• “Notes” post will be reorganized and redistributed here and elsewhere

• Go over the other sections and recursively add to this section

The case for an overhaul of Title VI in general

• The goal is to cast doubt, which means make it impossible to disprove the possibility that civil rights violations that equate to denied access to education are occurring

The “institution side” of the loop is broken

• Based on the last year, it is impossible to say that the current standard for Title VI is working, we know that with respect to antisemitic and anti-Muslim activity

• Michigan is an example of the schools themselves not knowing Title VI

  • Decentralized reporting with little to no accountability

  • Difficulty deciphering between creation of a hostile environment and protected speech

The “student side” of the loop is broken

• Based on these issues why would we assume it is working at all?

• The law is vague with respect to what constitutes “protection of rights”

  • It largely relies on the student to protect themselves

  • But the student cannot be relied upon to be aware and proactive without, at the very least, notification and literacy

• Thus, there is no way to determine whether low reporting is due to a low number of incidents or a broken system

Campus climate is a related problem

• If the law is vague, and left up to the recipient—who may themselves be the subject of reports—to define “access to education,” then that access may be vulnerable

• What are the diversity enrollments in STEM?

• If we don’t know, how can we say there’s no correlation between minority enrollment and a negative STEM “climate?”

Notes

• Based on a broken system it is unknown what other civil rights issues are present

• Longevity: these issues will persist indefinitely—due to geopolitical conflict, the vitriolic political climate, foreign students, unfettered access to bias and discriminatory views via social media, and bullying and harassment via social media—and will serve to fill the void in the absence of administrative guidance and Title VI education and enforcement

• Acknowledge by enrollment to adhere to student conduct code

• Undergraduate Admissions Summary Tables

• Accountability report 2020

  • “African American students are less likely to feel that students of their race/ethnicity are respected on their campus than other students.”

  • “Conservative undergraduates are less likely to feel that students of their political affiliation are respected on campus than those with liberal or moderate political opinions.”

  • “The share of students who felt their religion was respected increased between 2016 and 2018, particularly for Muslim students.”

  • There is no data on the URM categories in STEM fields

  • What about STEM and socioeconomic status?

• Executive Summary

  • Public high schools and UC student and faculty, percent female

  • Public high schools and UC student and faculty, percent underrepresented

• UCOP Academic Affairs research and analyses on the impact of proposition 209 in CA

• AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, MISMATCH, AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY AFTER CALIFORNIA’S PROPOSITION 209

  • “First, I show that ending AA caused substantial and persistent educational and labor market deterioration among URM UC applicants: each of UC’s 10,000 annual URM freshman applicants’ likelihood of earning a Bachelor’s degree declined by 1.3 percentage points, their likelihood of earning any graduate degree declined 1.4 p.p., and their likelihood of earning at least $100,000 in each year between ages 30 and 37 declined by about 1 p.p. per year. These results imply that affirmative action’s end decreased the number of age 30-to-34 URM Californians earning over $100,000 by at least 2.5 percent. Second, I show that ending AA did not improve URM students’ relative performance or persistence in core physical, biological, or mathematical science courses, within or across impacted universities. These findings suggest that state prohibitions on university affirmative action policies have modestly exacerbated American socioeconomic inequities.”

• College Major Restrictions and Student Stratification∗

• Training should include

  • message activism over identity activism

• There’s anxiety about possible outcomes

  • The goal should be to encourage people, if nothing else, to just submit a report

    • It should be clear to students first and foremost that an arrest does not have to be made and a Title IX investigation does not need to be initiated

    • Beyond this step, they should trust that the grievance process is discrete and fair

• Why is there a stigma in talking about SVSH? Why don’t we know how pervasive SVSH is? Why aren’t students surveyed?

  • How can anyone have any idea if the number of reports is anywhere close to the number of incidents? Is this not a concern for the well-being of the students?

• More money for DOE and OCR

• For both Title IX and Title VI, in the training, they need to be promoting a culture of reporting and safety

• Students are adults, and should be treated as such. An equitable environment shouldn’t mean punishment.

• Problems with UCUES

  • UCUES is optional

  • UCUES is massive

  • UCUES made certain civil rights questions optional, in an optional survey

• UCLA annual data report has inexplicable discrepancies

  • Civil rights reporting is low compared to Title IX