Racial ‘crisis’ engulfs campus

A decision to postpone the first-ever meeting of the new Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee has escalated into a racially-charged conflict that has an array of faculty and classified employees calling for the resignations of new EDI Director Dr. Guadalupe Rodriguez Corona, Vice President of Student Services Dr. Angelica Suarez and President Dr. Melinda Nish. College trustees met in emergency session Feb. 19 and pledged to take action at its March 8 meeting.

Two weeks of behind-the-scenes tension and acrimony became public Feb. 16 when classified employees president Andre Harris made an emotional presentation to the SWC Governing Board and said the campus was awash in racism. Harris, an African American, said the impression he had was that Corona cancelled the EDI meeting to re-evaluate the make-up of the committee because she thought it had “too many African-Americans.” The 12 -member committee has three “tri-chairs” and nine voting members. Tri-Chairs Ursula Morris-Williams and Janelle Williams are African-American. Tri-Chair Corona is Latina. Voting members Abdulmalik Buul, Harris and Myesha Jackson identify as African-American or black. The six other voting committee members are of European, Latin American or Middle Eastern descent.

Corona insisted she never said there were too many African-Americans on the committee and that others were attributing statements to her that she never said. Her concern about the EDI Committee, she said, was to “make sure all of the college’s diverse constituencies had a seat at the table and felt represented.”

Matters escalated during a Feb. 16 college leadership meeting when Nish reportedly said unnamed “people” said there were too many African-Americans on the committee because African-Americans are a relatively small portion of the college demographic (about 4 percent). Members of the college governing board expressed concern over Nish’s comments and called an emergency meeting for Feb. 19.

Board members heard emotional presentations by several campus classified and faculty leaders. During and after the meeting many called for the termination of Corona and some blamed Nish and Suarez for “throwing gasoline on the fire.” The board met for about 20 minutes in open session, then convened to closed session for more than four-and-a-half hours. Nish was dismissed from the closed session sometime during the final hour of the meeting and went to her office until the board adjourned around 10:30 p.m. Board President Nora Vargas said no personnel decisions were made and that the board would report out the closed session at its regularly scheduled March 8 meeting.

College responds the complaints of racial mistreatment

Roots of this controversy go back decades, according to campus leaders, but flared last January when SWC board members, campus African-American leaders and Assembly Member Shirley Weber were given copies of a letter originally leaked to The Sun that complained of systemic mistreatment of African-American employees. It was signed by five employees, four of which identified as African-American, most of whom were custodians. Nish originally dismissed the complaints as old and issues that the college had already dealt with. Harris, in a letter to the editor published in The Sun last March (Volume 58, Issue 6), said that he had never experienced racism at SWC and that it was his belief the college was a productive multicultural community.

Harris’s letter was met with scorn by some campus African-Americans who complained that the president of the CSEA classified union should not make such sweeping statements while some union members felt the college was not a tolerant workplace. He also received a death threat in the U.S. mail. Harris said the writer emphasized that s/he knew where Harris worked and where his family lived. Harris and other CSEA leaders said the FBI was investigating the letter, which could be considered a felony death threat punishable by five years in federal prison.

Harris, campus police and college officials have all said they do not know who wrote the letter, but that the investigation is ongoing.

Days later campus and law enforcement officials seized the computer of Dr. Donna Arnold, the former dean of the School of Arts and Communication. Classified employees from the school complained that Arnold and a professor, both of whom are African-Americans, were speaking very loudly in Arnold’s office one day and saying things about Harris the employees described as “unprofessional and inappropriate.” Arnold was put on administrative leave. She then retired under the incentive-laden retirement plan offered by the college last year. Arnold has denied any involvement with the custodian letter or the death threat against Harris.

Williams, in her role as director of staff development, was asked by the college to organize mediation sessions for the employees who had signed the letter complaining of racist treatment. Nish and the governing board also decided to create a new position, Director of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, and to form a campus EDI Committee in hopes of starting a productive discussion of the college’s years of racial tension. Williams applied for the position and was hired, but resigned shortly after starting the new job due to what she said were scheduling issues with her family. She returned to her position as director of staff development and Nish hired another finalist, Corona, to become EDI Director.

February 4, 2016: Corona asked why she had cancelled the first EDI Committee meeting

Corona and Williams both admit they did not get off to a good start. Corona unilaterally cancelled what would have been the first EDI Committee meeting, blaming her workload and an important deadline for a report. Williams said she was not happy about the decision and met for two hours with Corona to discuss why Corona had canceled it without consulting tri-chairs Williams and Morris-Williams. During the meeting Corona raised concerns about the committee’s membership, said Williams.

“The meeting on February 4^th occurred because Ursula and I had received an email from the new director, Dr. Corona, that she needed to cancel the meetings,” Williams said. “She had a report due on the 18^th that she needed to focus her attention on and she was losing her secretary the next day and there were some concerns that she’d like to talk to me about in person.”

Williams said that she and Corona talked about Corona feeling overwhelmed in her new position and wanting to focus her attention on the Student Equity budget report. Williams said that Corona indicated she was the person most responsible for organizing the EDI Committee meeting.

“I said I understand, but remember we’re a team, so if you can’t make it to the meeting it’s okay, there’s two more of us, we can run the meeting,” Williams said. “She said, well I have some other concerns about the committee.  I’m concerned about the make up of the committee and I said well, what is your concern and she said well I would’ve been more intentional. I said what does that mean?”

“She said well, you know, where’s the Asian-Americans? Where’s our LGBTQ folks? Where’s our people with disabilities?” Williams said. “I said how do you know that by looking at a list of names? It dawned on me who the names were that people sent to me and I said to her, oh you’re concerned there’s too many black people on the committee. Her response to me was, well it’s about perception. I said whose perception?”

Corona said she did not know who the members of the committee were before the first EDI meeting.

“ I did not question the racial make-up of the committee,” Corona said. “I asked who’s not at the table because I don’t know who people are here (at SWC).”

Corona also said Williams showed her the list of members that had been emailed to her.

“All the members went to her. I didn’t set up this committee,” Corona said. “All I know is that at one point she was in charge of the committee and she was responsible for putting that committee together and then we had a meeting and she showed me who had emailed her and so I walked into this.”

Williams said she discussed the history of racial tension at SWC and how African-Americans had been marginalized on the campus.

“I shared with her that when you live in my skin, so often times when there are more than two of us who get together it has been called into question,” Williams said. “We don’t worry about the countless committees that are full of white and Latino representation only and we don’t question that. But when there are more than two black people, then there’s a problem.

“I explained how African-Americans have long been marginalized as employees on this campus and how if we had people who wanted their voices heard on this committee, it should be a feather in a hat, not another problem,” Williams said.

Corona said there were a lot of misunderstandings about the first meeting, the allegations were incorrect and she did not say there were too many African-Americans on the EDI Committee.

“What I said was that there a lot of people who are not at the table and the work of this committee is all inclusive of the campus and how are we going to address that?” Corona said. “My understanding is that we decided to move forward and bring up this conversation to the committee because I don’t know the structure. My understanding (was) that you can look at the committee structure and decide if you wanted to add more voices to the table or if you wanted to add individuals as resources and that’s a different structure. This is all new to me and I said fine, let’s move forward.”

Williams said she had explained to Corona the process of how each member was appointed to the committee by their constituency leadership.
“I talked about how I was not comfortable going back to the constituency leaders and telling them I’m sorry, who you chose was not significant, it is not good enough,” Williams said. “She seemed to have an impression that I put together the committee and she said how did you get this committee together? I said I’m sorry, I didn’t put the committee together.”

Corona said that most of her work in her first 28 days on the job was focused on training to use new accounting systems. She said that she lost her secretary due to a family emergency on Corona’s second Friday on the job and the reason for canceling the meeting was not due to the make-up of the committee, but to finishing the Student Equity Fund budget that was due on Feb. 19.

“We agreed to postpone,” said Corona. “I said look, I’m new here, I don’t have any support, I’m here by myself and I had a deadline to meet. We agreed to postpone given the deadlines I needed to meet.”

Williams and Corona agreed to let the committee meet Feb. 22 and discuss expanding membership.

“We left that meeting talking about look we are a team, you are not doing this on your own, you have a really large job description, remember that we work together,” Williams said. “I felt like we ended on a good note. I was very hurt and frustrated from the meeting, but we got to a good place.”

The next day, Williams met with Morris-Williams to fill her in on the meeting with Corona. Morris-Williams expressed concern to Williams that the tri-chairs had met for 3 hours and 48 minutes to introduce themselves before the meeting between Williams and Corona.

“We put everything on the table, my 18-year history here, Janelle’s history here, how things happened, how they were and she brought up perceptions at that time and I said well you know perceptions are open to everyone,” Morris-Williams said. “I said as an African-American woman walking into your (Corona’s) office, my perception is we hired a Latina woman. She’s very deeply rooted in her culture, but is she open enough to be supportive of everyone because your office, and it’s her office, is full of things from her heritage and her culture, but as the EDI director, aren’t you supposed to represent everyone?”

Ultimately Williams and Morris-Williams agreed to move forward to have the EDI Committee meeting on Feb. 22 and keep the conversation to themselves.

“This would not be good for the office for something like this to get out. Let’s keep this to ourselves,” Williams said. “Dr. Corona kept saying in that meeting, I’m afraid that this is gonna be a bomb in my face and I said if you move forward with this agenda that will be the bomb in your face. If people want to have this discussion, that’s why we’re here, let’s have that discussion.”

Morris-Williams concurred and also said that it had been agreed upon by the tri-chairs that the conversation stay between them.

“For me as a tri-chair of the committee, knowing the beginnings of this,” Morris-Williams said, “the conversation started with Janelle Williams, Guadalupe Corona and myself and that we agreed that that conversation would stay between us.”

Corona said she never agreed to keep that conversation confidential and spoke to her supervisor, Vice President Suarez, about what had transpired.

“I don’t ever recall having a conversation of confidentiality,” Corona said.

Corona said that because the committee is for the campus, the work is public and there should not be any secrecy.

“I don’t understand what is the whole secrecy behind this conversation because this is the work of the institution and it seems to me that this is the way some of this work has been done,” Corona said. “And that’s why there is so much pain around it, because people are focusing on the things that are divisive, instead of focusing on the things that are going to help move this institution forward.”

After the Feb 4. meeting with her tri-chairs, Corona reached out to Suarez in an email, expressing her concerns about the composition of the EDI Committee. Williams said this upset her.

“I got an email Dr. Corona had sent to Dr. Suarez saying these are the recommended members,” Williams said. “So I chimed in and I said, I’m sorry, these are not recommended members, these are the members that have been selected by their constituency leads. This is the membership.”

Suarez decided to brief her supervisor, Nish. Williams said she received a subsequent email from Suarez saying they would be having a meeting with Nish to discuss next steps.

“When I was called into the meeting on the 16^th to hear the same agenda (about the composition of the EDI Committee) put forward, I felt blindsided,” Williams said. “Because I thought it was done and I thought we were moving forward.”

Suarez said that in her years at SWC she has always taken issues that could result in divisiveness on campus to the president.

“I did share with Dr. Nish that I had the membership of the committee, people had asked me about the committee, how do they get on the committee and I shared that,” Suarez said. “What I said is that I’m sure the committee is going to handle it, but as a vice president, what I have done here for 16 years-17 years that I’ve been here is I take anything that I believe is going to create any kind of divide with this campus, I take it to the president.”

Controversy at the Feb. 16 Leadership Council Meeting

After Suarez talked to Nish about the EDI Committee membership issue, they spoke about it again at the regular leadership meeting on Feb. 16. That meeting included cabinet members, constituent leaders, and Corona and Williams as guests.

Academic Senate President Patricia Flores-Charter said the problem that had flared between Corona and Williams had a “simple solution” — discuss expanding the EDI Committee with the full membership at its first meeting. Matters escalated, however, when the issue was discussed at the leadership meeting in front of the entire campus leadership, said Flores-Charter. She described the meeting as a “crisis.”

Nish told those assembled that the issue of EDI Committee membership had been brought to them to avoid a “brown-black conflict,” according to Flores-Charter. It was the first time any of the campus leaders had seen the membership of the EDI Committee, she said. After viewing the list of EDI Committee members, campus leaders heard what had been said at the meeting between Williams and Corona. Flores-Charter said Corona’s concern was based solely on the list of names, some of which sounded like African-American names, she said. Attendees at the meeting said Nish echoed the idea that there were too many African-Americans on the committee. When her comment was met with aghast by some attendees, she quickly added that she meant strictly from a demographic measure were there too many African-Americans.

“We were next told that there were too many African-Americans on the committee and there were questions about process,” Flores-Charter said. “You’ll see this concern was based only on the names on this committee template. These were the names on which the concern that there were too many African-Americans on the committee was based.”

Harris, president of the CSEA, said Nish raised the issue.

“Nish has said at the leadership (meeting) it was brought to her attention someone had an issue with the make-up of the (EDI) Committee,” Harris said. “She said ‘well, um, some people are complaining that there’s too many African-Americans on this committee.”

Harris said his first reaction was that it was a joke.

“When this was brought to us I actually took like a 15-second laugh like really? I thought they were joking,” Harris said. “I thought it was really a joke that someone would question the make up of a committee, that there were too many African-Americans.”

Harris said in his 15 years of employment at SWC, not once was a committee questioned about its racial make-up. He also said at that moment he realized there was racism on the campus.

“Then I got upset, then I lost it,” he said. “So it was just the words ‘too many African-Americans on this committee.’”

Harris expressed this to the governing board on Feb. 16.

“To sit in a meeting of that caliber with my constituents and my leaders and the vice president and the president, to hear that, it was a smack in my face that racism is at Southwestern College,” he said. “I felt like I have lied to so many people (by previously asserting that there was no racism). If I said there was no racism on this campus, then Andre Harris was totally lost. Andre was in his imaginary world, everything was peaches and cream.”

Flores-Charter said campus leadership needed to let the EDI Committee meet and trust the committee members constituent leaders had appointed to discuss the issue of membership. She said that they were told that unnamed “people” had gone to Suarez confidentially with their concerns about the committee.

“This concern raised by two administrators in this meeting about the make-up of this committee is based in race,” Flores-Charter said. “This concern is divisive. It is based on assumptions and judgments based on names. This is the issue. How could the college make this controversial before the committee had a chance to meet?”

Flores-Charter said she and Williams were ignored at the leadership meeting and there was no support by Nish or Suarez to let the committee meet and work.

“The pandering to these questions of a select few has caused a crisis and is interfering with this committee’s ability to begin its critical work,” Flores-Charter said. “This is not leadership on part of our college leadership or this new director.”

­­­­­­Suarez said that neither she nor Nish ever said they did not want the committee to meet.

“What I recall saying at that meeting was, Dr. Nish, you know, she talked about the committee composition,” Suarez said. “What I said is maybe a way to move forward is to increase the composition to add resource members. That’s what I remember saying. I don’t ever recall saying that we wanted the committee not to meet.”

A 40-minute discussion took place about the alleged concerns raised by unnamed people about the membership of the EDI committee and no resolution was found.

Corona sat quietly through the meeting and did not answer questions posed to her, according to several attendees. She said there was “speculation” that Suarez told her not to speak.

“No, there’s a speculation about that and I think part of it is I can think for myself,” Corona said. “I’m a member of the community. I’m here to learn and I’m here to assess and I’m here to recommend. For me to just come out and start saying things that we need to do is out of context. Me? I haven’t been here, not even a month.”

At a subsequent Academic Senate meeting on Feb. 23, however, Suarez acknowledged that she advised Corona not to speak and that she took full responsibility for that advice.

“I said, you need to consider not saying anything at this meeting, you really need to hear from the group in terms of their thoughts.” Suarez said. “Hindsight is 20-20, maybe she should’ve said something, but that’s what I said. It was in respect for the years and history that the people at the table had and I did not want her to be disrespectful in the sense of imposing a view rather than listening to the group.”

Many leaders who attended the meeting said they were concerned that Corona did not speak during the 40 minutes spent discussing the EDI Committee. Frank Post, SCEA president, said the administration had behaved poorly at the meeting.

“I can tell you that at that meeting, as a campus leader, I feel very betrayed by the administration on campus,” Post said. “That Dr. Corona was in that meeting and I was not told why she was there, not knowing that she was the source, why we had a 40-minute conversation of what I thought was a private conversation in that room. That this individual that was the source of all of this, was sitting there listening and not saying a single word to defend herself, to defend this situation or to explain why she has an issue with the number of African-Americans on a committee.”

Harris said that the complaints from the “unnamed people” mentioned at the leadership meeting were anonymous and there was no proof they existed.

“She didn’t say, that’s where the speculation went, because the person who is the director of equity was there but said absolutely nothing,” Harris said. “She was quiet the entire meeting. So if anyone could’ve clarified or gave names it would’ve been Dr. Corona, but she was quiet.”

Two subsequent meetings occurred after the leadership meeting on the same day. Nish requested a meeting with Flores-Charter and Academic Senate President-Elect Andrew Rempt. After that the regularly-scheduled governing board meeting of Feb. 16 was called to order at 7 p.m. at the Otay Mesa campus. During his regular CSEA report to the board, an emotional Harris shared his concerns about what was said at the leadership meeting and condemned the notion at a campus committee could ever have too many African-Americans. After his report, Harris abruptly left the meeting and did not return.

“The very fact that it was brought to the attention of our vice president Dr. Suarez as well as Dr. Nish, it hurt me and it hurt me to the point where I left the board meeting,” Harris said. “I gave my report and I walked out. I didn’t want to be around anything Southwestern that day. That’s why I left.”

‘Crisis’ escalates back on campus

After the governing board meeting, Nish requested another meeting with Rempt and Flores-Charter to discuss what Nish now also called a “crisis.” Flores-Charter said she and Rempt expressed the need for leadership to act quickly. After that meeting, Nish called an emergency meeting of leadership on Feb. 18. Corona attended, the issues were discussed, but there was no resolution, according to Post.

“I’m just quite disgusted with what’s happening in that (Corona’s) position,” Post said. “I was at the second (leadership) meeting on Thursday and I feel that meeting never should’ve been called if all the original attendees couldn’t make it. So again, another failure by the administration as a whole.”

Morris-Williams said that Corona remained quiet, similar to the first leadership meeting, even though the Suarez advice to not speak was no longer in play.

“In the second meeting she (Corona) pretty much stayed silent, but when she did speak, she didn’t take ownership of what she said. She said no, no, no, no, I was questioning demographics,” Morris-Williams said. “I have an issue with the fact that this was caused by her, from the office that is supposed to be, that so many people have worked so hard to create to avoid this and this is where it comes from.”

Post agreed.

“In that meeting, Andre spoke directly to Dr. Corona as to why he was quitting the diversity committee, because of her actions,” Post said. “And her response was I feel your pain. I know your pain. I’ve experienced your pain. The work I do is very difficult. These are quotes. I interrupted her and said are we in the same meeting? Because this gentleman just said he’s quitting because of you and you’re saying you feel his pain? When you are the person who created this entire scenario?”

Later that day another emergency meeting was held. An emergency Academic Senate Executive Meeting was called and the executive committee agreed the issue needed to be taken to the full Academic Senate at its regular meeting Feb. 23.

Governing board members called their own emergency meeting to discuss the issue on Feb. 19. During the opening segment of the meeting, Rempt, Flores-Charter, Morris-Williams and Harris expressed their opinions that the campus had lost confidence in Corona. Harris acknowledged that Corona was a woman who was effective and respected in the Latino community.

“I don’t know her personally. I’ve Googled her and I’ve seen what she’s done in the community,” Harris said. “Great things. She’s very powerful, very impactful, but not for here. This is not the issue here that we have an all-Latino issue. We have an issue with African-Americans that are being questioned about a committee.”

Corona, who was not at the meeting, replied later.

“Does that mean that because I do great work for the Latino community that I can’t do great work for other communities?”

After about four hours of deliberation in closed session, the board adjourned.

“The board at this time does not have any reportable actions,” said board president Nora Vargas. “We take these issues very seriously and we are going to continue this discussion and we are getting ready to ensure that we either have continued the meeting before or by March 8^th so we can continue to have discussions over these items.”

Academic Senate, Classified Employees consider Votes of No Confidence against Corona.

On Feb. 23 the regular Academic Senate meeting focused primarily on the EDI situation.

Senator Jessica Posey asked why the Senate had to wait for the governing board to act.

“Isn’t there something that we can do, that if it’s obvious that this person is not going to be able to represent us and move us forward in a climate of not only equity but inclusion, is there not something we can do to ask for her removal?” asked Posey. “Because it seems like she’s not a good representative.”

Posey made a motion that the Academic Senate draft a Resolution of No Confidence against Corona. Senator Candice Taffolla-Schreiber said all faculty members should have a say in a No Confidence vote and suggested the Senate delay drafting a No Confidence Resolution until Senators could poll the faculty they represent. Posey’s motion was amended and the Senate agreed to take up the No Confidence proposal again at its March 8 meeting.

Silvia Lugo, CSEA Vice President, said the CSEA will take the same action.

“We are also going to be putting to our membership a Resolution of No confidence,” she said. “We took it to our exec. team yesterday and we’re going to follow the due process as well. We want to make sure that we not only talk to our constituents, but also talk to our colleagues and by no means we condone this behavior (by Corona). It (the racial composition of the EDI Committee) should have never, ever, ever been questioned ever at any level.”

Corona was not invited to the Senate meeting, which Suarez said was unfortunate.

“I think it would’ve been important to invite Guadalupe Corona to this meeting so that she can answer some of these questions directly, because obviously I’m not going to speak for her,” Suarez said to the senators.

EDI Committee meets on Feb. 22, former faculty union president strongly defends Corona

The EDI Committee met on Feb. 22 and Corina Soto, a former faculty union president, spoke up for Corona. Soto said the campus has engaged in a “rush to judgement” on Corona and was guilty of a “mob mentality.” She said the negative framing of the question asked by Corona was taken to the emergency governing board meeting.

“I believe that the faculty and staff quoted in the article (on theswcsun.com website) were angry with Dr. Corona because they believed that they were supporting the people on the committee who were hurt by what they think that Dr. Corona meant when she allegedly made a comment asking for more diversity and inclusion on the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee,” Soto said.

Recent actions to condemn Corona were akin to bullying by academics, she said.
“For Dr. Corona to be maligned in print is an action that can never be undone,” Soto said. “Once something goes out on the Internet it is very difficult for it to be taken back. Dr. Corona is a very respected educator and community leader in San Diego County. For her to experience bullying, academic mobbing and being ganged up on… is embarrassing for the entire SWC community.”

Corona said the issue is not about her. SWC has an issue with management talking for others, she said, leading to misunderstandings.

“People can speak for themselves and I’m seeing that behavior of people saying things that I didn’t do, saying things that I didn’t say and it’s so unfortunate that there is a habit around here that people speak for others,” Corona said. “I can speak for myself. Quietness doesn’t always equate to lack of leadership. I’m a process person. I’m trying to process a big picture here with very little information, and the more I talk to people, I can understand where some of this stuff is structural and where some of this stuff has become painful over the time for certain individuals and there’s other individuals involved than the three people here. It’s bigger than us. It bigger than Southwestern and so my concern is, what is the real issue, let the committee get its work done. I believe committee members expressed that they’re ready to get the work done. Can we move forward?”

Many campus leaders expressed their lack of confidence in Corona’s ability to run the EDI office.

“Dr. Corona is so disconnected from any sense of reality, on fairness and justice as it concerns race that I have no confidence in her ability to lead any of us to a better place,” Post said.

“To this day, Dr. Corona has not owned up to what she said, she’s not taken responsibility for any part of it,” Morris-Williams said. “She hasn’t been truthful. I’ve had several meeting where she’s said different things that are basically either conflict or a lie.”

“We need to come together as a community and look within ourselves because we can’t fix this race issue until we start with ourselves,” said Harris. “If you think you’re not a racist, look again. Maybe you have something going on, because we all have our little biases sometimes and if you just bring it to the forefront that there are too many of a group on a certain committee, you’re a racist. Plain and simple.”

“For that issue to be brought up and to be called to question should be an insult to all of us and I will not stand for it,” Lugo said. “We are not going to let this fight go. We have not done a good job as an institution to resolve racial issues on this campus. We’ve ignored them. We’ve marginalized them. We’ve swept them under the rug for so many years and every time there’s a little bubble then it becomes a big issue, but we’ve never resolved them. Never.”

Soto said the EDI director has the responsibility of asking uncomfortable questions in order to do the job she was hired to do.

“The person who is currently in the position of Director of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, or any director hereafter, needs to be in charge of the committee,” Soto said. “She deserves to be able to ask questions not just about the composition of the committee but of anything else her experience, education and expertise tells her she should ask because that is exactly what she was allegedly hired to do.”

Corona said she was not discouraged by the controversy and plans to continue her work.

“My understanding is that (EDI) committee was set up to talk about real, deep, meaningful issues of the institution,” she said. “I believe that what I’ve learned from that committee is that the institution has people who really care about Southwestern and they really want to address this and part of that means that every group has to do self- reflection about how they react in times of conflict and one of the things that I think would be very beneficial for that group is to get some training and coaching on how to deal with difficult issues when they come up and I think that’s part of the work that needs to be done.”