Student organizations need autonomy to be effective

RELATED STORIES:
Profs may be hard to find keep because of policy

The Christian education requirement at Calvin College, which states that faculty must send their children to Christian schools, has become a point of contention in Calvin’s community. The requirement helps Calvin keep its Reformed foundation, which is especially important given Calvin’s affiliation with the Christian Reformed Church.

But there is a downside to the requirement, because it deters the hiring and retention of minority faculty, a commitment Calvin has claimed, but has been slow to achieve. What we at Calvin are now facing is the divided loyalty between expanding our horizons by integrating the knowledge and experience of minority students and faculty, and keeping our Reformed identity intact. As we try to deal with this situation, we at Calvin must remember that if we do not keep up our commitment to diversity, we will run the risk of hypocrisy.

It sends a contradictory message to prospective minority faculty —“We want you to come here because you are different, but now you must become like us.”

In 1986, Calvin College adopted a Comprehensive Plan, which set forth certain goals for integrating North American minority students and faculty into its campus. In April of 1997, at the end of Calvin’s Multicultural Year, a symposium was held to reflect on Calvin’s achievements and obstacles that remained. This symposium, as well as a summary of the Comprehensive Plan, was documented in a book entitled “The One in the Many: Christian Identity in a Multicultural World,” edited by Professor Thomas R. Thompson. In the Comprehensive Plan, Calvin aimed for a community in which 10 percent of the student body is comprised of minorities. This goal was meant to be met by 1995; in reality, however, Calvin has at best included only four percent minorities. Calvin has had a similar lack of success in reaching its goals for hiring and retaining minority faculty.

We need minority faculty and we need to put forth the extra effort to attract such faculty for three reasons. First, minority faculty bring a unique and valuable perspective to Calvin. In the middle of a fairly homogenous Reformed culture these people stand out and help us to see the wonderful diversity of the Kingdom of God. This broadening of our horizons is an essential part of our commitment to a liberal arts education.

Second, having minority faculty makes Calvin more attractive to minority students. Minority faculty can provide support and direction for students who are entering a majority culture that is strange to them.

Third, we need to put forth the effort to bring in minority faculty simply because Calvin has already agreed that this is necessary and has committed itself, at least on paper, to such actions. Whether or not our personal beliefs lead us to desire a more diverse community at Calvin, the administration has already committed to multiculturalism. The Calvin community must now hold itself to this promise.

As previously stated, the requirement that faculty send children to a Christian school is a large factor in our inability to hire and retain minorities. This requirement forces professors to conform to standards of the Reformed tradition which are not necessarily a part of their own background. While we cannot easily fault Calvin for desiring its professors to hold to Reformed ideas, we do feel that this requirement is a tradition which is too intrusive into the professors’ private lives. Furthermore, it sends a contradictory message to prospective minority faculty —“We want you to come here because you are different, but now you must become like us.”

Also, many minority professors are unwilling to send their children to schools that often represent only one worldview and are composed of mostly white upper- and middle-class students. The money required to enroll children in private schools may also be prohibitive to any prospective faculty, especially when other colleges already offer better pay than Calvin.

Psychology Professor Justin Barrett’s situation is an example of how the Christian school requirement leads to Calvin losing minority perspectives. As someone from a non-Dutch background who has nevertheless become a full part of the community, he brings a valuable and unique perspective to this campus. Justin has been active in the Mosaic community and other multicultural aspects of Calvin, and has helped many students think through the challenges and implications of racial and cultural diversity. Justin is also a personal friend whom we know loves Calvin and enjoys his job. Yet he has decided to give up his secure position here to follow God’s call to involve himself in the world by placing his children in public schools. Though Justin attends a Reformed church and is committed to Calvin’s philosophy of education, he must give up his position at Calvin to follow God’s calling — a calling that is directly in line with the Reformed mission of “engaging” the world. Simply because of the Christian school requirement, Calvin will lose a professor who is a valuable part of its multicultural community.

This example brings to light the conflict on Calvin’s campus. Calvin has gone on the record as being committed to diversifying its faculty, yet the Christian school requirement stands in the way of this diversification. As students, faculty and administration of Calvin College, we need to ask ourselves exactly how committed we are to making the college a more multicultural community. Calvin is an institution that says good things about multiculturalism but is sometimes hesitant to do the things necessary to bring it about. Eliminating or significantly modifying the Christian school requirement would break down a significant barrier to hiring minority faculty, thereby helping Calvin fulfill its goal of becoming a more multicultural community.

There are conflicting allegiances between diversifying Calvin’s faculty and holding to tradition, as embodied in the Christian school requirement. Both cannot both be served. If Calvin continues to ignore the growing tension, it may soon be rightfully called hypocritical, in more than one way. Calvin has committed itself to a more diverse community, yet if we do not act in accordance to our commitment, we will run the risk of becoming a school that gives promises, but not results.

And Calvin, with more urgency than we may realize, must deal with the schism between seeking to be a representative community of God’s people and holding to the traditional Reformed identity that has made this college what it is today. Since we have chosen to expand our horizons, we must be willing to ease our grasp on some of our traditions. Secularization through loss of tradition is not the only way for us at Calvin to lose our institution’s spiritual vitality and commitment. Holding so tightly to our traditional identity that we become ingrown will also bring about a breakdown in our vital focus on God and His kingdom. Surely we can find a middle ground, especially in the area of the faculty Christian school requirement, where our traditions will be respected without the exclusion of valuable minority insights.

We are greatly indebted to Justin Barrett, and to the book mentioned in the article — “The One in the Many,” especially the article by Steve Timmermans — for information and for helping us think through these issues.