campus climate. The staff members who had a more positive work environment
worked in spaces such as in the office of outreach and recruitment where they interact daily with
people of color (Garcia, 2015). The study also highlighted that, though it is an HSI, similarly to
students, staff also experienced racial microaggressions on their campus (Garcia, 2015).
Campus climate surveys. As mentioned earlier, many higher education institutions
administer climate surveys to gain a better understanding of the campus culture from faculty,
staff and students. To gain a more focused perspective on the campus climate, institutions may
choose to administer separate surveys depending on the stakeholder group. The group that is
oftentimes left out of the equation when assessing campus culture is staff, which is a large group
inclusive of employees in positions that manage the day-to-day operations of the campus, such as
custodial staff, food service employees, and administrative assistants (Hart & Fellabaum, 2008).
Staff who oversee cultural centers can provide insight to upper administration on the perceived
climate at the institution specifically around issues of race and ethnicity. There is a lack of best
practices established when thinking of the most effective way of administering surveys, and there
is also no general consensus on a theoretical framework to use when creating and administering
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 32
surveys (Hart & Fellabaum, 2008). Assessing the racial campus climate can assist administrators
with identifying problems that contribute to the negative experiences of students, faculty and
staff of color at the institution.
Bias Related Incidents Related at Predominantly White Institutions
Cultural centers at PWIs are sometimes questioned about their purpose and why they are
needed at a university. Critics of the ethnic-specific cultural center model postulate that these
centers further isolate students from the rest of the campus population and that the goal should be
to foster dialogue among all students (Hord, 2005). What is often not examined consistently are
negative incidents related to race and culture bias that occur at PWIs that cause students of color
to feel unable to acclimate into the overall campus population. What is considered a bias related
incident? These incidents are categorized as hostile actions, language, and images against an
individual or group based on a number of factors such as race, ethnicity, religion and sexual
orientation (Dalton, 1991). There are documented accounts of bias related incidents, including
racially themed college parties, hate speech to bullying targeting specific ethnic and cultural
groups occurring at PWI across the country for decades and is engrained into the overall history
of the United States. These incidents are often directed toward marginalized communities of
students at PWIs. Student groups most affected by these incidents are students who identify as
African American/Black, Latino, Asian and Asian Pacific American, Native American, LGBT,
and with religious affiliations other than Christian. Cultural centers play a role in providing a
safe space for students to seek assistance with reporting these incidents and provide opportunities
to educate the campus community about why certain incidents negatively depict certain groups
of individuals (Patton, 2010). In the last few years, an increase in negative incidents related to
race and culture at PWIs across the country is apparent, but this could be due to the increased use
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 33
of social media. With the prevalence of social media, these incidents are oftentimes captured in
real time and are immediately shared with everyone. Racially themed college parties and racial
microaggressions are discussed to explore the varied nature of incidents related to race and
culture bias at PWIs.
Racially Themed College Parties
One type of bias related incident that has reoccurred at PWIs for at least 30 years are
racially themed college parties (Garcia, Johnston, Garibay, Herrera, & Giraldo, 2011). One of the
most recent highly publicized parties took place in October of 2015 at the University of
California, Los Angeles. The Kanye Western-themed party was hosted by Sigma Phi Epsilon and
Alpha Phi a fraternity and sorority (Rocha, 2015). There were reports of students attending the
party wearing baggy clothes, gold jewelry and exaggerated buttocks to mock celebrities Kanye
West and Kim Kardashian. Some students were also seen with black soot on their faces, which
some students referred to as Black face (Rocha, 2015). There are some common themes that
emerge in the research about racially themed college parties. These parties are often sponsored
by historically White fraternities and sororities. The parties are themed to stereotype people of
color or other marginalized groups. Lastly, most organizations that host themed parties do not
feel that their parties were offensive to these racial or ethnic groups (Bartlett, 2001; Garcia et al.,
2011). An article by Garcia et al. (2011) aimed to deconstruct these parties and to determine if
they are, indeed, racist. The article listed parties that have occurred at PWIs since 1986. One of
the more infamous parties was the “Compton Cookout” in 2010 which was hosted by an
organization affiliated with the University of California, San Diego. Attendees were encouraged
to wear nappy hair, gold teeth, to speak loudly with broken vocabulary and to eat watermelon
(Garcia et al., 2011). Other parties on the list were “Halloween in the Hood” that took place at
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 34
Johns Hopkins University in 2007, “Once Upon a Time in Mexico” that took place at the
University of Southern California in 2005, and “Dress Like a Nigga Night” that took place at
Rider College in 1990 (Garcia et al., 2011). The article encouraged using Critical Race Theory
(CRT) to examine these parties and to facilitate dialogue on how they perpetuate stereotypes and
racism toward marginalized communities. Using CRT as a lens also assists with validating the
counterstories or narratives of students of color. The article also goes on to define race, racism
and racial microaggressions and how they all play a role in explaining how certain bias incidents
related to race and culture occur on campus. It is not the sole responsibility of cultural centers to
create dialogue about how these incidents have lasting negative effects on students. But these
centers can assist with holding institutions accountable for creating opportunities for individuals
to share how these incidents create an unwelcome campus climate for people of color.
Racial Microaggressions
Other acts of bias related to race and culture are experienced by students and staff of
color at PWIs are in the form of racial microaggressions, which can be either subtle or overt
forms of racism (Garcia, 2015). Racial microaggressions have long-lasting effects on students
because they may feel they are not severe enough to report them to someone at their institution.
These experiences can also lead to students feeling disconnected, isolated, having lower levels of
academic achievement and decreased participation in activities sponsored by the institution
(Harwood et al., 2012; Minikel-Lacocque, 2013; Sue et al., 2007). Sue et al. (2007) categorize
racial microaggressions into three categories, microassaults, microinsults and microinvalidations.
These acts can be described as conscious or unconscious. Microassaults are the more traditional
form of racism. They are verbal and nonverbal acts intended to intentionally hurt an individual.
Microinsults are more subtle comments, behaviors or gestures that can be depicted as racially
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 35
offensive. Microinvalidations occur when individuals deny or minimalize the experiences of
people of color (Harwood et al., 2012).
Harwood et al. (2012) conducted a study on students of color who lived in residence halls
at a PWI. They conducted focus groups with Black/African American, Latino, Asian American
and Native American students and documented over 70 accounts of racial microaggressions.
These experiences included comments made by roommates, unequal treatment and racial slurs
written in shared spaces in the residence halls (Harwood et al., 2012). The authors emphasized
that living in the residence halls was instrumental in students creating a connection with the
university and development as a student; a negative perception of the campus climate can have a
negative effect on the retention of students of color at the university.
Racial Microaggressions and the Experiences of Students of Color
The experiences of students of color are often examined as a group but it is important to
also highlight how some of these subgroups experience racial microaggressions. It is important
to examine how racial microaggressions affect each racial and ethnic group because the lasting
effects may manifest differently in each group.
Asian American Students and Racial Microaggressions
Asian American students are often depicted as the model minority and seen as exempt
from negative stereotypes or racial discrimination. A study by Sue et al. (2007) shed light on the
experiences of these students at PWIs. This study used focus groups to capture narratives from
participants. Some of the responses included accounts of people assuming they were foreign-
born or the assumption that all Asians are smart and good at math (Sue et al., 2007). Some of the
most poignant themes that emerged from the study were students feeling invisible, the denial of a
racial reality and the invalidation of interethnic differences. A 2015 study examined how Asian
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 36
American students’ experience with racism affects their experience at PWIs (Museus & Park,
2015). The qualitative study used interviews with 46 students from six higher education
instructions across the nation. Findings are similar to those studies conducted years prior.
Themes emerged of student feeling isolated, feelings of being the forever foreigner and the
model minority stereotype (Museus & Park, 2015). Asian American cultural centers combat
these negative experiences by assisting with the development of Asian American student identity
and by recognizing the diversity of ethnicities within the construct of identifying as Asian
(Patton, 2010).
Latino Students and Racial Microaggressions
Latino students’ experiences with racial microaggressions are often assumed to be the
same as those of Black/African American students, but it is important to give voice to each sub
group to validate their individual experiences. Minikel-Lacocque (2013) examined the
experiences of six Latino students as they transitioned into a PWI during their first year. Data
was captured from field notes and interviews to examine racial microaggressions that these
students experienced. The study used CRT as a framework to analyze the data because it
emphasized using the voice of those that have been negatively affected by racism (Minikel-
Lacocque, 2013). The data showed that these students had a difficult time integrating into the
institution. One participant shared that, even though she had a 3.6 grade point average (GPA),
she still felt like an outsider on campus. A poignant point was that institutions generally measure
the success of students based on their GPAs and graduation rate, but they do not take into
consideration the negative experiences students may have endured while persisting at the
institution. The article highlighted the term contested microaggression, which describes what
happens when the target defines the act as racist, but the perpetrator does not perceive it as such
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 37
(Minikel-Lacocque, 2013). The author ended the article with four recommendations on how to
create a more racially inclusive environment. Many Latino cultural centers at PWIs align with
some of the recommendations, which include an increased presence of faculty and staff of color
and programs and services that assist with the retention of students of color (Minikel-Lacocque,
2013).
Black/African American Students and Racial Microaggressions
In 2015, the University of Missouri’s (Mizzou) Black student body president voiced his
experiences with racial discrimination on campus, which prompted others to share their
narratives. Mizzou students were outraged by the lack of response from administrators. This
eventually led to a hunger strike and student athletes threatening to not play during football
season (Ballentine, 2015). This is important to emphasize because many Black students
experience higher levels of racial microaggression but many of the incidents go unreported
(Hurtado & Ruiz, 2012). Solórzano, Ceja and Yosso (2000) conducted a study using CRT as a
lens to examine how racial microaggressions affect the campus climate for Black/African
American students. Data was captured through focus groups with participants from three PWIs.
There were a range of experiences captured in the focus groups. Some of the experiences were
pressures and frustration from experiencing racial microaggressions that led to students dropping
a class, changing their major and some students discontinuing their studies at their current
institution to attend an HBCU. The study also pointed out that Black/African American students
were more likely to experience more subtle forms of racism in a classroom or academic setting,
and more blatant forms of racism were more likely to occur in social spaces on and off campus
such as residence halls and parties (Solórzano et al., 2000). The study also noted that students
created counterspaces to combat the experiences they were having at their institution. These
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 38
spaces included joining historically Black sorority and fraternities and living in residence hall
communities geared toward supporting Black and other students of color as well as utilizing
departments such as cultural centers that supported their needs (Solórzano et al., 2000). Black
cultural centers at PWIs serve as these counterspaces because students utilize the space to build a
support system with other Black faculty, staff and students and to share about their experiences
at their institution. There is also research that suggests that Black students are often lumped
together and specific ethnic groups are often times overlooked. Black domestic and foreign-born
students may have differing experiences and interpret racial microaggressions differently
(Griffin, Cunningham, & George Mwangi, 2015).
Native American Students and Racial Microaggressions
There is limited research that discusses the experiences of Native American students at
PWIs. The research that is available focuses on strategies on how to better support Native
American students at PWIs, since this population historically has a high attrition rate (Patton,
2010). Reyhner and Dodd (1995) studied the experiences of Native American students in higher
education and found that they experience racial microaggressions in a way similar to other
students of color. Racial slurs and other verbal attacks seemed to be the most prevalent. All of
these experiences lead to students feeling isolated and unable to fully integrate into the campus
culture. The article also examined a study of Native American students who were successful at
their PWI. Twenty-four students were interviewed over the phone. Some students cited that they
were succeeding through the support of family, friends and support services at the institution
(Reyhner & Dodd, 1995). TRIO programs and cultural centers were mentioned multiple times as
services that students sought if they had problems; it was noted that students sought academic
support services before seeking out faculty. One of the recommendations was the creation of
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 39
Indian student services, which speaks to the importance of these centers at PWIs. The center
would assist Native American students with preserving their ethnic identity and sharing their
culture with the rest of the campus community.
Students, faculty and staff of color are becoming more vocal about both covert and overt
forms of racism and other forms of bias that continue to occur on their campuses. Mizzou is a
recent example of how the willingness of the student body president to share about his incident
being called a “nigger” spurred others to share their experiences with racial discrimination at the
university (Resmovits, 2015). Students of color at universities across the country have banded
together using forms of social media under a variety of hashtags, such as #blacklivesmatter and
#ConcernedStudents1950, to show support and solidarity with others experiencing racism on
their campuses. Cultural centers foster environments where students are encouraged to use their
voices to express their concerns on their campuses.
Cultural Centers at Predominantly White Institutions
Cultural centers emerged in in the early to mid-1960s at a time of great cultural change in
the United States. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 stated that discrimination of a person based on
their race, color, religion, sexual orientation or nationality was unconstitutional (Feagin, 1991).
This landmark legislation eventually led to the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, and
the desegregation of schools (United States Department of Justice, 2012). Institutions began
practicing the Golden Rule as it related to the diversification of their student populations
(Stewart, 2011). Treating everyone the same was the rule, but it did not recognize students who
were having a difficult time integrating into the university.
Though universities have been legally desegregated for almost 40 years, the campus
climate at PWIs in the United States is still perceived as unwelcoming for some students of
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 40
color. To assist with transition and retention, cultural centers and support centers for students of
color were created (Stewart, 2011). Through protest and other forms of activism, students
demanded staff, faculty, programs and services that served their needs and supported retention at
their institutions. This led to multiple models of cultural centers being created at private and
public 4- year PWIs across the country. Some of the most common models are intercultural,
multicultural, ethnic-specific and cross-cultural. These centers provide leadership development,
cultural programming and training for ethnic student organizations and the larger campus
community. The ethnic-specific model provides similar programs and workshops as the
aforementioned models, but some services and programs are specialized to specific ethnic
groups. Some cultural centers are also tied to the university’s ethnic studies departments, where
research is a component of their mission along with teaching courses, while some centers are a
hybrid of research, teaching, student support services and providing workshops to the campus
community (Hefner 2002). The benefit of these centers is that, though they broadly have similar
goals, they all differ depending on the institution. From their inception, cultural centers have had
direct ties to the community with many opening up their spaces for community meetings during
the Civil Rights Movement (Patton, 2010). The Afro American Cultural Center at Yale
University, founded in 1969, noted that in the early days of their center students from Yale and
other schools in the Northeast gathered in the center to discuss a range of issues impacting the
Black community (Yale College, 2015).
One feature of cultural centers that significantly differs per institution is the size, budget
and staffing. Some centers occupy entire stand-alone buildings while others may occupy an
office or suite in a building on campus. The variation in size makes some centers more visible
and better able to provide space and resources for students of color. Some centers moved to
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 41
multimillion dollar buildings while others remain in the location they have been in since their
inception (Hefner, 2002). The Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture, established in 1983
at Duke University, is named after a renowned pianist, composer and humanitarian. It moved to a
newly remodeled location in 2003 (Duke University, 2014). Dr. Lori Patton, one of the leading
scholars on cultural center research at PWIs noted that cultural centers need an inviting space to
host events, showcase art and provide study and social areas (Patton, 2010). Staffing sizes also
differ, depending on the size of the center. Most have a director-level administrator, faculty
member, or a blend of both overseeing the center. There may also be an assistant director, and
other coordinator or support level positions. The centers are also staffed with undergraduate and
graduate students that assist with the day-to-day activities of the center.
Ethnic-Specific Cultural Centers
Ethnic-specific cultural centers at PWIs can assist with transforming and assisting others
with making the environment at PWIs more welcoming for students of color. Campus climate
surveys can assist with identifying elements of the campus climate from diverse stakeholder
groups which can be helpful when students at their institutions may be voicing their opinions
about not feeling welcome on campus. Ethnic-specific cultural centers have been used at PWIs to
document and empathize with student about their experiences and to provide a space to share
their narratives and to celebrate their history and culture (Patton, 2010). These spaces are
sometimes referred to as a third or counterspace because it is a space where individuals can be
their authentic selves and where new relationships are formed in a comfortable and familial
setting (Patton, 2010). Counterspaces are seen as physical spaces that are a retreat from the larger
campus where students of color experience racial microaggressions and other forms of
discrimination. These are safe spaces where students can build community and share strategies
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 42
for combating challenges they may face at the institution (Patton, 2010; Patton et al., 2007).
These counterspaces may include cultural centers, ethnic-specific themed hosing in residence
halls, student organizations and other spaces where students of color feel safe and surrounded by
other individuals that can relate to their experiences.
The most common ethnic-specific cultural centers at PWIs are Black/African American,
Asian American, Latino and Native American (Patton, 2012). Some research indicates that
students who identify with any of these racial and ethnic groups experience higher levels of
stereotyping and unequal treatment by faculty, staff and students (Ancis, Sedlacek, & Mohr,
2000). Though these centers share a similar purpose, such as assisting with their students’ racial
and ethnic identity development, they also have unique programs and services specific to their
population, cultural practices and traditions. For Latino cultural centers, family and community
outreach is incorporated into the mission. Many of these centers have a parent affiliate group
closely connected to them. Some of the programs sponsored by the center may also focus on
issues relevant to the local or greater Latino community.
Black/African American cultural centers are seen as a home away from home for students
where they engage in discussions with other students about their experiences navigating and
adjusting to being a student of color at their institution. (Patton, 2010). Historically, Black
cultural centers had close ties to the local Black community; these efforts continue today with
centers engaging in pre-college outreach and sponsoring programs that incorporate and benefit
the surrounding community (Patton, 2010). Many of these centers also have close ties to Black
and ethnic studies departments, with some center directors teaching courses as well (Hefner,
2002). Black cultural centers have been under question, with some stating that the centers are
outdated and need to move toward the multicultural or cross-cultural model due to the changing
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 43
demographics of PWIs and scarcity of resources (Hefner, 2002). Many scholars and practitioners
continue to advocate for the need and relevance of the ethnic-specific model in addition to other
models emphasizing that there is room for more than one cultural center at an institution.
Asian American cultural centers at PWIs are products of the Civil Rights Movement and
also have a history of student activism and close ties to the surrounding community. These
centers assist with combating the numerous stereotypes that Asian American students experience
at PWIs, including the model minority stereotype which refers to students of Asian descent as
being smart and the ideal minority. Research has shown that Asian American students are also
perceived as the forever foreigner, referring to individuals assumed to have been born in another
country (Sue et al., 2007). Many Asian American centers have mentoring programs as well as
close ties to Asian and ethnic studies (Patton, 2010).
The Native American (or American Indian) cultural centers at PWIs are the newest of the
ethnic-specific center models on some campuses; they emerged at PWIs in the early 1970s
(Patton, 2010). The Native American student population is usually the least represented ethnic
group at PWIs and an even greater concern is the high attrition rate of these students once they
are admitted. Some of the research indicates that attrition rates for these students are high
because of the lack of academic preparation, financial issues, isolation as well as the lack of the
understanding of their cultural practices among the university community (Patton, 2010).
Cultural practices are key to the success of Native American students and there is a large
emphasis on familial relationships as well the larger community versus individual concern.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 44
Theoretical Approaches
Three frameworks were used to study the experiences of cultural center scholar
practitioners: the tri-sector practitioners model, single loop and double loop learning and
microaggressions framework.
Tri-Sector Practitioners Model
Jenkins (2010) identified a framework that describes cultural center scholar practitioners
and their role in their centers and at the university. This model is also applicable to all levels of
professionals in higher education. The tri-sector practitioners model was created to assist
practitioners with effectively creating opportunities for culturally engaging co-curricular spaces
outside of the traditional classroom setting. This model builds off of components of CRT and
other student development theories.
Sector I of the model is community building and outreach, which describes the
importance of cultural centers in building and sustaining relationships with stakeholders such as
students, alumni, faculty, community organizations and other groups inside and outside of the
university. Sector II is administrative practices, which is focused on cultural environment
creation, professional development of staff and commitment from the institution. This sector
emphasizes the importance of having a functional space for centers that ideally has options for
students to study, host events and adequate storage and social space. Sector II also advocates for
the continued growth of the professionals who oversee the centers through presenting and
attending conferences as well as consistently being immersed in other cultures. It is also stressed
that in order for staff to be developed it also takes commitment from the university to place value
on these centers and the staff who oversee them. Sector III, cultural programming, focuses on
three types of programming that should be offered in the spaces: cultural education programs,
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 45
cultural arts in social action initiatives and cultural engagement programs (Jenkins, 2010). All of
these programs take an interdisciplinary approach, especially in the areas of visual and
performing arts as well as in providing opportunities for faculty, staff and students to engage
through the celebration of culture. The tri-sector practitioners model identifies the unique
differences in practitioners who oversee cultural centers and, most importantly, emphasizes the
need for institutions to support the growth and sustainability of these centers (Jenkins, 2010).
Jenkins’ (2010) model offers a framework and lens through which individuals establish a
foundation and continuity to the work done in their centers and on their campuses. This will
ultimately make it easier for programs and services to be assessed to demonstrate to the
institution how these centers are impacting students and the larger campus community.
Single Loop and Double Loop Learning
Bensimon (2005) applied Argyris and Schön’s (1996) single versus double loop learning
inquiry to examine activity and discourse around equity and diversity at higher education
institutions. Single loop learning only focuses on surface-level solutions to deep-rooted
problems. It is focused on establishing normalcy to dysfunctional problems that are outside of
the institution’s control. This type of learning eliminates the individual taking any ownership for
the cause of the problem (Bensimon, 2005). Double loop learning focuses on the root cause of
the problem as well as the beliefs and practices of individuals connected to the problem. It forces
reflection on how practices and institutional history may be unintentionally reinforcing the
unequal treatment of people of color (Bensimon, 2005). Double loop learning assists with not
just recognizing the need for diversity but also shifts thinking to a more equity focused lens. This
framework has relevance in this study because the scholar practitioners speak to single and
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 46
double loop learning through their experiences working with students and other stakeholders
inside out outside of the institution.
Microaggression Framework
Sue et al.’s (2007) microaggression framework can be used to examine the experiences of
students of color related to race and culture bias. This framework categorizes microaggressions
into three forms: microinsults, microassaults and microinvalidations as well as the macro level
category of environmental mircroaggressions. Microinsults are subtler racial gestures; comments
and actions individuals may exhibit toward people of color. Microassaults are more conscious
actions or forms of racism directed at an individual. Microinsults occur when individuals dismiss
incidents of racism geared toward people of color, claiming that racism does not exist in society.
(Harwood et al., 2012). Within the three forms of microaggression are environmental
microaggressions, which are the more macro or institutionalized forms of discrimination.
Microaggression framework will be helpful in understanding the ways in which cultural
center practitioners are supported or effective in their work as they interact with students and
other individuals connected to the university. There has been an increasing amount of studies
documented about students of color and other underrepresented groups experiencing
microaggressions but there is limited research that explores these experiences among
practitioners of color.
Additional Theories Used by Cultural Centers Practitioners
Most cultural centers use a number of theoretical approaches as a lens to guide programs
and services in their centers as well as to understand the experiences of students of color at
PWIs. Putting theory to practice benefits students and the larger university community and
validates these spaces as more than just social spaces, as they are also learning communities at
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 47
the institution. Traditional student affairs theories are oftentimes not fully used in practice in
these centers because they were not created to encompass the varied experiences and needs of
students of color at PWIs. If traditional student affairs theories are used, they are used in
combination with other theories. These theories were created out of research and findings of
mainly White, heterosexual male and female students, therefore not taking into consideration the
complex identities of students of color. Many cultural center practitioners use Critical Race
theory as well as other ethnic and racial identity theories to guide their work because they
validate the experience of students of color at PWIs (Patton, 2010). Cultural center practitioners
place emphasis on programs and services that they provide but also with making their centers
feel like a “home away from home” for students (Patton, 2010; Toya, 2011).
Student Affairs and Cultural Center Staff
The profession of student affairs has been a component of higher education and student
learning in some form since the creation of American colleges and universities. The “Student
Personnel Point of View” is a seminal work that scholars start with when researching and writing
about the field of student affairs. This report was created as a result of a meeting in April of 1937
with 19 individuals who sat on the Committee on Problems and Plans in Education within the
American Council on Education (American Council on Education, 1949). Recommendations
from the report listed an array of student personnel services, now referred to as student affairs or
student support services, which should be included into any higher education program. Some of
the services listed in the report were orientation, admissions, religious guidance, career services,
tutoring, life skills training, housing services, the organization of co-curricular activities,
financial aid and mental and physical wellbeing (American Council on Education, 1949). Since
cultural center practitioners are fairly new to the overall field of higher education and were not
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 48
incorporated into the original structure of student personnel services, it is important to examine
how these practitioners are currently integrated into the field, especially since many services
were originally created for White male students. Student affairs practitioners were examined to
understand how cultural center scholar practitioners are at times incorporated into this category
of practitioners.
Traits and Skills of Student Affairs Staff
Student affairs practitioners at PWIs are part of a growing field that encompasses
individuals from different disciplines and backgrounds. Lovell and Kosten conducted a study in
2000 that examined 30 years of traits that individuals working in student affairs possess. Some of
these traits were interpersonal skills, counseling, integrity, the ability to relate to and work with
college students and the recognition of specific services needed to support students of color
(Burkard, Cole, Ott, & Stoflet, 2005; Lovell & Kosten, 2000). Many of these traits are seen as a
necessity when working with students in a higher education setting. Theories are helpful for
practitioners to use because they help explain why students behave in a certain manner
depending on their age. They also look at environmental factors that may contribute to certain
outcomes (Hamrick, Evans, & Schuh, 2002). The concept of student development also plays a
major role in student affairs practice. The most relevant definition used was coined by scholar
Robertis Rodgers and states that student development is the way that students grow
developmentally from matriculating at a higher education institution (Evans, Forney, Guido,
Patton & Renn, 2009).
Student affairs is increasingly recognized as fostering co-curricular learning for students.
Many institutions established learning communities which foster intentional collaboration
between student affairs and academic affairs. Learning communities create curriculum on a
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 49
common theme or topic for fostering learning both inside and outside of the classroom (Smith &
Williams, 2007). Learning communities as well as the use of student development theories and
research assist student affairs practitioners with their establishment in the field of higher
education as more than just support staff and as scholar practitioners. It is beneficial for scholar
practitioners to encompass the traits mentioned above, but they also must blend these skills with
other competency areas to successfully oversee cultural centers.
Cultural Center Practitioners
Depending on the institution, cultural center practitioners are seen as student affairs
practitioners or a combination of student affairs and academic affairs administrators. Some
cultural centers organizationally report to academic or research departments, while others fall
under the purview of student affairs at the university. This makes it nearly impossible to classify
all staff who oversee cultural centers as student affairs practitioners. These individuals have a
range of responsibilities, including serving as advocates for students of color, mentors, workshop
facilitators, professors, and serving on different committees at the institution and in the
surrounding community (Sutton & McCluskey-Titus, 2010).
There is also literature that explores the typecasting of professionals who oversee cultural
centers or interact specifically with students of color. The typecasting generally has four
components for these professionals: specialized skills and responsibilities, the institution
becoming overly reliant on their specific skills, the assumption that the professional can succeed
only in their current role and the issue of reaching a career plateau (Sutton & McCluskey-Titus
2010). As these practitioners explore other positions within higher education, it is assumed that
these specialized positions limit them as able successfully interact with only students of color
and not with White students. Institutional racism plays a role in this professional typecasting.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 50
This includes institutions not wanting to lose their campus diversity expert or assuming that an
individual does not possess the skill set to move into senior level positions within student affairs
(Patton, 2010). Some recommendations to combat typecasting include being mentored by more
seasoned professionals; continued development of skills; job enlargement, which includes
expanding one’s job responsibilities; and job enrichment which focuses on the how specific
projects are accomplished rather than in increasing workload.
Conclusion
This review of literature provided a snapshot of some of the challenges students of color
face integrating socially and academically at PWIs. It also provided insight into how students
and student affairs professionals experience the racial campus climate at institutions. It also
reviewed the roles and characteristics of student affairs and cultural center scholar practitioners
to show the differences and similarities between both types of positions. The subsequent chapter
details the population and the methodology used in this study.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 51
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Cultural Centers began emerging at PWIs during the Civil Rights Movement as students
of color protested a lack of services and programs on their campuses (Patton, 2010). These
centers create opportunities for students to identify institutional agents that can be utilized for
support and advocacy when faced with challenges during their tenure at the institution. These
centers also engage the rest of the campus around topics related to students of color and other
social justice issues. As college campuses continue to become more ethnically diverse, different
types of cultural centers are emerging at institutions across the country. The research that is most
prominent about cultural centers focuses mainly on the purpose of the centers and the identity
development and retention of the students who utilize these spaces. This research is important
and captures the narratives of students of color and their challenges and successes at these
institutions. There is minimal research that focuses on the scholar practitioners who oversee the
centers and are privy to information about the positive and negative experiences of students of
color at PWIs. There is also minimal information about their experiences at PWIs and the
interactions with internal and external stakeholders.
The purpose of this case study was to examine the experiences of scholar practitioners
who serve in leadership roles at the Asian American, Black, Latino and Native American cultural
centers at CU. This study also aimed to explore how the experiences of students of color are
communicated to others at the institution. Since each center is unique, this study examined how
each of them work together to facilitate cross-cultural dialogue and address the intersections of
identities of students of color. Understanding the varied experiences of these scholar
practitioners will inform the field of higher education about how they assist students of color
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 52
with navigating through their institutions as well as any challenges they may encounter
managing a cultural center at a PWI.
Two research questions guided this study:
1. How do ethnic-specific cultural center scholar practitioners make meaning of their
experiences and foster relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the
community?
a. How do cultural center scholar practitioners utilize student narratives to inform
senior level administrators about the experiences of students of color at the
university?
Qualitative Research Design
This study was a qualitative case study; this type of research is focused on the individual
and on making meaning out of experiences (Merriam, 2014; Creswell, 2013). Qualitative
research has roots in anthropology and sociology with individuals in these fields examining
inquiries such as where individuals lived and how they interpreted their environments. This type
of research was already being conducted years before it was labeled qualitative research or
qualitative inquiry. Other disciplines such as law and health also utilize qualitative research to
understand phenomenon (Merriam, 2014). Researchers tend to adopt a preference toward a
positivist, constructivist, critical or postmodern orientation when engaging in this type of
research. Positivists tend to believe that reality is observable and measurable. With the rigid
nature of this orientation, post positivism states that reality is not necessarily absolute, but
empirical evidence can establish more reasonable claims (Merriam, 2014). Constructivists tend
to believe there is not one absolute reality, as it is socially constructed. This orientation is where
most qualitative researchers position their studies. Constructivism assumes that there can be
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 53
multiple interpretations of the same experience (Merriam, 2014). A critical orientation is a
combination of multiple theories such as Critical Race and Feminist theories and looks deeper
than just examining a person’s experiences. A postmodernist believes there is not a single truth
and that concrete explanations are considered myths.
Qualitative inquiry uses the researcher as the instrument, which can be seen as a major
bias when conducting research. This type of inquiry requires extensive reflection throughout the
entire process so that the researcher’s biases can be exposed and documented. This research is
labeled inductive because most times there is not a single theory guiding the inquiry. Researchers
are gathering data to create concepts and/or theories through conducting interviews,
observations, surveys and document analysis (Merriam, 2014).
Qualitative methods enabled the researcher to gather data that provided narratives and
rich thick descriptions of experiences of the participants. This would not have been successful
using quantitative research because this type of inquiry uses a larger sample and is more focused
on using variables to determine frequency, central tendencies and other forms of descriptive
statistics to infer relationships between the variables. In quantitative inquiry, there is no
opportunity for explanations of the variables used, since everything is interpreted numerically.
Site Selection
CU is a large private 4-year PWI located in the western region of the United States. The
institution was founded over 100 years ago and has no religious affiliation. It is highly selective
and identified as a high research university under the Carnegie Classification. University
enrollment is a little over 18,000 students with approximately 7,000 students enrolled at the
undergraduate level. CU offers bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees in multiple disciplines.
Tuition and fees to attend CU are over $50,000 per year and the campus operates as a need-blind
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 54
financial aid institution. There are also scholarships and grants available for students whom the
university considers low-income. The institution’s students come from a range of ethnic
backgrounds as well as from different states and countries. The racial/ethnic breakdown of
students of color is 6% Black/African American, 16% Latino, 20% Asian, 1% American Indian,
0% Native Hawaiian, and 11% identifying with two or more races. CU was the ideal institution
for this study because it is a highly selective university with a rich history of student activism,
and its cultural centers appear to be well funded and highly integrated into the fabric of the
university.
The division of student affairs at CU focuses on the development of students outside of
the classroom. Departments, programs and services focus on developing students cognitively and
ethically by enhancing and making connections to what they learn in the classroom. Some of the
departments within the division of student affairs are the career center, cultural centers, campus
activities, residential education, veteran’s center and financial aid. Many departments within the
division of student affairs collaborate and host programs so that students are exposed to multiple
departments within the division.
This case study focused on the Black, Asian American, Latino and Native American
ethnic-specific cultural centers in the division of student affairs at CU. CU has other cultural
centers, but the four centers stated were the focus because, historically, they are the most
common model of ethnic-specific centers at PWIs across the country. These four centers were
established at CU between 1969 and 1978; they occupy their own spaces on campus and have
histories of being created out of student activism. The Asian American cultural center offers
mentoring programs as well as support to the Asian American student organizations on campus.
One-on-one advising services are also available for students. The Black cultural center offers a
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 55
mentoring program, a faculty lecture series, opportunities for service learning as well as one-on-
one advising and support to Black student organizations on campus. The Latino cultural center
offers leadership opportunities, one-on-one advising, a graduate student in residence program, a
lecture series and support to Latino student organizations. The Native American cultural center
has close ties to the office of admission; there are Native outreach coordinators who work closely
with the center to assist with recruiting Native students to the university, since they comprise 1%
of the student population. The center also offers a mentoring program and opportunities for
students to present their research. Each of the centers works closely with its advisory board and
also has a connection to the residential themed houses that are focused on Black, Asian
American, Latino and Native students.
Population and Sample
The unit of analysis for this case study were the scholar practitioners who lead the Black,
Asian American, Latino and Native American Cultural centers at CU. This population includes
any staff member and affiliated faculty who interact with students as well as assists with
providing services and programs for the centers. Each of the centers has at least two professional
staff members who assist with overseeing the center. The associate dean/directors of the centers
at CU are unique because three out of the four have been in their positions of leadership between
18 and 26 years. They all have extensive history of their centers as well as the institution and
stakeholders. They are aware of the political landscape of the university since they are the face of
their centers. The assistant dean/assistant director of these centers have worked in the role for
various lengths of time, ranging from 4 to over 10 years. Other leadership connected to these
spaces are faculty from multiple disciplines, counselors and other staff members at the
university. The goal was to have a sample size of 8 to 10 individuals who represent the four
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 56
cultural centers. Students who assist with planning programs and managing the centers are
integral to the day-to-day operations as well as events planned in the centers. However, the focus
of this study was on individuals who work professionally in the field of higher education, since
there is minimal research that focuses on this population.
Purposeful sampling was used for the selection of participants. Snowball sampling
specifically was used, since there was a relationship already established with one of the cultural
centers. Utilizing this existing relationship assisted with creating buy-in from individuals in the
other three centers. Snowball sampling was used to identify additional individuals affiliated with
each center. The sample size is also unique because the focus was on the scholar practitioners
who oversee and are affiliated with the four ethnic-specific centers at CU.
Instrumentation/Sources of Evidence
Three types of methods were utilized to collect data. Each method will be discussed
along with explanations as to why additional methods were not used. A pre-survey was used to
gather baseline information from participants. The questions were formatted as open-ended so
that responses were not restricted. Document analysis was used to examine material related to
each cultural center. Documents included a wide variety of items like self-studies, reports, letters
from stakeholders and news articles. Interviews were used to identify meaning making of
experiences, to capture perceptions and to inquire about the human condition and past events
(Merriam, 2014). Phenomenological interviewing was utilized to delve deep into participants’
experiences. This type of interviewing also required the researcher to constantly reflect on the
phenomenon between interviews (Merriam, 2014).
There are three types of interview structures utilized in qualitative inquiry. Highly
structured interviews are used when demographic information is being collected; questions are
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 57
determined prior with little deviation. Unstructured interviews are flexible and questions are not
created prior to interacting with the participants. These types of interviews assist the researcher
with creating structured questions for later interviews and are often used during observations.
Semi-structured interviews; the last type was used for the case study of cultural center scholar
practitioners. Interviews included the use of an interview protocol with predetermined questions
and themes. This type of interviewing is flexible in the manner in which questions are asked and
emergent topics can be explored (Merriam, 2014). This case study conducted one-on-one
interviews instead of utilizing focus groups to collect data. Focus groups are a more efficient way
to gather data but one-on-one interviews allowed for the researcher to build rapport with
participants so that they felt comfortable openly discussing their experiences about working in a
cultural center without fear of judgment from their colleagues.
Observation is a data collection method that was not utilized in this study. The
experiences of cultural center scholar practitioners are unable to be fully observed. More in-
depth information about their experiences was captured through one-on-one interaction since
they recalled memories and feelings from past events.
There were three conceptual frameworks used to guide the data collection process. The
tri-sector practitioners model was created to assist practitioners with effectively creating
opportunities for culturally engaging co-curricular spaces outside of the traditional classroom
setting (Jenkins, 2010). This model builds off of components of CRT and other student
development theories. Single and double loop learning which focuses on individuals reflecting
on their own practices to identify the root cause of problem and to move from a diversity to an
equity minded lens (Bensimon, 2005). Sue et al.’s (2007) microaggression framework was used
as a lens since it focuses on capturing and examining the covert and overt forms of
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 58
discrimination experienced by people of color (Harwood et al., 2012; Minikel-Lacocque, 2013;
Sue et al., 2007). These conceptual frameworks were essential as questions were formulated for
the interview protocol.
Data Collection
Data collection started with sending a formal email including the pre-survey to each
participant before in-person interviews were conducted. This was used to gather baseline
information, including length of time worked at CU and in their centers, as well as ethnicity and
other demographic information. Responses were recorded using Qualtrics, a web based survey
software system. Qualtrics made it easier for the researcher to review responses and is a secure
way of storing information. Responses were reviewed and assisted with refining the semi-
structured interview protocol. Once the interview protocol was complete, it was sent to
participants a few days prior to their interview. Reviewing the questions prior to the interview
caused participants to reflect on their experiences, which led to a more fruitful in-person
interview. Interviews were scheduled to take place over a period of five days allowing time for
the researcher to reflect on each experience. The researcher communicated with each participant
to identify the most appropriate time to conduct the interviews. The beginning of the term and
other busier times of the year were avoided. Each interview lasted a little over 60 minutes and all
participants consented to be audio-recorded. Audio-recording each interview allowed for the
researcher to focus on the interaction with each participant instead of attempting to capture all
data through note taking. Notes were used to capture and identify themes and major points that
were made throughout the interview. Memos were also used to capture the researcher’s
reflections. Following each interview, each participant was given a thank you card as well as a
moderately priced Starbucks gift card as compensation for their participation. Throughout the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 59
data collection process, document analysis took place by analyzing websites, reports and other
artifacts to gather additional insight into each cultural center and leadership affiliated with these
spaces. Some of the documents were gathered at CU following participant interviews since there
was no online access to some of the material.
Location
The researcher traveled to CU to conduct in-person interviews with each participant. The
researcher flew to the site, since it is not centrally located to her home institution. Interviews
were conducted over a 5-day period. The researcher stayed on campus with Jessica, one of the
study participants, who is also a faculty in residence in the Imani House, one of the themed
housing options at the university. Eating meals in the dining hall and talking to students during
her stay in the Imani House gave the researcher a snapshot of the experiences of students of color
at the institution. All of these experiences allowed time for the researcher to be engrained in the
campus culture at CU during the data collection process. Between interviews, the researcher
spent time in the student union and other locations on campus taking notes and engaging with
students, staff and faculty on campus. Interviews were conducted at CU in personal offices
outside of the centers and in each of the cultural centers so that each participant was in a familiar
environment. Being in the spaces allowed for the researcher to observe each space, which was
helpful during reflections and writing findings from the study. Being in each space also assisted
participants with triggering memories of past occurrences since the centers were filled with
pictures and artifacts from past events. A semi-structured interview protocol was used to guide
the interviews, and being in the center also allowed for other topics that related to the interview
questions to be explored. The researcher allowed adequate time to memo and reflect at the end of
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 60
each day after all interviews were conducted. All interviews were conducted during the 5-day
period.
Anonymity and Protection of Data
Due to the specificity of the units of analysis, pseudonyms are used for each participant
as well as the institution and official name of each cultural center. Each cultural center has been
given the generic designation of Asian American cultural center, Black cultural center, Latino
cultural center and Native American cultural center. A brief explanation of the Institutional
Review Board process was discussed along with the informed consent form. This was helpful in
assuring participants that their information would be kept confidential and used only for research
purposes. Notes and audio recordings from interviews are securely kept on the researcher’s
personal computer.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was an ongoing process throughout the study and took place as data were
collected. Data analysis software was not used, since the sample was small and manageable.
Phenomenological analysis was utilized to capture the essence of the phenomenon by using a
variety of techniques (Creswell, 2013; Merriam, 2014). Field notes and reflective memos were
retyped after interviews were conducted. A transcriber was hired to accurately transcribe each
interview. The researcher listened to each interview multiple times to become more familiar with
the data since the data were transcribed by another person. Once all interviews were transcribed,
the researcher coded data from the interviews, documents and field notes. A priori codes were
used to start with; these codes are considered first level and were based on the research
questions, literature and the conceptual frameworks. Second cycle coding was used to identify
patterns and themes. A mixture of open coding and creating themes was helpful to organize data
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 61
from the interviews. Once coding was complete themes were created based on sources including
the literature, participant’s responses and the researcher’s knowledge. All themes were focused
on the purpose of the study (Merriam, 2014). Creswell notes that, in qualitative inquiry, theories
are used as a lens for questions asked, and they are used in a more varied way throughout the
study (Creswell, 2013). Data were analyzed through the lens of Argyris and Schön’s (1996)
Single and Double Loop Learning, Jenkins’ (2010) Tri-Sector Practitioners model and Sue et
al.’s (2007) Micro aggression Framework. This assisted with making meaning of the data and
connecting it to the field of higher education as well as inherent biases that exist in society. Once
all data were analyzed and themes were identified, findings were assembled into a report.
Validity
Validity in qualitative research is the extent to which the study is trustworthy or credible.
There are two types of validity that are examined in a study, internal validity which refers to how
well the research represents real life and external validity which refers to the extent that findings
can be generalized or applied to other situations (Merriam, 2014). A host of strategies are used to
ensure that research is both reliable and valid. For this study, many of these strategies were used,
including triangulation, member checking, the researcher’s position and rich thick descriptions
(Merriam, 2014). Triangulation was accomplished by using surveys, interviews and document
analysis to gather data. Member checking was achieved by allowing participants the option to
review their transcribed interviews for accuracy and to ensure information was not
misinterpreted. The researcher’s position was examined throughout the entire process through
self-reflection and journaling. Rich, thick descriptions were used as data was interpreted and
findings were reported (Creswell, 2013).

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 62
Role of the Researcher
The researcher was the instrument in conducting qualitative research. The researcher
captured extensive reflective memos throughout the entire process to capture thoughts, feelings
and reactions that emerged. Reflective memos were important to collect before and after each
participant interview to keep personal thoughts and opinions out of the data collection process.
This was especially important since the researcher is familiar with some the participants. Biases
were inherently brought to the study since the researcher is currently a practitioner in an ethnic-
specific cultural center at a similar institution. Some of the responses of the participants
resonated with the researcher, but it was important to remain as neutral as possible so
participants felt comfortable responding to the interview questions honestly. In
phenomenological research and analysis, a technique used is epoche, which refers to the
researcher constantly being aware of their biases and other prejudices they may bring (Merriam,
2014; Creswell, 2013).
Conclusion
The researcher used interviews, document analysis and surveys to capture data from
participants. The data were transcribed and analyzed. The subsequent chapter conveys themes
that emerged as well as additional information about the scholar practitioners.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 63
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF DATA AND THEMES
This chapter presents data about the participants and their roles in the centers. Themes
from in-person interviews and document analysis will also be discussed. CU, a large private, 4-
year institution was the site selected for this study because of the rich history and activity within
their cultural centers. The purpose of this study is to better understand the experiences of the
scholar practitioners who comprise the professional leadership of the Black/African American,
Latino, Asian American and Native American cultural centers at the university. The study sought
insight into how they balance their roles in being an advocate for their students and also make
meaning of their own experiences interacting with stakeholders on campus and in the
community. The research questions that were used to guide this study were, “How do ethnic
specific cultural center scholar practitioners make meaning of their experiences and foster
relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the community?” and “How do cultural center
scholar practitioners utilize student narratives to inform senior level administrators about the
experiences of students of color at the university?”
This chapter begins by profiling each participant and moves into presenting data from
participant interviews and document analysis. Single and Double Loop Learning and
Microaggressions Framework are two of the three frameworks that were used to analyze the
data. The third framework, the Tri Sector Practitioners Model, will be discussed in Chapter five.
The six emergent themes are also discussed in this chapter along with their connection to the
data.
California University Cultural Centers
CU is a large private, 4-year PWI located in the western region of the United States. It is
highly selective and Carnegie classifies the institution as having high research activity. The
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 64
university enrollment of undergraduate and graduate students is around 18,000. The division of
student affairs at CU houses departments focused on fostering learning outside of the classroom.
The four ethnic-specific cultural centers are housed in this division. All of the centers were
created between 1969 and 1978, and a common theme among them is that they all emerged as a
result of student activism. Protests, a hunger strike, petitions, and demands eventually led to the
creation of these centers as well as academic departments such as African American, Chicano,
Native American and Asian American studies. The cultural centers at CU still have close ties to
their counterparts in the ethnic studies department. The centers were created at different times,
are all in different locations on campus, and all have varying physical space, different budgets
and slightly different staffing structures. These dynamics play a role into how each center serves
its student population and the larger campus community.
The discourse around racism, profiling and other forms of discrimination at PWIs and in
the United States has fueled the activism of students at CU over the past years. Students have
been vocal on campus and in the community around the Black Lives Matter Movement, which
led to increased visibility of the cultural centers at the university. The university president and
provost have looked to the leadership in these centers to better understand the experiences of
students of color at the university and how to better support them as they are being vocal about
issues of injustice. Each center is discussed in the following section along with narratives of each
participant. It is important to note that there are some voices missing from the Latino and Native
American cultural centers, since not all of their professional staff participated in this study. They
are still noted as a component of leadership at the centers in the cultural centers organization
chart later in the chapter.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 65
Black Cultural Center
This was the first center established in 1969, one year following the assassination of Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr. This is the only center at CU that is located in a stand-alone building,
and the center also has an additional building to host programs and to generate revenue through
leasing the space for events. The center works closely with an advisory board that is comprised
of alumni, faculty, staff and students. When I arrived to CU, my first stop was at this center. It
felt very warm and welcoming inside, with pictures on the walls, multiple couches and a
television in the large open space. There were students working on their laptop computers as well
as students having conversations about upcoming Black History Month and parent’s weekend
events. The associate dean engaged students in a discussion on the meaning of Black excellence
and also interacted with students during their staff meeting that took place as I was in the center.
The overall feeling of this space was one of comfort and retreat for Black students. Interviews
were conducted with the four individuals who comprised the leadership of this center.
Participants from the Black cultural center are discussed below. Information about their length of
time working in the center and their roles is also discussed to gain additional insight about each
person.
Jessica is the associate dean in the Black cultural center; she has worked at the institution
for over 20 years and has been in her current role for almost 18 years. She has a dual role in that
she is also a faculty in residence in the Imani house, a residence hall for students interested in
immersing themselves in learning about the African diaspora. Jessica garnered the support of
Black alumni and was the visionary behind working with some of the university trustees and
alumni to fundraise and build an additional structure expanding the footprint of the center at the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 66
university. She is someone who has extensive institutional history and is outspoken about
advocating and shedding light on the experiences of Black students at the university.
Byron is the assistant dean in the Black cultural center and has been in his current role 6
months; though he is new to CU, he has over a decade of professional experience in higher
education. He assists with more of the program planning in the center and also works closely
with advising several student organizations and with training student staff in the center. He feels
that he has more freedom to assist students in their efforts of being activists compared to his
previous institution where he was not encouraged to support students in this way. He continues
to work closely with the person previously in his position to better understand how to support the
students who are involved in the center. He also considers his colleagues in this center as part of
his personal support system at the university.
David is the former assistant dean in the Black cultural center and was in the role for 3
years. He is now an assistant dean of an area within residential education at CU. He stays closely
connected to the center through collaborations and with assisting with the search, hiring and
continued training of the new assistant dean. He worked in the center during the Black Lives
Matter Movement when students were protesting on campus and in the community. He also
considers his colleagues in this center as part of his personal support system at the university.
Felicia is the dean of residence life and does not formally report to the associate dean of
the center. She is considered affiliated staff because of how closely she works with the center on
issues affecting the Black community. She has been at the institution 6 years and has held three
different roles during that time. A large component of her role is to assist students in crisis, and it
is helpful for the center to have a partnership with someone who is familiar to Black students
who live in the residence halls. Felicia is now considered to be in a senior leadership role, so she
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 67
can influence policies and decisions. She also considers her colleagues in the center part of her
personal support system.
The Black cultural center is a major support system for activists at CU and serves as the
pulse of the Black community on campus. The center serves as a resource not only for the Black
community at CU but also for the entire campus community. The practitioners in the space wear
many hats and are constantly shifting from advisor to educator to event planner to meet the needs
of their community.
Asian American Cultural Center
This center was established in 1972 and occupies almost an entire floor of a building as
well as an auditorium on the first floor of the building. Interviews of the two professional staff
members were conducted in this center. When I arrived, I noticed the center had several couches
in the large open area and a long conference table where students were eating lunch and using
their laptop computers. The center had pictures on the walls of different events that have taken
place over the years that were sponsored by the center. Many of the event pictures focused on
activism in the Asian American community at CU and in the cities surrounding the university.
The center also works closely with their advisory board that is comprised of alumni, faculty, staff
and students. Participants from the Asian American cultural center will be discussed below to
gain further insight into their roles in the center and how the two practitioners work together to
carry out the mission of their center.
Carmen is the associate dean in the Asian American cultural center and has been in her
role for 25 years. She started in an entry-level, professional staff position in the center and
worked her way up to her current role. She has seen many changes in the center and at the
institution. A large part of her role is to create a vision and strategy for the center. She is
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 68
someone with extensive institutional history and is not afraid to speak up about inequities among
students of color at CU. She considers colleagues in the other cultural centers her support
system, especially the associate dean in the Black cultural center.
Jason is the assistant dean in the Asian American cultural center and has been in his
current role for 4 years. He is the primary resource for the 60 student organizations that are
affiliated with the center and also manages the spaces in the shared auditorium. He is supported
tremendously by his supervisor and is active with numerous committees on campus and in the
higher education community.
The Asian American cultural center at CU is a hub of activism and support for student
organizations. The professional staff seems to be an ideal balance since the associate dean has
been in her role for almost 25 years and the assistant dean has been in his role for 4 years. They
pull from the history of the center at CU but also keep the center relevant to students by having
different perspectives.
Native American Cultural Center
This center was established in 1974 and has strong ties to the local tribes in the area. It is
located in the same building as the Asian American cultural center and they share the use of the
auditorium. This center has a large focus on the retention of Native American students and is the
only center with three full-time staff members. The center occupies a section of the first floor
and is filled with pictures from past events. The space is broken up into multiple rooms, so it
seemed much smaller than the other centers. There appeared to be limited space for students to
congregate. A focal point was pictures on the walls from their annual Pow Wow, which has been
occurring at CU since 1971 and is the largest in the country. Below is a description of the one
participant from the Native American cultural center that will give insight into her role in the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 69
center. This center has two additional professional staff members, but they were not included due
to lack of interest in participating.
Kristen is the associate dean; she has been in her current role for five years but has taught
at the institution for 20 years. She also has a faculty appointment at the law school. She considers
herself an institutional border crosser because she blends her dual roles of faculty member and
administrator in student affairs. Kristen is responsible for creating partnerships with tribes and
Native American alumni. She considers her colleagues in the other cultural centers as well as her
faculty colleagues part of her support system.
The Native American cultural center is unique in that staff consistently pays homage to
the Native community in which CU is located. The campus was built on several village and
grave sites, and CU voluntarily gave skeletal remains to the tribe as a way create to practice good
ethics and to further establish a partnership with the tribal community. The center works closely
with the tribal leaders and they often visit campus to talk to students about the history and
current state of tribes in the area. The associate dean values the relationships she has with the two
other professional staff in the center and emphasizes that they have to all pitch in to ensure they
are all accomplishing the goals of their center.
Latino Cultural Center
This center was established in 1978 and occupies an entire floor in a building in the same
vicinity of the Asian American and Native American cultural center. This center has strong ties
to Latino graduate students and has a program for doctoral students in residence in the center.
They also work closely with an advisory board that is comprised of alumni, faculty, staff and
students. The center’s professional staff consists of two full-time and one part-time position. As I
walked into the center, I noticed it was very welcoming with colorful pictures of Latino artists
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 70
and representation from different Latin countries. This center occupies an entire floor and is
broken up into multiple rooms, but still appeared large and open compared to the other centers.
There were several areas where students were sitting on couches eating and talking to one
another. In the back of the center, there was a separate area where all graduate students in
residence were housed. Interviews took place in their wellness room, a quiet and relaxing room
that is primarily utilized by their counselors in residence. Below are descriptions of the two
professional staff members who participated in study. There is one additional professional staff
member who did not participate in the study due to scheduling conflicts.
Frieda is the associate dean in the Latino cultural center and has been in her current role
for 26 years; she is the only person who has held this role in the center. Frieda is an alumna of
CU and has strong ties to multiple academic departments. She has extensive institutional history
and has seen many changes in the center and the institution. Her role is to advocate for Latino
students, support students in their activism and foster an inclusive community. She considers her
colleagues in the other cultural centers and faculty who sit on the advisory board her support
system.
Melissa, the graduate programs specialist in the Latino cultural center, is a part-time
professional staff member and has been in her current role for six years. She is also a doctoral
student at CU. Her main role is to support programs and to oversee the graduate students in
residence that occupy a portion of the center. She also assists with advising the Latino student
organizations that are affiliated with the center. She is on committees at the university and is
supportive by her supervisor and her other colleagues in the other cultural centers.
The Latino cultural center is a hub of activism at CU and is also unique in that graduate
students have always been embedded into the purpose of their center. The professional staff in
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 71
the center have unique roles but all work together to support the Latino and larger CU
community.
Cultural Center Organization Structure and Demographic Information
To gain a larger perspective of all the participants, figures below better illustrate how
each individual fits into the structure of the cultural centers and the university. Table 1 below
provides an overview of the participants. These details are important to highlight, especially the
“highest degree earned” category because it emphasizes the scholar part of their role. These
individuals are not only practitioners in their centers but also educators who engage in research.
The number of years in the position is important to highlight because it creates contrast in the
experiences of participants who have been in their center for different lengths of time. Figure 1
illustrates the reporting structures of each cultural center at CU. Since some professional staff
were not interviewed for this study, it is important to visually include their roles in the overall
composition of the leadership in the centers.
Table 1
Participant Demographics
Name Gender Current Role Cultural
Center
How Long in
Role
Highest
Degree
Earned
Byron Male
Assistant
Dean
Black 6 months Master’s
Carmen Female
Associate
Dean
Asian
American
25 years Bachelor’s
David Male
Former
Associate
Dean
Black 3 years Master’s
Felicia Female
Residence
Dean
Black 6 years Doctorate
Frieda Female
Associate
Dean
Latino 26 years Doctorate

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 72
Table 1, continued
Jason Male
Assistant
Dean
Asian
American
4 years M aste r ’s
Jessica Female
Assistant
Dean
Black 17.5 years Master’s
Kristen Female
Assistant
Dean
Native
American
5 years Doctorate
Melissa Female
Graduate
Programs
Latino 6 years Master’s

Figure 1. Cultural Centers Organization Chart

Emerging Themes from Data
Data from participant interviews and document analysis were analyzed to answer the
research question, “How do ethnic-specific scholar practitioners make meaning of their
experiences and foster relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the community?” and
the sub question, “How do cultural center scholar practitioners utilize student narratives to
inform senior level administration about the experiences of students of color at the university?”
Themes emerged from participants’ responses and were collapsed into six focus areas: advocacy,
advising, partnerships with stakeholders’ support for practitioners, longevity of practitioners and
institutional history. The first two themes relate directly to how participants interacted with their
Black Cultural
Center
Established 1969

Jessica
Associate
Dean
Byron
Assistant
Dean
David
Previous
Assistant
Dean
Felicia
Residence
Dean
Assistant
Dean
Assistant
Dean
Asian American
Cultural Center
Established 1972

Carmen
Associate
Dean
Jason
Assistant
Dean
Native American
Cultural Center
Established 1974

Kristen
Associate
Dean
Assistant
Director
Recruitment
and Retention
Specialist
Latino Cultural
Center
Established 1978

Frieda
Associate
Dean
Associate
Director
Melissa
Graduate
Programs
Specialist
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 73
students as well as other stakeholders. The last four themes related more to how participants
make meaning of their experiences at CU. Research question one is aligned with the tri- sector
practitioners model conceptual framework, the sub research question is aligned with the single
loop and double loop conceptual frameworks. Themes and their intersections with the conceptual
frameworks will be discussed later in the chapter.
Advocacy
The theme of advocacy emerged from the data most clearly because it is interwoven into
the mission and purpose of each cultural center. The centers served as place of support for
students who are considered activists at CU. In this study, advocacy is described as participants
using their role and influence and utilizing students’ experiences to improve the campus climate
for students of color. The basic definition of advocacy is the act of supporting a cause. The
leadership in the four centers described how they are responsible for being a voice for students
affiliated with their center. Through their roles of being advocates, they feel that they have a
responsibility to translate the student experience into language that enables their colleagues to
understand how this affects the students and the larger university community. Carmen, in the
Asian American cultural center stated,
A critical component of the work that we do is to help our colleagues understand these
students in terms of what their experience is and what that means in one, how to help
them be successful here. And to understand what motivates them and help them be able
to balance these tensions that manifests in how they see themselves beyond [CU].
This excerpt from Carmen was stated in other ways by all participants in the cultural centers.
This quote emphasizes not just improving the experience for students of color but also putting
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 74
effort into understanding their motivation and how they persist at the university despite
challenges.
Student activism. The leadership in these spaces advocate for their students in different
ways. One that emerged from the data was the support of student activists at CU. The cultural
centers provide immense support to this community and there is a respect and ally ship between
both communities at CU. Activism is embedded into the history of these centers at CU and the
professional staff understand the importance of supporting students in this role. It is through
student activism that major changes occurred to improve the centers. The last two years have
been very emotionally challenging for students and the larger campus community supporting the
Black Lives Matter Movement. An important role played by the leadership in the cultural centers
was to express to upper administration the need for Black students and other activists to be
supported as they chose to protest at the university and in the larger community. David from the
Black cultural center expressed how challenging it was to garner support from administrators at
the institution during the beginning of the Black Lives Matter Movement. When viewed through
the lens of the Microaggression Framework, it is possible to see David’s challenges with being
understood as an advocate and professional of color as a microaggressive act itself:
I remember it felt like begging him to come to the students’ rally...as he finally said he
would come, I remember turning to her and just walking into her arms and breaking
down crying because it was like I had to beg this White man to come hear the stories of
our students.
Students from all backgrounds at CU banded together to support Black students who were
especially vocal during the Black Lives Matter Movement and protests. These protests occurred
on campus and in the larger community, resulting in a number of Black students being arrested
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 75
for blocking a major highway in the area. Professional staff in the Black cultural center were
affected immensely by these incidents because they were not only having to advocate for the
support of their students, but also manage their own emotions along with the frustration of not
having the support of upper administration at the institution.
Validating student experiences. All participants expressed that they advocate for their
communities by validating the experiences, good and bad, of students of color through serving
on committees at the university, meeting with stakeholders, teaching courses and through
facilitating workshops and trainings. Through interactions with stakeholders, participants infuse
their meetings, classes and workshops with real life examples from students at CU. In some
cases, participants created a platform for students to share openly about their experiences from
their perspective. Students having their voices heard in a larger forum created a sense of relief
for them to know that their experiences were important. Much of the work that was being done
by the scholar practitioners in these centers was also personal in that they see this as more than
just a position at a university. There is a connection between the participants’ identities and their
community that creates a greater purpose for the work. As Kristen from the Native American
cultural center stated,
One of the things that, I think, those of us in the ethnic cultural centers have the unique
double blessing of is that we’re able to marry our own ancestry and our own identity and
our own champion of communities with our profession.
Participants all discussed in some way how sharing common identities with their students fuels
the passion for work in their center. A commonality among all participants is that they see
themselves as advocates for their students and issues impacting their communities at CU.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 76
Advising
The second theme that emerged from the data is advising. In higher education, we often
think of advising roles more formally, such as an academic advisor or faculty advisor for
doctoral students. Advising, in this study, refers to participants meeting formally or informally
with students, faculty, staff, or alumni to offer guidance and/or advice in a particular area. The
subthemes that emerged were advising student organizations, individual advising of students,
and advising/consulting with stakeholders. All participants expressed that they engaged in
advising in one or more of the areas listed below.
Advising student organizations. Seven participants stated that one of the purposes of
their center is to advise student organizations at the university. This includes meeting with the
leadership of the organizations to assist with the planning of programs, educating them on
planning and university policies and at times, attending the events. Though some of these student
organizations may officially report to the student activities office, some student organizations
choose to affiliate more closely with the cultural centers because the practitioners assist with
creating culturally relevant programs. Kristen from the Native American cultural center stated,
Supporting over 30 different Native student organizations ranging from pre-professional,
pre-graduate, to regional or cultural specific…we do support of individual students and,
you know, and support their thinking about broader issues.
Kristen explained above that they not only advise the student organizations but also discuss
broader issues with them that may be helpful as they plan programs and other events throughout
the year. Though some of the student organizations fall under the purview of the cultural centers
most of the student organizations fall under the Office of Campus Activities at CU. It is the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 77
responsibility of the entire institution to be able to adequately advise all student organizations
instead of the leadership in the centers taking on added responsibility in their roles.
Individual student advisement. All participants discussed they consistently advise
students on issues ranging from academics, future career aspirations, identity exploration to
mental health issues. Participants also explained that many of these interactions are not
scheduled and that students know there is an open door policy and that someone will be available
to talk to them during the center hours. Jessica in the Black cultural center explained that she
does a blend of both; she holds office hours once a week where students can pre-schedule 30-
minute appointments with her, and, if that does not work, she is always open to making time to
meet with students. These interactions can create a very strong bond between students and the
leadership in the cultural centers. David from the Black cultural center stated,
I think in these roles we become pseudo-counselors, we become family to the
students…we don’t have the luxury of getting to tell students that “I work 9 to 5 and
when you come to me, I’ll tell you to wait.”
David explains their roles transcend typical office hours and students become your family. This
counseling role forms as students share personal information and experiences and look to the
participants for guidance.
Advising/consulting with colleagues. All participants expressed they are sought out by
colleagues to assist with creating more culturally inclusive programs and trainings at the
institution. Jessica in the Black cultural center stated she has worked with colleagues at other
universities on increasing alumni engagement through program development. Advising has
played a major role in communicating to the university provost and president the reasoning
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 78
behind the activism that has been occurring at the university. As Carmen from the Asian
American cultural center stated:
I think that’s what I mean by the ethnic cultural centers being the conscience of the
university and having all the way to the level of the president and the provost play this
role of the educator and the attempt to help them understand the student experience of
students of color and the reason that activists are making the demands they’re making.
Carmen explained that the cultural centers are the places where societal issues are brought to the
forefront of the university. In their leadership roles in the centers, they use their position to
translate to upper administration how these issues have a direct impact on students at CU.
Partnerships with Stakeholders
The third theme that emerged from the data is partnerships with stakeholders at the
university and in the larger community. Stakeholder is a general term used to identify other
professional staff, alumni, faculty and administrators at CU as well as partners in the surrounding
community. The continued success of these centers has been their ability to create lasting
partnerships that led to resources and opportunities for students of color and the cultural centers
as well as to bring visibility to their centers. Partnerships range from alumni providing internship
and job opportunities for students to partnering with counseling and psychological services to
reduce to the stigma of students of color seeking out services. All participants discussed their
countless partnerships and documented them through a self-study each of the centers completed
four years prior to this study. All discussed that some partnerships are more frequent than are
others. Participation in committees and taskforces is also included in this definition of
partnerships. Seven participants took part in committees within student affairs, the larger
university and in the field of higher education. These partnerships actively contributed to double
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 79
loop learning, as campus stakeholders used collective experiences and learning to foster deeper
examination into the root causes of inequities at CU and to seek measures to increase equity.
Reoccurring partnerships. Every participant discussed mental health and how it has
become more visible in communities of color at CU. This has led to their strong partnership with
counseling and psychological services (CAPS). Each cultural center has a CAPS liaison, and
most hold in house hours inside of the centers during the week. This enables students to talk to
the liaison in a familiar setting. This often leads to students scheduling additional appointments
to speak with the liaison in the CAPS office. Melissa from the Latino cultural center discussed
how a student used their social media page to book a same day appointment.
One student said they were feeling terrible. They were walking out of the library, and
they looked in their Facebook page feed…It was, like, “Hey, we have an appointment
today at 2 p.m.,” and they called and got an appointment.
This is an example of how the relationship between CAPS and cultural centers are normalizing
students of color seeking out assistance from counselors at the university. This student saw the
walk-in hours on the Latino cultural center’s Facebook page and took advantage of this service.
All participants also discussed their ongoing collaboration with one another, specifically
a leadership program that has been in existence at CU for 17 years. The cultural centers work
together to create curriculum and facilitate courses and other activities affiliated with the
program. The program includes an overnight retreat and the opportunity for everyone to learn
more about the histories of marginalized communities of color in the United States. This
program collaborates with the school of education and students receive course credit at the end
of the semester.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 80
Other recurring partnerships include engagement with their alumni as well as the
advisory board in each of the cultural centers and organizations from the surrounding
community. Each participant discussed the importance of alumni engagement in their centers.
With alumni financial support, the Black cultural center created a short term professional staff
position. Jessica, the associate dean, also garnered support toward an additional building for the
center because alumni affiliated with center contributed over $350,000 toward the project. The
office of residential education is another reoccurring partnership; there are ethnic themed houses
that have direct ties to the cultural centers through joint programming and with one of the
participants serving as the faculty in residence in the Imani house. Kristen from the Native
American cultural centers details their partnership with residential education: “We have a
Native-themed house, so we have seamless programming of, at least that’s our goal with the
Native house, and I am the faculty advisor to the house seminar.” This partnership allows for
cultural centers to expand their reach to students that may choose to reside in a themed
community but may not be involved in the cultural center.
Less frequent partnerships. All participants discussed partnerships that were important
for their centers, but some occurred less frequently. A major example is partnerships with the
provost, upper level administrators and the advancement office. These are all key stakeholders
for these centers to have reoccurring partnerships with but opportunities are at times not
available for partnerships to be created. Through increased activism and changing campus
climate at CU over the last few years’ participants hope to increase these partnerships with upper
level administrators in the near future.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 81
Support for Practitioners
The fourth theme that emerged from the data are the different types of support systems
for the practitioners in the cultural centers. This theme is important because it helps explain how
these individuals make meaning of their experiences. The research and data show that there are
few formalized ways that support is offered to individuals in these roles. The most common form
of support is through professional development opportunities such as attending conferences.
Below will detail the support they receive from their colleagues as well discuss how balance
their multiple roles. The sub themes that emerged were support from colleagues and
compartmentalized experiences; they will be discussed in detail below.
Support from colleagues. All participants indicated that a major source of support is one
another because they understand the many challenges as well as triumphs that are associated with
working in the centers. They all described the necessity of their weekly meetings so that they can
all strategize, celebrate accomplishments and discuss issues concerning students of color at the
university. Melissa from the Latino cultural center stated,
Meeting with our colleagues in the other cultural centers, I always leave those meetings
so happy, and, often, I arrive in a bad mood…it’s just such smart and committed people
that it’s just so empowering.
Melissa explained how challenging it can be navigating the politics of CU and the weekly
meetings with her colleagues who are also committed to social justice and their centers
empowers her to keep going. In addition to support from colleagues in the other cultural centers
six out of the nine participants explained that they find immense support from their supervisors.
This emerged from the participants that report directly to the person overseeing the center. Four
participants described their supervisors as protective and mindful of when they may need a day
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 82
off from work. Since the leadership in each center consists of two to three people, everyone
supports the day-to-day activities of the center as well as planning programs. Kristen in the
Native American cultural center stated, “I have exceptional staff, and we don’t operate as a
hierarchy…we like each other, we work well together and we have complementary skill sets.”
Kristen was transparent with sharing that, though she is the Associate Dean in the center, she has
been in the center for the least number of years. They all have different areas of expertise that all
complement one another. Other support systems include other administrators of color on campus,
faculty and cultural center advisory board members. Some of the participants expressed the
importance of all colleagues to also be more supportive and to be more vocal about issues
impacting marginalized communities. Felicia, who has a joint appointment with the Black
cultural center and residential education stated,
I’m the only person of color in my leadership team, and I had the direct conversation
because people were like, “how can we support you?” and I was like, “you’ve got to say
something.”
Felicia expressed that she was always the only professional staff member speaking about Black
issues and that she did not feel supported through her colleagues’ silence.
Compartmentalized experiences. Six participants balance their multiple roles and
support themselves by compartmentalizing their experiences. Through interpretation of the data,
it appears that they separate interactions with faculty, staff and students in order to remain
productive in their roles. Separating experiences such as meeting with a student that discloses
personal information and then having to facilitate training directly after can be mentally taxing.
As Byron from the Black cultural center shared,
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 83
So, when I navigate and try to help my students navigate these spaces, I end up altering
because I haven’t dealt with things...so, I believe that one major thing is making sure that
I am, I hate saying the word stable...stable in a sense of, I’m very conscious of where I
am in my mental space.
Byron had a sense of putting his students first before dealing with his own emotions. He
discussed a recent experience of being stopped by a police officer with other Black male students
in the car with him, and how, though he was very uneasy with the situation, he remained calm:
Another reality, you know, when I experienced that, I was compartmentalizing my
emotions to deal with emotions of my students to make sure they were okay, and I
realized that I wasn’t okay with everything that was going on.
Byron shared this example that his own emotions and potentially microaggressive experiences
were not important at the moment because he needed to remain calm and protect his students. As
he shared this example, he explained it was not until after the incident that he realized that he
suppressed his emotions during the interaction with the police officer.
Longevity of Practitioners
The fifth theme, longevity of practitioners, emerged as almost all participants discussed
the length of time that some of the practitioners have worked in their center. Participants shared
that many of their colleagues have invested many years of their professional and personal lives in
these spaces. The recruitment and retention specialist in the Native American cultural center has
been in his role for over 35 years. Three participants have been in their current roles from 18
years to 26 years. Carmen, who has held every position in the Asian American cultural center,
has been in her role for 25 years and said, “You know the staff at these ethnic centers tend to stay
because it’s not just a job; it’s like a passion.” Her response is a clear illustration that, despite
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 84
budget cuts, lack of appreciation and other challenges, many choose to remain in their roles.
Throughout the data, there was an underlying theme of my students that also plays a factor into
the longevity of practitioners in these positions. The majority of the participants expressed that
they should be compensated more. Byron from the Black cultural center sums it up by stating:
Because, in student affairs, we don’t make as much money as we should, you know, but
we do it because of the work in…which is more capital for us. It may not be financial
capital, but it’s capital for us.
The capitals that Byron refers to are the students he has formed relationships with through the
center. He sees playing a role in the identity development and support of students while at CU as
an alternate form of compensation.
Institutional History
The longevity of the leadership in some of these roles in the cultural center leads to the
sixth and final theme of the importance of institutional history. Through analyzing data, all
participants made reference to the history of their centers and the institution. The foundation of
cultural centers at PWIs is through student activism and remembering the students and
stakeholders that assisted with creating these spaces. Melissa from the Latino cultural center
shares the involvement of her colleague when she was a student at CU.
Eventually, the big gain for the students at the end of the hunger strike was my colleague,
our associate director was actually one of the strikers when she was a student...it led to
the creation of the ethnic studies department.
This example speaks volumes of the history that many of the individuals in these centers have
about CU and how they are using this knowledge to engage in double loop learning to create
lasting change at the university. Melissa’s colleague can now infuse her experiences as a student
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 85
activist into her role in the Latino cultural center. Three out of the nine participants gave
significant insight into the history of these centers at CU and how they have had varying levels
of institutional support throughout the years. These individuals infuse this history into the
programs and interactions with students in these centers. As Frieda, the associate dean of the
Latino cultural center who has been in her role 26 years, stated,
I think it’s always important to remember history when you frame these
conversations...we stand on the shoulders of those folks only to give credit to them, but,
more importantly, the evolution of curriculum is something that can’t be separated from
what happened in 1970, right?
Frieda used her extensive knowledge of the institutions as she discusses how to solve issues
affecting the Latino community. Currently, their center is in discussion about a possible name
change suggested by current students. Her role is to educate students on the meaning behind the
current name of the center but also remain open to new ideas from them in hopes of creating a
balance of preserving the history but staying relevant to the current student population.
Conclusion
The following chapter reviews findings from the study, discuss implications and
recommendations for practice and conclude with final remarks about the study and population.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 86
CHAPTER FIVE: OVERVIEW, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, CONCLUSION
This qualitative study examined the experiences of scholar practitioners who oversee
ethnic-specific cultural centers at California University. Their narratives are important to better
understand how to support students of color academically and socially at a PWI. It also gives
insight into the multiple roles these administrators have to manage as they interact with students,
faculty, staff and alumni. The purpose of this chapter is to review the issues identified in Chapter
One and to answer the research questions using the three conceptual frameworks and their
connection to data. This chapter also uses literature from Chapter Two to compare and contrast
findings. The chapter will end by discussing implications for practice and concluding remarks.
The overview of issues in Chapter One provided background on the experiences of
students of color at PWIs as well as institutions that are classified as MSIs. The different
classifications of institutions were important to highlight because, though MSIs receive funding
to provide additional services and programs for their increased racial and ethnic student
population, some research suggests that the experiences of students of color at MSIs are similar
to those of students attending PWIs (Contreras et al., 2008). This demonstrates the continued
need for cultural centers and other retention services at institutions for students of color. The
concept of structural versus interactional diversity was highlighted to show how cultural centers
can assist with achieving the latter by providing opportunities for students from diverse ethnic
backgrounds to interact with one another outside of the classroom in informal settings. These
interactions contribute toward students’ identity development because they grow intellectually
and are challenged to think outside of their comfort zones (Gurin et al., 2002). The last issue that
was highlighted in Chapter One is the lack of collaboration between academic affairs and student
affairs at higher education institutions. This was important to highlight because this can, at times
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 87
be a disservice to students of color that may be having challenges at their institution. If a student
shares their challenges or accomplishments with their professor or an administrator in student
affairs, it is important that both work together to assist with the student’s success.
The overview of issues discussed in Chapter One provided background to understand the
necessity of cultural centers at PWIs and to understand the important role the scholar
practitioners play in overseeing the centers and with creating relationships with stakeholders on
and off campus.
Discussion
This section focuses on a discussion of the data that assist with answering the research
questions. This study sought to understand the experiences of scholar practitioners at four ethnic-
specific centers at CU and how they have utilized student narratives to inform internal and
external stakeholders of the challenges and accomplishments of students of color. The nine
participants have been in their roles between 6 months to 26 years, which created a unique
perspective of CU, their cultural centers and students at the institution. Data was collected
through a survey, interviews and document analysis. The researcher interviewed the participants
in their centers, which allowed for her to experience the centers and be engrained in CU campus
culture. Findings include the importance of partnerships with stakeholders, connections to their
personal identities, institutional history and utilizing student narratives. This research may,
ultimately, provide insight into the importance of the centers and assist with understanding the
multiple hats leaders in these spaces wear to ensure the academic and social success of their
students.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 88
Research Question One
The primary research question asked, “How do ethnic-specific scholar practitioners make
meaning of their experiences and foster relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the
community?” The concept of meaning making is how individuals understand and interpret
themselves, life events and relationships (Ignelzi, 2000). This concept applies to the participants
of the study as they understand themselves in the context of their centers, CU and partnerships.
The scholar practitioners in the Asian American, Black, Latino and Native American cultural
centers at CU make meaning of their experiences and establish relationships with internal and
external stakeholders on an ongoing basis.
Partnerships with Stakeholders. The theme of partnerships with stakeholders emerged
out of the data as participants discussed their experiences in their centers. They emphasized the
importance of connecting students with individuals inside and outside of the classroom to
enhance their learning experience at CU. As Kristen in the Native American cultural center
states,
Wisdom sits in places, and the fact that we have space where knowledge can transcend
different disciplines…can cross borders between the academic, the tribal community,
alumni, students, staff, that’s a really important learning opportunity and that we can be
the anchor for those kinds of conversations.
Seven participants explained the importance of the partnerships they have with one another in
making meaning out of their experiences. Their weekly meetings where they all convene to
discuss upcoming programs and to share information about campus events is a time where they
can connect with one another and share similar experiences and challenges they may be facing.
The varied yet similar experiences that come along with working in an ethnic-specific cultural
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 89
center creates a bond between the participants that naturally allows them to work together to
advocate for their students and their centers. Jessica from the Black cultural center states,
The one thing I appreciate when I stepped into our group, it never was tit for tat. They
have this. Why don’t we have this? Like it’s not an equal kind of situation whether it be
funds, budgets or people right? So it’s never been we pit each other against each other but
it has been how do we go collectively and say here is what, you know, we all need. And
that is something that I definitely respect. I came into that culture.
Jessica’s quote is insightful because she explains that all of the cultural centers are aware they
have varying levels of resources (budgets, staff, physical space) since they were created at
different times but they all continue to work together to advocate for one another collectively.
Connection to personal identities. Though participants share similarities in making
meaning out of their experiences, each shared how they connect their personal identities and life
experiences into their roles. They see themselves in their students and directly relate to their own
college experiences, which also fuels the passion for the work they do. Felicia from the Black
cultural center explains how there is a natural overlap between her professional and personal
experiences at CU:
So there’s a constant, like, interplay and I cannot be in spaces where people are like,
where people can’t understand that personal is professional, so, when you’re talking about
Black men and women losing their lives, that’s very real to me in a different way where
it’s abstract to some of my colleagues. I don’t have the luxury of not talking to my child
about race or not preparing her for certain things.
Institutional history. Four participants make meaning of their experiences by
referencing institutional history, which is also one of the themes that emerged from the data. This
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 90
connects to the literature discussed in Chapter Two that identifies institutional history as one of
the many dimensions of campus culture. In this context, Hart and Fellabaum (2008) define
institutional history as outdated policies that are being enforced that may be unintentionally
benefitting specific groups and excluding others (Hart & Fellabaum, 2008). Four participants
have worked at CU in some capacity between 20 and 26 years. They have seen the student
population change as well as observed many positive and negative changes at the institution.
Being privy to this information appeared to be helpful in these individuals’ navigating and
sustaining their roles and advocating for their students. There was a resonating sense of
affirmation and gratitude as participants discussed having a positive impact on students’ lives as
well as interacting with stakeholders on and off campus.
Sub Research Question
The sub question asked, “How do cultural center scholar practitioners utilize student
narratives to inform senior level administration about the experiences of students of color at the
university?” Student narratives are important because understanding their experiences can assist
the university community with creating and improving existing practices to ensure the academic
and social success of all students. All participants discussed being privy to information that
students share about their experiences at CU. This connects to the theme of advocacy that
emerged from the data. This theme describes how participants utilize narratives from students in
their centers to inform administrators and other stakeholders about the triumphs and challenges
students experience at the university. All participants, in some capacity, through sitting on
committees and interacting directly with the provost and president are a voice for students.
Felicia from the Black cultural center explains below how it is difficult, at times, to explain to
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 91
students the importance of meetings with upper administrators and faculty instead of
participating in every program, protest or student meeting:
We don’t know what you are all doing. We don’t feel like you all are on our side. And for
me I had to say, in that space, we are dealing with different things, but we also occupy
the spaces that you can’t. Like, there are meetings that you will never be invited to that I
am at, and, so, I have to occupy that space. So, I think I’m struggling with the “I can’t
physically be present with you anymore, but my role has shifted into having to be a voice
for you instead of necessarily being a voice with you.”
Utilizing these narratives from students assisted with accomplishing goals related to their
centers, such as in Jessica in the Black cultural center raising funds for a new building that
expanded the footprint of their current center and for Frieda revising the name of their center to
be more inclusive of the Latino community. They also use this information to convey to
stakeholders the impact of their centers as well as to understand and recommend changes so that
all students of color feel a sense of belonging at CU. Ultimately, participants can assist with
creating opportunities for student voices to be heard. They also bring student voices with them as
they use their positions of power to advocate for their students.
Though participants came from very diverse ethnic, socioeconomic and religious
backgrounds, they see themselves in the students they interact with. During their college years,
they shared many of their students’ experiences such as racial microaggressions and feeling like
they did not fit it with the rest of campus. This finding is important because it also indicates why
these individuals are so connected to the students and the work of the centers.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 92
Conceptual Frameworks and Connections to Data
Three conceptual frameworks were used to guide the study of scholar practitioners who
oversee the ethnic-specific cultural centers at CU and how they make meaning of their
experiences as they interact with stakeholders. Below, the frameworks and the connections to
data are discussed as they apply to the themes from a broad perspective to a narrower
individualized perspective of each participant. Below, Figure 2 illustrates Microaggressions
Framework and the Tri Sector Practitioners Model both intersecting with Single and Double
Loop Learning,. Each framework used a different lens to examine the varied experiences of the
participants. This section will also make meaning of each framework as they relate to each
cultural center at CU.

Figure 2. Conceptual Frameworks

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 93
Single and Double Loop Learning
This concept was coined by Argyris and Schön in 1996 to examine two types of learning,
single and double loop. Single loop learning is focused on addressing a problem in order to
create a sense of stability or normalcy. Double loop learning goes one step further and focuses on
the underlying factors that are contributing to the problem. It forces the examination of the
values and beliefs of the individuals that are in power to make meaningful changes (Bensimon,
2005). This organizational learning theory aims to uncover patterns of unequal outcomes. In
most organizations, inequities are invisible, which leads to them never being discussed.
Participants revealed the inequities at CU to upper administration and how they affect students of
color. The purpose of this framework is to encourage those in power to shift from single loop to
double loop learning which requires examination of deep-rooted issues and policies that may be
hindering the success of students of color at the institution. This framework posits that, at times,
individuals in power operate from a deficit cognitive frame which perpetuates negative
stereotypes of certain ethnic groups. Many students of color at CU succeed academically but are
unable to fully integrate into the campus culture. All participants are aware that their center
resources may never be the same, since they were all created at different times, but their focus is
ensuring there are equitable resources at CU for their student populations.
The data showed that all participants are regularly engaging in double loop learning
through the themes of advising, advocacy and partnership with stakeholders. They use their
positions to bring awareness and address the root problem of inequities at CU that are negatively
affecting students of color as well as the inconsistencies of resources in their cultural centers.
Carmen from the Asian American cultural center stated, at times, it can be discouraging:
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 94
You know, it’s not fatigue that comes from doing the job, working with the students. It’s
the fatigue that comes from lack of support…the disrespect. For me, it is the
demoralization...the lack of understanding with our role within the university, the lack of
advocacy within the university...down to the inequities when they’re pointed out.
Carmen, who has worked in the center for 25 years is vocal about holding administrators
accountable to students, staff and faculty at the university. She is known for speaking up and
challenging administration to rethink quick-fix solutions to issues that arise at the university.
Upper administrators at CU respond to student demands when they are pointed out in order to
stabilize the campus climate, this is categorized as single loop learning. However, inequities
continue to be prevalent for students of color and cultural centers and other departments created
in the 1960’s because the root cause of the problem has not been addressed. This requires
individuals in positions of power to not only look at institutional barriers but also requires
reflection on how their own deficit-minded thinking may be hindering deep-rooted change.
Tri-Sector Practitioners Model
Jenkins (2010) used this model to describe cultural center scholar practitioners and their
role in their centers and at the university. It assists with framing the more practical roles of the
participants in the cultural centers. This model is also helpful in creating understanding in why
certain relationships with internal and external stakeholders have been established. The model
uses three sectors: community building and outreach, administrative practices and cultural
programming. There are no hierarchies associated with the sectors and each sector overlaps and
could be occurring at the same time. As we apply these sectors to the data, the themes of
partnerships with stakeholders, support for practitioners, and advising are closely aligned to the
sectors. The sections below describe how each sector connects with the aforementioned themes.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 95
Community building and outreach. This sector is focused on creating strategic
relationships with internal and external stakeholders. The themes of partnerships with
stakeholders and support for practitioners emerged from the data to illustrate this concept. As
Jason from the Asian American cultural center states,
Our goal is to also…Not also to just help our communities and understand what’s best for
our centers and students of color, but, then, like another part is to be a part of the larger
external, like external communities…external community outside of the community
aspect.
All participants explained how important establishing key relationships with faculty, staff,
alumni and others in the community is important to the success of their centers.
Administrative practices. This sector is focused on ensuring the centers’ facilities are
equipped to serve the needs of the campus community as well as the practitioners’ ongoing
professional development in leading many of the initiatives around issues of diversity, inclusion
and equity. In analyzing the data, the theme of advising emerged to illustrate this concept. Jessica
from the Black cultural center worked with stakeholders to raise funds which eventually led to
the creation of additional building for their center. David from the Black cultural center discusses
below how he created curriculum for facilitation training for professional staff in the division of
student affairs:
And so, literally, all of our professional staff went through, all of the ones that are
teaching went through this facilitation training that redesigned dialogue, the discussion of
facilitation in creating inclusive classrooms and practices, and class preparation.
This is an example of how the participants are at the forefront of creating inclusive practices for
their colleagues.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 96
Cultural programming. This third and final sector is focused on ensuring culturally
engaging, educational and developmental programs are being offered in the centers. The theme
of partnerships with stakeholders emerged as eight out of the nine participants referenced their
leadership course and program that aligns with this sector. Jason from the Asian American
cultural center describes the program below:
It is a program that started in 1999 through the lens of leadership development using the
social change model but specifically looking at how culture impacts leadership itself.
And, specifically, when we talk about culture, we talk about racial culture. So, what does
it mean to be an Asian American person working amongst a multicultural group of
people?
This is just one example of how participants assist with providing culturally relevant
programming to the campus community. This program is highlighted because it is an opportunity
for the leadership in the centers and students to learn about other cultures and develop leadership
skills.
As noted above, all participants in the cultural centers at CU provide programs and
services that fall within the three sectors. Below will highlight the efficient practice of one
specific sector in each of the centers.
Black Cultural Center. This center excels in the practice of Sector II: administrative
practices. This sector emphasizes the integral need of creating and enhancing physical space that
contributes to students of color feeling safe and that their culture is valued at the institution
(Jenkins, 2010). As discussed in Chapter Four, Jessica, the associate dean, established
relationships with alumni and campus stakeholders to raise funds and build an additional
structure for their center. Within this sector, are also the concepts of professional development
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 97
and institutional commitment. David, the former assistant dean, created curriculum to assist
colleagues in the division of student affairs to create more culturally inclusive trainings and
programs for students.
Asian American Cultural Center. This center excels in the practice of Sector I:
community building and outreach. This sector emphasizes the importance of creating
partnerships with stakeholders at the university but also in the community through marketing,
campus and community involvement and external outreach (Jenkins, 2010). Carmen, the
associate dean, discussed a survey their center conducted about mental health for Asian
American students at CU. This has now led to collaboration between their center and the mental
health and wellbeing task force, which is now a campus-wide effort. Jason discussed that the
partnerships they have with local nonprofit organizations that are in the nearby Asian American
communities allows students to learn about their culture and also participate in internships in the
organizations.
Native American Cultural Center. This center excels in the practice of Sector I:
community building and outreach. This sector emphasizes the importance of creating
partnerships with stakeholders at the university but also in the community through marketing,
campus and community involvement and external outreach (Jenkins, 2010). As discussed in
Chapter Four, Kristen, the associate dean, refers to herself as an “institutional border crosser”
because she utilizes her dual roles as faculty and a practitioner to establish these partnerships.
Kristen also emphasized the importance of the relationship they have established between tribes
in the surrounding community, specifically those who previously occupied the land that CU now
occupies. Annually, their center hosts a Pow Wow, the largest in the country, which not only
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 98
exposes CU and the surrounding community to Native culture, but also educates individuals on
the history of Native communities in the United States.
Latino Cultural Center. This center excels in the practice of Sector III: cultural
programming. The sector emphasized the importance of collaborating with academic affairs to
create co-curricular learning opportunities for students and the campus community (Jenkins,
2010). Melissa described that they are the only center that has a graduate student in residence
program that gives the center a direct tie to an academic department at the institution. Melissa is
also pursuing her doctorate at CU which enables the opportunity to connect programs in the
academic community to the center. Frieda the associate dean in the center completed her
doctorate at CU and has close ties to the school of education which also allows for more strategic
collaboration in the Latino cultural center.
Microaggressions Framework
The purpose of this framework is to examine the overt and covert racialized experiences
of people of color. In higher education research, it is often used to illustrate the experiences of
students, but, in this study, this concept was used to examine the experience of practitioners in
the centers. This framework categorizes microaggressions into three types, microinsults which
are unconscious acts of bias. Microassaults which are the more blatant forms of discrimination
and microinvalidations which are unconscious but also dismiss the feelings of the person
affected by the act. Within the three forms of microaggressions are environmental
microaggressions which are the more macro or institutionalized forms of discrimination (Sue et
al, 2007). Findings from this study indicated that only one participant discussed racial
microaggressions experienced in their current role. This framework was still important to
highlight because most participants discussed racial microaggressions in reference to the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 99
experiences of students of color at CU. Remnants of other forms of microaggressions and
hostility were experienced by some participants at their institution. Jessica from the Black
cultural center described an incident where she was in a meeting with 15 to 20 colleagues. The
facilitator of the meeting repeatedly interrupted Jessica while speaking and the individual raised
her voice and pointed toward Jessica and others in the room. Jessica, being conscious of being a
Black woman and not wanting to be labeled an “angry Black woman” remained calm in the
meeting and refrained from responding negatively toward her colleague. This resulted in Jessica,
later that evening, having a breakdown and going to the hospital. It is unknown if this incident
was a result of Jessica’s race, but it does depict a hostile interaction. Carmen and David also
describe other incidents they were involved in at CU that they classified more as disrespect or
disregard for their efforts toward advocating for their student populations.
Microaggressions that most participants discussed fell into the category of environmental
microaggressions which are invalidation of people of color at the macro level. This relates to the
theme of institutional history. Frieda in the Latino cultural center discussed how, in the 1970s
and 1980s, there were special advisors to the president of the university who worked to resolve
specific inequities within the Black and Latino communities, but the positions were eventually
phased out:
There were...in the 70s and the 80s. I mean, there was very similar, like an advisor to the
president of Black affairs very similar...but advisor to the president of Chicano
affairs…the communities of color had a voice, to the president, or a liaison to the
president. But, when that started disappearing like ours went away in 1991…three years
later, the highest ranking Latina was let go.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 100
Frieda’s example is poignant because, since she has been in her role for 26 years, she has seen
how upper administrators with culturally specific roles were phased out of the university, which
silenced the voices people of color at the upper administration levels. Melissa in the Latino
cultural center shared she relates to the experiences of students of color and is happy there is now
language to describe these experiences. Melissa facilitates a microaggressions workshop to assist
students with identifying them when they occur and to discuss the impact that they have on
individuals.
All conceptual frameworks utilized contributed toward understanding how participants
maintain their roles in their centers but also gave insight into how their interactions with
students, staff and faculty inform their experiences at CU.
Findings and Implications for Practice
This section uses data to discuss findings and implications for practice. These findings
and implications include: scholar practitioner as campus change agent, collaboration between
student affairs and academic affairs, student narratives, campus climate, institutional history,
utilizing data to validate practice, the evolution of ethnic-specific cultural centers and
institutional accountability. As emphasized several times throughout this study, there is limited
empirical research available that examines the experiences of scholar practitioners that comprise
the leadership of cultural centers at PWIs. One piece of literature details the experience of
individuals in cultural centers and other multicultural administrative positions and describes the
typecasting of their careers when in these roles for extended periods of time. They are seen as the
go-to diversity expert or as able to work only with students of color (Sutton & McCluskey-Titus,
2010). This deficit-minded thinking can lead to these individuals being marginalized and
underutilized. This study serves to shed light on the experiences of cultural center scholar
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 101
practitioners and to highlight their expertise in a range of areas as well as their role as educators
to the larger campus community. As cultural centers continue to emerge, this study may serve as
a starting point to identify the role they will play and what type of leadership should be
overseeing them.
Scholar Practitioner as a Campus Change Agent
The term scholar practitioner was intentionally used throughout this study to emphasize
the educator role of participants. This term is defined in this study as an individual who bridges
research and practice by grounding individual practice in theory (Short & Shindell, 2009; Herbet,
2010). There is an increasing amount of research on the concept of scholar practitioners
especially as it relates to individuals working in student affairs and other student support service
roles. One article defines this concept as connecting and balancing what you “know” and what
you “do” (Kupo, 2014). Practitioners who engage in research bridge the often prevalent gap
between student affairs and academic affairs. Institutions can better utilize scholar practitioners
by regularly consulting with them as policies and new initiatives are being created or revised.
The insight into specific student populations can bridge the often disconnect between upper
administration and the experiences of students of color.
Participants and anecdotal research indicated a lack of understanding of what individuals
in these centers do besides plan programs and hang out with students. Eight participants earned a
master’s degree, two earned terminal degrees and four are working toward completing their
doctoral degree. Kristen, the Associate Dean in the Native American Cultural Center, has a
partial faculty appointment connected to her role, which allows her to regularly teach courses at
the institution. Other participants have taught courses, co-authored publications, regularly
present at national conferences in the field and have experience in curriculum development. The
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 102
scholar and educator part of their role is oftentimes overlooked but can be utilized in the
development of curriculum as well as in the revision of outdated policies.
Scholar practitioners in this study are ultimately seen as campus change agents. The
general definition used to describe change agent in this study is someone who fosters change.
These individuals can be in formal and informal positions of leadership (Astin & Astin, 2000).
Their role is ultimately seen as assisting with transforming and improving an organization. In
addition to advocating and ensuring the success of students of color at CU, these individuals are
also working with students, faculty and staff to work toward creating deep-rooted change at the
institution.
Self-Care for Scholar Practitioners
The concept of self-care continues to grow in the field of higher education specifically in
student affairs. The nonstop and, at times, around-the-clock nature of practitioners who oversee
cultural centers can also be emotionally draining as many serve as pseudo-counselors to their
students. Emphasis is often placed on students to practice self-care but institutions can also
ensure that faculty and staff are engaging in self-care by communicating that it is important for
the entire campus community to be well. Highlighting resources that already may be available
including counseling sessions, meditation classes, yoga and encouraging the use of compensation
time can assist with modeling self-care and shows a genuine effort of concern for the campus
community.
Compassion fatigue is a term that could be used to describe some practitioners as they
form close bonds with their students. This type of fatigue is used to identify when
psychotherapists are unable to bear the suffering of their patients (Figley, 2002). This fatigue
emerges as individuals continuously show compassion to others but do not take the time to
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 103
replenish and care for themselves. Taking time to step away and reenergize is a necessity so that
high quality work can continue to occur. Racial battle fatigue is another term that was referenced
by individuals in this study and refers to the mental, physical and emotional drain of constantly
experiencing racial conflict in everyday life (Smith, Yosso, & Solórzano, 2011). Participants
shared they practice self-care in a variety of ways including working out, dancing, taking long
weekends and spending time with friends and family. Most of the participants described how
their supervisors also encourage them to spend time with family and to take vacation.
Collaboration Between Student Affairs and Academic Affairs
Institutions can encourage these collaborations by creating incentives for student affairs
and academic units to work together. Providing additional funding for specific initiatives,
creating shared curriculum and providing opportunities for co-teaching as well as incorporating
these opportunities into the tenure process, assessment and long term planning of departments
are some ways to ensure that both entities consistently work together.
Collaborative relationships between student affairs and academic affairs continues to be
important in relation to work that is accomplished in cultural centers. As participants noted, their
partnerships are, at times, seamless since some teach courses and have direct ties to graduate
programs at CU. The concept of learning communities is an example of a strategic partnership
between academic affairs and student affairs. These communities connect learning inside and
outside of the classroom by creating curriculum that encourages both entities to work together
(Smith & Williams, 2007). An example of a learning community from participants in this study
is the collaboration between the ethnic specific cultural centers and their School of Education.
Both entities work together to develop curriculum for their leadership program that uses the
Social Change model of leadership to understand how racial culture impacts leadership. This
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 104
program is also a course that students enroll in for credit that requires students to implement
what they have learned into a social change project at California University. These partnerships
provide a more holistic view of the experiences of students of color and enables for both entities
to work together to contribute to the academic success of students
Student Narratives
Predominantly White Institutions can share the stories of students of color by
highlighting their narratives at highly visible events such as family weekend, convocation and
commencement. This serves as an opportunity for donors, trustees and other stakeholders to get a
snapshot of these students that focuses on their assets instead of deficit focused. Keeping
student voices at the heart of the centers is essential as new centers emerge and as established
centers evolve at the institution. Cultural centers were born out of student activism and out of the
need for students to be supported academically and socially at their institution. Participants
shared stories of students succeeding at CU despite challenges they encounter. Participants
shared they use these narratives when they meet with upper administrators, alumni and other
staff members who inquire about the experiences of students of color. As new initiatives are
created at institutions, it is important to keep in mind all students’ voices, especially those often
forgotten. This is the role of many practitioners who oversee cultural centers on their campuses.
Campus Climate
Many institutions continue to administer campus climate assessment to students, staff and
faculty and many times are willing to share the results from the assessments. Creating a way to
measure if any changes have been made since putting recommendations in practice from the
climate surveys can assist with holding institutions accountable to their commitment of creating
a safe and welcoming climate for the campus community. Literature in Chapter Two discussed
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 105
the concept of campus climate or campus culture and the importance of understanding how this
can contribute positively or negatively toward the experiences of students of color at a
university. Campus climate is defined in this study as how an individual experiences their
institution. The literature review focused on how Black, Latino, Asian American and Native
American students are affected by a negative campus climate. However, it is also important to
understand how staff and faculty experience the campus climate because their perspective is,
ultimately, going to influence the student perspective. Participants made a point to be in tune
with the campus climate at CU by utilizing student narratives as well as their weekly meetings
with cultural center colleagues and other faculty and staff. They have a unique perspective in that
they assess the campus climate through the lens of their center, their colleagues and students.
Participants who teach courses or have direct ties to academic units also have a more informed
view of the campus culture. Literature in Chapter Two highlights the lack of collaboration
between student affairs and academic affairs but some participants bridge this gap. Campus
climate continues to be a hot button issue as students, faculty and staff of color and other
marginalized communities continue to experience campus differently than others. This is also
tied to the next topic discussed below, institutional history which explains that this issue is more
than creating programs and services, and hiring “diverse” faculty and staff to improve the
campus culture. It is a more complex issue that is rooted in the systems and practices at many
PWIs.
Institutional History
Predominantly White Institutions can better utilize scholar practitioners in the cultural
centers to better understand the history of specific student populations at the institution. This can
assist with creating insight into the varied experiences of these students. For example, partnering
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 106
with a university librarian to create an exhibit to highlight activism, researchers or influential
former students, faculty and staff of color can educate the entire campus on the rich, diverse
history of their institution. Institutional history, in this study, refers to acquired knowledge of the
history of an institution, specifically relating to major changes that have occurred over time. Hart
and Fallabaum (2008) define institutional history as longstanding outdated policies that prevent
cross-cultural interaction or may unintentionally benefit one group over another. Both definitions
were important to utilize to create context in examining the experiences of participants. This was
a significant finding to highlight because it also ties into the emphasis that many of the
participants discussed about knowing and passing along the history of the university, the centers
and the different social movements. Campus climate is directly related to institutional history
because in order to improve the climate the positive and negative history of the institution has to
be examined. Participants shared that many administrators at CU want quick surface-level
change to occur to stabilize the uneasiness of the campus when issues arise. The history of the
creation of cultural centers at CU has deep roots in student activism and other unrest related to
race and ethnicity occurring at institution. History is something that is celebrated through annual
programs sponsored by students, cultural centers and a publication students created to inform
new students about the rich history of activism at CU. A diverse range of social issue are covered
in the publication such as the retention of faculty of color, marriage equality, and the promotion
of local and global sustainability. The publication is an example of how students at the university
work together in solidarity to promote and support causes that are important to them.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 107
Utilizing Data to Validate Practice
Using data to drive practice in higher education continues to be essential as the need for
resources continues to increase at institutions. Capturing and documenting data in cultural
centers will assist with demonstrating the need for additional funding, space and staffing.
Documenting the number of individuals that utilize the centers daily as well as students who
participate in programs assist with creating a more holistic story when paired with qualitative
data of student experiences. All participants advise students in the areas of their professional,
personal and academic lives. Very few participants documented the number of students they
have one-on-one interaction with on a daily basis. Students not making appointments and
seeking out these individuals as needed, make it a challenge to track these interactions. Utilizing
a card swipe system and other forms of electronic tracking will assist cultural centers with
documenting individuals that visit the centers as well as attend programs that take place outside
of the centers. Using databases similar to those used in academic advising offices will assist
practitioners with keeping track of student advising sessions as well as document the purpose of
their advising session. Scholar practitioners are essentially case managers in the sense that they
are working with multiple departments to advocate and ensure students are getting the support
that is needed. Being able to illustrate the number of students advised by these individuals could
assist with demonstrating the need for extending center hours as well as for hiring additional
professional staff members. Another important component to the continued success of these
centers are scholar practitioners who can speak the language of individuals making the decisions
at the university.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 108
Evolution of Ethnic-Specific Cultural Centers
Leadership that can evolve as institutions evolve is essential, as many departments
continue to make decisions from a business-driven framework (Soares, Steele, & Wayt, 2016).
As student populations evolve, it is necessary for the centers to change to meet student needs.
This is a sensitive subject in relation to ethnic-specific cultural centers because this can be
interpreted as no longer needing this model of cultural centers at PWIs. There is a demonstrated
need for ethnic-specific cultural centers but it is important for these centers to continue to stay
relevant to their student populations and to their institution. Scholar practitioners have to
continue to utilize data to inform practice, stay current with trends in social media, technology
and hot topics domestically and internationally. Practitioners are able to develop and stay current
with these skills by attending conferences such as the National Conference on Race and Ethnicity
in Higher Education (NCORE) and becoming involved with professional organizations that are
specific to this field of practice such as the California Council of Cultural Centers in Higher
Education (CaCCCHE) and The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education
(NADOHE). Being able to attend conferences and participate in other professional development
opportunities are at times financially not possible due to lack of funding. Institutions must make
it a priority for these individuals to be further educated because it will have long term benefits
for their student populations and colleagues. These individuals must also develop a keener
business acumen that creates opportunities to establish relationships with donors and have
experience with grant writing and budget management. This is not seen as one person possessing
all of these areas of expertise but developing a team in the centers that are proficient in the areas
discussed above. Practitioners can develop or freshen up these skills by taking courses or
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 109
completing certifications in the business school and other relevant schools within their
institution.
Institutional Accountability
Institutions should be held more accountable to impact deep rooted change regarding
each area discussed above especially campus climate, the support of cultural centers and
supporting the collaboration between academic affairs and student affairs. More specifically the
Provost and President and their cabinets have the ability to jump start these efforts by working
collaboratively with student affairs and academic affairs. Increased responsibility is being placed
on cultural centers, Chief Diversity Officers and other diversity related offices to create safe and
inclusive spaces for students of color and other marginalized groups, but the entire institution
should be engaging in these practices in order for the culture to shift. A starting point can be
engaging the entire campus in a climate study every couple of years to assess the needs of each
stakeholder group. This will assist at creating a plan of action for students, faculty and staff.
Hiring of more diverse faculty and staff, cultural competency training, utilizing and increasing
the visibility of cultural centers and creating tangible plans of action for academic units can also
assist with creating a sustainable culture of respect for all cultures and inclusivity at institutions.
Recommendations for Future Research
Continued research in best or promising practice in cultural centers at institutions across
the country will continue to assist with validating these spaces and keeping them relevant in the
field of higher education. Though this study focused on ethnic-specific centers, other identity
specific centers such as those for undocumented students and gender and sexuality centers
continue to emerge across the country. Additional research will be useful in learning about the
creation of these spaces and how they collaborate with ethnic-specific centers to address the
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 110
intersections of identities among students. Future research at institutions that comprise different
models of cultural centers such as multicultural, cross-cultural and ethnic-specific centers will
also be helpful to understand how these centers differ, yet work together to educate the campus
community on social issues and ways to support students of color. Ethnic-specific cultural
centers were created and continue to emerge at PWIs to assist with the retention of students of
color. Research that uses data to specifically identify how these centers are contributing to the
retention of students will be helpful since the relevance of these centers often comes into
question at some institutions.
Conclusion
Our society is inundated daily with events that have a negative impact on students and the
larger campus community. From mass shootings, bullying, and police brutality to bombings, our
students are entering college and are expected to quickly adjust and excel academically and
socially in their new environment. Some students of color are entering with even more burdens,
such as adjusting to being in an environment where they do not feel welcome and experiencing
racial microaggressions directed to them inside and outside of the classroom. These spaces serve
as a safe haven for students in terms of creating connection to their culture and to their multiple
identities while also connecting to the larger campus community.
Scholar practitioners connect to their students on a personal level because they see
themselves in the students who utilize these spaces. These individuals wear many hats:
counselor, educator, event planner, and consultant. Though they may have differing roles, they
all share in wanting their students to succeed academically and socially at their institution.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 111
References
Allen, W. R. (1992). The color of success: African-American college student outcomes at
predominantly White and historically Black public colleges and universities. Harvard
Educational Review, 62(1), 26-45.
Ancis, J. R., Sedlacek, W. E., & Mohr, J. J. (2000). Student perceptions of campus cultural
climate by race. Journal of Counseling & Development, 78(2), 180-185
American Council on Education. (1949). The student personnel point of view. Washington, DC:
American Council on Education.
Aragon, Steven R. (2000). Beyond access: Methods and models for increasing retention and
learning among minority students. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational Learning II: Theory. Method and Practice.
Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership reconsidered: Engaging higher education in
social change. Battle Creek, MI: Kellogg Foundation.
Ballentine, S. (2015, November 15). Missouri student leader says students unified. U.S. News. &
World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2015/11/15/
missouri-student-president-school-has-racism-also-unity
Bartlett, T. (2001). An Ugly Tradition Persists at Southern Fraternity Parties. Chronicle of
Higher Education, 48(14).
Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99-111.
Bowman, N. A., & Brandenberger, J. W. (2012). Experiencing the unexpected: Toward a model
of college diversity experiences and attitude change. The Review of Higher Education,
35(2), 179-205.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 112
Bowman, N. A., Brandenberger, J. W., Hill, P. L., & Lapsley, D. K. (2011). The long-term
effects of college diversity experiences: Well-being and social concerns 13 years after
graduation. Journal of College Student Development, 52(6), 729-239.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
Burkard, A. W., Cole, D. C., Ott, M., & Stoflet, T. (2005). Entry-level competencies of new
student affairs professionals: A Delphi study. Journal of Student Affairs Research and
Practice, 42(3), 545-571.
California State University Los Angeles. (2016).Office of Communication and Public Affairs
Retrieved from http://www.calstatela.edu/univ/ppa/media/history.php
Contreras, F. E., Malcolm, L. E., & Bensimon, E. M. (2008). Hispanic-Serving Institutions:
Closeted identity and the production of equitable outcomes for Latina/o students. In M.
Gasman, B. Baez, & CSV Turner (Eds.), Understanding Minority-Serving Institutions
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Sage publications.
Dalton, J. C. (1991). Racial and ethnic backlash in college peer culture. New Directions for
Student Services, 1991(56), 3-12.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York, NY: NYU
Press.
Duke University, Student Affairs. Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture. 2014. Retrieved
from http://studentaffairs.duke.edu/mlw
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2009). Student
development in college: Theory, research, and practice. John Wiley & Sons.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 113
Feagin, J. R. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Antiblack discrimination in public
places. American Sociological Review, 101-116.
Figley, C. R. (2002). Compassion fatigue: Psychotherapists’ chronic lack of self care. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 58(11), 1433-1441.
Foote, K. (2005). Excerpts from home away from home. Black cultural centers: Politics of
survival and identity, 183-209.
Garcia, G. A. (2015). Exploring student affairs professionals’ experiences with the campus racial
climate at a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI). Journal of Diversity in Higher Education
Garcia, G. A., Johnston, M. P., Garibay, J. C., Herrera, F. A., & Giraldo, L. G. (2011). When
parties become racialized: Deconstructing racially themed parties. Journal of Student
Affairs Research and Practice, 48(1), 5–21.
Gasman, M., Baez, B., & Turner, C.S.V (2008). Understanding minority-serving institutions.
New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
Goodenow, C. (1992). Strengthening the links between educational psychology and the study of
social contexts. Educational Psychologist, 27(2), 177-196.
Griffin, K. A., Cunningham, E. L., & George Mwangi, C. A. (2015). Defining Diversity: Ethnic
Differences in Black Students’ Perceptions of Racial Climate
Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory
and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330-366.
Hamrick, F. A., Evans, N. J., & Schuh, J. H. (2002). Foundations of student affairs practice. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Harper, S. R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for
institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 7-24.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 114
Hart, J., & Fellabaum, J. (2008). Analyzing campus climate studies: Seeking to define and
understand. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(4), 222.
Harwood, S. A., Huntt, M. B., Mendenhall, R., & Lewis, J. A. (2012). Racial Microaggressions
in the Residence Halls: Experiences of students of color at a predominantly White
university. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 5(3), 159.
Hart, J., & Fellabaum, J. (2008). Analyzing campus climate studies: Seeking to define and
understand. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(4), 222.
Hefner, D. (2002). Black cultural centers: Standing of shaky ground? Black Issues in Higher
Education, 18(26), 22-29.
Herbet, T. R. (2010). The Scholar-Practitioner Concept and Its Implications for Self-Renewal: A
Doctoral Student’s Perspective. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly, 4(1), 33-41.
Hiraldo, P. (2010). The role of critical race theory in higher education. The Vermont Connection,
31, 53-59.
Hord, F. L. (2005). Black culture centers: Politics of survival and identity. Third World Press
Chicago.
Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. The Journal of Higher
Education, 63(5), 539-569.
Hurtado, S., & Ruiz, A. (2013). The climate for underrepresented groups and diversity on
campus. American Academy of Political and Social Science, 634(1), 190-206.
Ignelzi, M. (2000). Meaning Making in the Learning and Teaching Process. New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, 2000(82), 5-14.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 115
Jenkins, T. S. (2010). Viewing cultural practice through a lens of innovation and intentionality.
In L. Patton, (Ed.), Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory,
and practice (pp. 137-156). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Kupo, V. L. (2014). Becoming a scholar ‐ practitioner in student affairs. New Directions for
Student Services, 2014(147), 89-98.
Liptak, A. (2016, June 23). Supreme Court uphold affirmative action program at University of
Texas. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/
us/politics/supreme-court-affirmative-action-university-of-texas.html?_r=0
Lomotey, K. (2010). Encyclopedia of African American Education (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Lovell, C. D., & Kosten, L. A. (2000). Skills, knowledge, and personal traits necessary for
success as a student affairs administrator: A meta-analysis of thirty years of research.
Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 37(4), 250-269.
Mercer, C. J., & Stedman, J. B. (2008). Minority-serving institutions: Selected institutional and
student characteristics. In M. Gasman, B. Baez & C. S. Viernes Turner (Eds.),
Understanding minority-serving institutions (pp. 28-42). Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.
Merisotis, J. P., & McCarthy, K. (2005). Retention and student success at minority serving
institutions. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2005(125), 45-58.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. Jossey-
Bass.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 116
Milem, J. F., Clayton-Pedersen, A. R., Hurtado, S., & Allen, W. R. (1998). Enhancing campus
climates for racial/ethnic diversity: Educational policy and practice. The Review of
Higher Education, 21(3), 279-302.
Minikel-Lacocque, J. (2013). Racism, college, and the power of words racial microaggressions
reconsidered. American Educational Research Journal, 50(3), 432-465.
Museus, S. D., & Park, J. J. (2015). The continuing significance of racism in the lives of Asian
American college students. Journal of College Student Development, 56(6), 551-569.
The National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education.
(2011) The Relevance of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders in Higher Education. Los
Angeles, CA: Author.
Nelson Laird, T. F., Bridges, B. K., Morelon-Quainoo, C. L., Williams, J. M., & Holmes, M. S.
(2007). African American and Hispanic student engagement at minority serving and
predominantly White institutions. Journal of College Student Development, 48(1), 39-56.
Patton, L. D. (2006). The voice of reason: A qualitative examination of Black student
perceptions of Black culture centers. Journal of College Student Development, 47(6),
628-646.
Patton, L. D. (2010). Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and
practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Patton, L. D., McEwen, M., Rendón, L., & Howard ‐ Hamilton, M. F. (2007). Critical race
perspectives on theory in student affairs. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120),
39-53.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 117
Rendón, L. I. (1995). Facilitating retention and transfer for first generation students in
community colleges. University Park, PA: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching,
Learning, and Assessment. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED383369.pdf
Resmovits, J. (2015, November 9). The last 58 days at the University of Missouri. Los Angeles
Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-na-last-days-
university-of-missouri-presidents-ouster-20151109-htmlstory.html
Reyhner, J., & Dodd, J. (1995, January). Factors affecting the retention of American Indian and
Alaska Native students in higher education. Paper presented at Expanding Minority
Opportunities: First Annual National Conference, Tempe, AZ.
Rocha, R. (2015, October 9). Kanye West-themed frat party at UCLA sparks protests, claims of
racism. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-
ln-ucla-blackface-kanye-party-20151008-story.html
Santos, J. L., Cabrera, N. L., & Fosnacht, K. J. (2010). Is “race-neutral” really race-neutral?
Adverse impact towards underrepresented minorities in the UC System. Journal of
Higher Education, 81(6), 675-701
Sherman, T. M., Giles, M. B., & Williams-Green, J. (1994). Assessment and retention of black
students in higher education. The Journal of Negro Education, 63(2), 164-180.
Solórzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and
campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. Journal of
Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60-73.
Short, D. C., & Shindell, T. J. (2009). Defining HRD scholar-practitioners. Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 11(4), 472-485.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 118
Soares, L., Steele, P., & Wayt, L. (2016). Evolving higher education business models: Leading
with data to deliver results. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Smith, B. L., & Williams, L. B. (2007). Academic and student affairs: Fostering student success.
In B. L. Smith & L. B. Williams with others (Eds.), Learning communities and student
affairs: Partnering for powerful learning (pp. 1-33). Olympia, WA: The Washington
Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education at The Evergreen State
College.
Smith, W. A., Yosso, T. J., & Solórzano, D. G. (2011). Challenging racial battle fatigue on
historically White campuses: A critical race examination of race-related stress. In R.D.
Coates (Ed.), Covert Racism (pp. 211-238). Boston, MA: Brill.
Stewart, D. L. (2011). Multicultural student services on campus: Building bridges, re-visioning
community. Stylus.
Sue, D. W., Bucceri, J., Lin, A. I., Nadal, K. L., & Torino, G. C. (2007). Racial microaggressions
and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology,
13(1), 72-81.
Sutton, M., & McCluskey-Titus, P. (2010). Campus culture center directors’ perspectives on
advancement, current issues, and future directions. In L. Patton, (Ed.), Culture centers in
higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice (pp. 157-177). Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Toya, G. J. (2011). Cultural center staff: A grounded theory of distributed relational leadership
and retention (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
(3445010)
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 119
United States Department of Justice. (2012). Types of educational opportunities discrimination.
Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/edu/types.php
Woodard, V. S., & Sims, J. M. (2000). Programmatic approach to improving campus climate.
Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 37(4), 236-249.
Yale College. (2015). Afro American Cultural Center History. http://afam.yalecollege.
yale.edu/about-us/history
Zirkel, S., & Cantor, N. (2004). 50 years after Brown v. Board of Education: The promise and
challenge of multicultural education. Journal of Social Issues, 60(1), 1-15.

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 120
Appendix A
Interview Protocol
Research Questions:

1) How do ethnic-specific cultural center scholar practitioners make meaning of their
experiences and foster relationships with stakeholders on campus and in the community?
a) How do cultural center scholar practitioners utilize student narratives to inform senior
level administrators about the experiences of students of color at the university?

Introduction (at the beginning of the interview, review the items listed below)
 Thank individuals for their time in participating in the interview
 Explain why I selected them to be participate in my study
 Explain the purpose of the interview and the overall study. Share what I will be
doing with their responses to the questions
 Explain approximately how long the interview will take (60 minutes)
 Fill out consent form before beginning the interview
 Ask for permission to audio record the interview
Interview Questions
1) What kind of information do students that utilize your center share with you about their
experiences at the university?
a. How do you document information that is shared with you by students?

2) Describe how you work with colleagues in the other cultural centers to provide programs
and workshops for the campus community.

3) Describe how you are supported professionally by individuals at the university in your
role as (insert title) in the cultural center.

4) Describe how you balance your multiple roles/responsibilities in the center (counselor,
educator, event planner, advocate, etc.)
a. Tell me about the role you feel has the most impact on students that utilize your
center

5) Do you chair or sit on any committees at the university or in the community related to
campus climate, diversity or equity?

6) How do you assess if you are being effective in your role in your cultural center?

7) What partnerships do you have with other departments at the university that support the
needs of students of color at the university?

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 121
8) Do you communicate via reports or meetings with senior level administrators (VP student
affairs, provost, president, etc.) about the experiences of students that utilize your center?

9) Do you have partnerships with alumni and/or trustees that are focused on supporting your
center?

10) How do you balance work, life and family in your current role?

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 122
Appendix B
Institutional Review Board Info Sheet Template

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4033

INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH

Campus Change Agents: Examining the Experiences of Cultural Center Scholar Practitioners at a
Predominantly White Institution

You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You should
ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
You are invited to participate in a study that will examine the experiences of practitioners that are
in leadership positions at ethnic-specific cultural centers at a Predominantly White Institution
(PWI). This study will inform the field of higher education by identifying how these centers
contribute to the academic and social integration of students of color at PWIs. This study will also
shed light on the differing experiences of these individuals and the relationships they create with
various stakeholders at the institution and in the community to foster a more inclusive environment
for students of color.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 10 minute survey and a
60 minute audio-recorded in-person interview. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t
want to. If you prefer not to be audio-recorded feel free to inform me prior to your participation in
the study.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
Following the completion of the survey and interview you will receive $10 Starbucks gift card for
your time.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential. Your
responses will be coded with a false name (pseudonym) and maintained separately. The audio-
tapes will be stored on a password protected computer in the researcher’s office for five years after
the study has been completed and then destroyed.
EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 123

The members of the research team, the funding agency and the University of Southern California’s
Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Principal Investigator via email Rosalind Conerly at conerly@usc.edu or phone at (213) 740-5290
or Faculty Advisor Dr. Tracy Tambascia at tpoon@rossier.usc.edu or (213) 740-9747.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

EXAMINING THE EXPERIENCES 124
Appendix C
Recruitment Email
Dear [Name],

My name is Rosalind Conerly, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education
at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation,
which examines the experiences of cultural center practitioners at a Predominantly White
Institution. You are cordially invited to participate in the study. If you agree, first you are invited
to complete an online survey that contains multiple choice and short answer questions. The
survey link will be sent to you once you agree to participate in the study. The online survey is
anticipated to take no more than 10 minutes to complete.
Following the completion of the survey you will be asked to be interviewed in person at your
institution. You will be contacted at a later time to schedule a date and time for your individual
interview. Each interview is anticipated to last approximately 1 hour and may be audio-taped.
Participation in this study is completely voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study.
If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me at conerly@usc.edu or (213)
740-5290.
Thank you for your participation,

Rosalind Conerly
Doctoral Candidate - Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative study examined the experiences of scholar practitioners who oversee Black, Asian American, Latino and Native American cultural centers at a Predominantly White Institution in the Western region of the United States. Participants were professional staff in leadership roles at the centers. Current cultural center literature primarily focuses on the creation of these centers and students who utilize these spaces. There is minimal literature available on the experiences of practitioners in the centers and their interactions with students, staff and faculty. This study used three frameworks: Single and Double Loop Learning, Tri-Sector Practitioners Model and a Microaggressions Framework to examine participants’ experiences interacting with stakeholders. Findings revealed participants make meaning of their experiences by partnering with stakeholders, connecting their work to their personal identities, being cognizant of institutional history and utilizing student narratives. This study informs the field of higher education by identifying how individuals in these centers contribute to the academic and social integration of students of color at a PWI.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The swirl world: sense of belonging of Black multiracial identifying students at a predominantly white institution

PDF

Creating a community of practice: serving student veterans in higher education

PDF

Historically Latino/a-based fraternities/sororities: understanding Latino/a student experiences in a historically White-dominated system

PDF

When parents become students: An examination of experiences, needs, and opportunities which contribute to student parent engagement in community college

PDF

Chief diversity officers and their impact on campus climate for students of color

PDF

The relationship between the campus climate and under-represented students’ experiences on campus and the influences on fit, self-efficacy, and performance: a qualitative study

PDF

And yet, still, they rise: a qualitative study on the persistence of Black undergraduate women at a predominantly White institution

PDF

A pathway to persistence: perspectives of academic advising and first-generation undergraduate students

PDF

Cross-cultural adjustment: examining how involvement in service-learning contributes to the adjustment experiences of undergraduate international students

PDF

Ethnic identity development, ethnic student organizations, campus racial climate, cultural integrity, and sense of belonging for Filipino American undergraduate students at a selective predominan...

PDF

Serving those who have served: the role of university career services in student veteran degree completion

PDF

Art school abridged: exploring the inferior completion rates of art colleges

PDF

Utilization of accommodations for learning or other non-apparent disabilities: the influence of ableism on student behavior

PDF

Examining the learning environments of urban high school educators who are culturally aware and serve a majority of students from historically marginalized populations

PDF

The racialized experiences of Black students in online master’s degree programs at a Predominately White Institution

PDF

Latino male community college students' persistence to transfer

PDF

Online student attrition in blended learning programs

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for marginalized students using the college-going culture: a promising practices study

PDF

Authors of our story: Black female students' experience during their first year at a predominantly White institution through a syncretic lens of critical race feminism and Afro-pessimism

PDF

Staff members’ transfer of social capital to first-generation, low-income Latino/a students of Mexican descent

Asset Metadata

Creator Conerly, Rosalind D. (author)

Core Title Campus change agents: examining the experiences of cultural center scholar practitioners at a predominantly White institution

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publication Date 03/07/2017

Defense Date 11/02/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag campus climate,cultural centers,diversity,OAI-PMH Harvest,scholar practitioners,student affairs,students of color

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tambascia, Tracy (committee chair), Green, Alan (committee member), Patton-Davis, Lori (committee member)

Creator Email conerly@usc.edu,rosalindconerly@hotmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-373453

Unique identifier UC11214685

Identifier etd-ConerlyRos-5121.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-373453 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ConerlyRos-5121.pdf

Dmrecord 373453

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Conerly, Rosalind D.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA