The Day Before...

Presidents in Denial
March 31, 2014
REPRINTED WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM  <https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2014/03/31/essay-college-presidents-are-denial-about-state-race-relations>
By
Marybeth Gasman
On February 24, 2014, The New York Times ran a story titled “Colorblind Notion Aside: Colleges Grapple with Racial Tension,” detailing myriad racial incidents on college campuses.  However, according to a new survey by Inside Higher Ed, most college and university presidents don’t think this kind of racial tension is happening on their campuses.  According to the IHE survey: “Most presidents (90 percent) say that, generally speaking, the state of race relations on their campus is good.” I was shocked to hear presidents answer in this way. How could this happen? 
Webinar on Survey Results
Register for a free Inside Higher Ed webinar on the presidential survey, and the findings on race relations and other issues. Sign up here.
Consider these incidents that have taken place on college campuses in the past year:
1. A student at San Jose State University wastormented and ridiculedwith racial slurs and the posting of the Confederate Flag by three students for months.
2. The University of Alabama admitted that it tolerated racial segregation in its Greek system up until very recently, with Black students being targeted for discrimination across the system.
3. Black students at Harvard University launched a Tumblr campaign called “I, Too, Am Harvard” to elevate the voices of Black students on campus because they are “unheard.”
4. Black males at UCLA created a YouTube video titled The Black Bruins detailing the dismal statistics surrounding Black men on the Southern California campus.  Likewise, law school students at UCLA have been bringing attention to the discrimination that they face on a daily basis through a social media campaign.
5. The chancellor of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, an Asian American woman, experienced racist slurs when she didn’t cancel classes during inclement weather.
6. Black students at the University of Michigan are protesting the racial climate on campus through both traditional means and social media.
7. A fraternity at Arizona State University held a party at which white students dressed in "gangsta wear" and drank from hollowed-out watermelons. (Note: This article has been updated from an earlier version to delete an erroneous reference to McDaniel College.)
Given these blatant incidents taking place regularly throughout the nation, let’s run through some possible reasons that college presidents remain positive about the situation on their own campuses:
First, the presidents answering the survey, although responding anonymously, could have been worried about bringing negative attention to their campus if they answered anything less than good. Typically, when racial tensions are high on college campuses, presidents are in damage control mode, tempering how the story is played out in media outlets. Moreover, presidents claim that it is harder to recruit students of color after negative media stories surface.
Second, some of the presidents might actually believe the myth that since the election of Barack Obama (twice) to the presidency of the United States, we live in a postracial world in which people of various racial and ethnic backgrounds get along famously and have set aside their differences and misunderstandings.
Third, some presidents are not fully aware of what is happening on their campuses – in classrooms, students organizations, fraternity and sorority houses, and in the residence halls. Midlevel staff members don’t always report the day-to-day interactions among students, and deans don’t want to bring bad news related to faculty members to presidents. For instance, at San Jose State University, mentioned above, it took the midlevel management considerable time to report the horrific incidents to the president. Perhaps presidents are kept in the dark as to the minor racial incidents and race relations on their campuses; only those that draw media investigation get their attention.
Fourth, many campuses have all of the “signs” of healthy race relations – diversity offices, diversity-related administrators, cultural centers, and diversity programs infused in orientation and student affairs activities – giving the impression that race relations on campus are "good" even when they are not.
Fifth, presidents might assume that demographic diversity on campus, which is on the increase, is equal to positive interactions among students, faculty, and staff. Research shows us that oftentimes demographic diversity doesn’t lead to interaction and in fact, campuses need to be purposeful about engendering positive race relations.
Sixth, and I think the most likely reason for the presidents’ understanding of campus race relations; the majority of college and university presidents are white. Oftentimes, even well-meaning whites are oblivious to the daily microaggressions felt by people of color because they do not experience environments in the same way.  More importantly, oftentimes whites create and sustain systems within academe that reinforce racism. These systems are most common in the areas of admission, faculty hiring and senior administration. For example, admission policies often privilege legacy status over the contents of the student application. Faculty member hiring systems sometimes hire candidates based on the recommendation of prominent white male professors rather than looking at the candidates that are actually in hiring pools. And upper administration, which is mainly white on most campuses, fail to notice their whiteness (intentionally or unintentionally) and the effect it has on the operations and race relations on campus.
From my own experience in academe at several colleges and universities, I have found that race relations are sometimes good depending on the circles in which I travel and they are sometimes strained. Students come to campus with varying degrees of exposure to difference; faculty members are sometimes uncomfortable "talking about diversity" and oftentimes will go to great lengths to protect white privilege and the systems that are in place that uphold this privilege; and administrative ranks at most colleges and universities are overwhelmingly white, making it more difficult to have an accurate understanding of race relations on college campuses. 
I do believe that our college campuses have people who care deeply about being inclusive, promoting true diversity, and engendering honest racial dialogue. However, there are still many individuals who do not feel this way; these people occupy the faculty ranks, the study body, the administration and staff, and even the presidency. Unless these individuals push themselves (or are pushed) to see the world through another set of eyes and place themselves in situations that are different from their everyday norm, they will not be able to catch a glimpse into what people of color experience on campus. An acknowledgement of the challenges that we still have in the area of race relations on campus is the pathway to bettering these relations; top down leadership is essential.
BIO
Marybeth Gasman is a professor in the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and director of the Penn Center for Minority Serving Institutions.


Pasted from <https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2014/03/31/essay-college-presidents-are-denial-about-state-race-relations>

Interpreting the General Letters by Herbert W. Bateman IV

Interpreting the General Letters

An Exegetical Handbook

(Handbooks for New Testament Exegesis)

The Seminarian's best friend and the Pastor's close companion.

This book - designed as a step-by-step approach for analyzing and communicating eight letters of the New Testament: Hebrews, James, the Petrine Letters, the Johannine Letters, and Jude - was made for the person who is familiar but not expert in the epistolary books of the New Testament Bible.  The book's strength is its ability to aid the reader/student in understanding and translating the ideas of those letters into a modern/post-modern context: hence the title.  It is being reveiwed in exchange for a free copy of the book.

The authors give a letter-writing context, a bibilcal-historical context and a sense of how each of these influences but does not determine the substance and style of each of the letters written by the early church fathers.

In concluding he work, the author, Bateman provides nine steps that move from interpretation to communication: three steps for preparing to interpret the letters, three for interpreting, and finally three for communicating the letters. All explanations include examples in order to develop a student’s or pastor’s skills for accurate interpretation and convicting communication of God’s Word.

I highly recommend this book for the Seminarian, the young pastor and even the Deacon or layman who is pursuing an interest in the early foundations of the church and its leaders.

Shepherding God's Flock is no Harder than it has Ever Been

Pastoring a church has never been easier.  I can say this with complete confidence because i have never pastored a church.  I have not been an assistant or associate pastor.  I have been an Active and a Reserve Chaplain in the US Army and Army Reserves.  I talk to pastors and Lead Chaplains on a regular basis and most of these are "venting" sessions which can only be shared by those who know, and believe me, pastoring a church (or chapel) has never been easier.

It is as difficult, complex, frustrating and fulfilling as it ever was.

Shepherding God's Flock: Biblical Leadership in the New Testament and Beyond, clarifies both the need for and frustration of pastors and leaders (as well as presbyters) throughout church history and in the present.  The scholarly work is a compilation of several well-regarded authors from an ecumenical collection of faiths  and edited by Dr. Benjamin L. Merkle, a professor of New Testament and Greek at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and Dr. Thomas R. Schreiner, a professor of New Testament Interpretation at the same seminary. 

Despite the subtitle, the work also looks at leadership in the Old Testament as well as perspectives and polity structures related to church leadership from Presbyterian, Anglican, Baptist ad Catholic perspectives. 

This book would be especially useful to seminarians in theologcial schools as well as Chaplains working in diverse and ecumenical Areas of Operation.   

An especially favorite chapter is Merkle's chapter three in which he looks at leadership based on Acts and the Letters of the Apostle Paul.  In this moderately long chapter which is worth the price of the book, Merkle should settle many of the arguments which I have had (and still have) with comrades in church leadership about what church leadership looks like in practice and where the concept first took form. 

The selling points of this book--which I received free in exchange for an unbiased review--is that it addresses church leadership from several perspectives and from a biblical historical reference point.  I strongly recommend it based on these advantages as well as the fact that it will make Pastoring easier for many.

What does the Best Education Look Like?

I am watching Anthony Muhammad's Moving the Bus Forward - Creating Healthy Learning Environments for All Children on my inclement weather day to get there.  What about you?
Please Respond.