Summary of "Critical Issues in Higher Education Webinar 2020"

Overview

This webinar (Azusa Pacific Univ. Critical Issues in Higher Education) featured Dr. Gina Ann Garcia presenting research and practical guidance about Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), racism/whiteness in higher education, and organizational change toward equity, justice, and liberation.

Dr. Garcia framed HSIs as “racialized institutions” and argued that U.S. higher education continues to privilege white‑normative standards and metrics; those standards produce hierarchies that devalue HSIs and undermine racial justice for students of color.

The talk combined theory (racialization, settler colonialism, decolonization), empirical findings, institutional case stories (a three‑way typology of HSIs), and an organizational model (the “decolonizing/transforming HSIs” model) with detailed recommendations for practice, policy, hiring, curriculum, assessment, grants, and governance.

Key concepts and lessons

Racialization of institutions Race operates at the organizational level — not only as individual bias — so institutions themselves become racialized (e.g., predominantly white institutions vs. racially minoritized institutions such as HSIs).
White‑normative standards Common legitimacy metrics (selectivity, SAT/ACT, GPA, national rankings, research prestige, certain “high‑impact practices,” graduation rates) reflect and reproduce whiteness. If these metrics alone are valued, HSIs and other broad‑access institutions remain undervalued.
Dominant narratives and deficit framing Grant proposals, institutional narratives, and everyday practice often portray HSI students in deficit terms to secure funding. That reinforces negative stories instead of acknowledging and building on students’ cultural capital.
Historical context matters Inequitable K–12 contexts, segregation, settler colonialism, and centuries of structural disadvantage partly explain observed higher‑education outcomes. Ignoring history produces flawed, race‑neutral policies.
Equity‑mindedness vs. deficit thinking Equity‑minded practice recognizes inequitable outcomes, disaggregates data, names race explicitly, and takes institutional responsibility to change structures rather than blaming students.
Decolonization as a frame Education and higher education have functioned as colonial projects. Decolonizing—or more pragmatically, transforming—HSIs requires rethinking curriculum, governance, pedagogy, community relations, and institutional purpose, not just surface changes.

Typology of HSIs (case‑study framing)

Dr. Garcia uses three institutional types to illustrate variation and consequences of different approaches:

Latinx‑producing Institutions that graduate many Latinx students (high completion metrics) but mostly by meeting race‑neutral legitimized outcomes; they may not transform curriculum, culture, or power structures.
Latinx‑enhancing Institutions with long engagement in Latinx identity and programming but that still struggle with low graduation rates and unresolved structural inequities.
Latinx‑serving (anomalous / transformative) Institutions that operate outside white‑normative standards—valuing student language, knowledge, and community—and that center racialized students’ experiences and culture in meaningful ways.

Data remarks

Typical patterns cited: average HSI graduation ≈ 39%; average for all institutions ≈ 54%; most selective institutions often 70–88% graduation.
These figures are illustrative of disparities rather than immutable truths.

Organizational model: “Decolonizing / Transforming HSIs” — dimensions to address

Dr. Garcia’s model describes ~9–10 institutional elements to transform:

Mission and purpose Embed explicit commitments to liberation, equity, anti‑racism, and justice (not only “diversity/inclusion” language).
Outcomes and purpose redefinition Move beyond race‑neutral legitimized outcomes to liberatory outcomes (critical consciousness, racial identity development, activism, civic engagement, social/self‑concept, community engagement).
Curriculum & pedagogy (including technology) Decenter white curricula; include ethnic studies, bilingualism, culturally sustaining pedagogy; redesign for students with work/family obligations.
Membership (hiring & composition) Recruit and retain faculty, staff, administrators, and trustees committed to anti‑racism and liberation (intentional, anti‑racist hiring; cluster hires; revised review rubrics).
Incentive structures Provide real incentives (course releases, internal grants, stipends) for faculty and staff to redesign curriculum and practices.
Governance & accountability Ensure decision‑making, boards, and leadership align with equity goals; disaggregate data; create mechanisms to hold actors accountable for microaggressions and exclusionary practices.
Boundary and community management Partner with local communities, address neighborhood policing/harassment that affects students, and align external stakeholders (funders, accreditors, foundations) with institutional justice aims.
Programs & services Provide high‑touch, culturally relevant student support, bilingual services, and diverse financial aid packaging.
Justice & community standards Create community norms and restorative/collective accountability practices to address racism and microaggressions.
Assessment & research Reframe research questions to value students’ assets and liberatory outcomes; avoid deficit framings in grant narratives and program evaluations.

Concrete, actionable recommendations

Reframe mission and language

Put anti‑racism, equity, justice, and liberation (not just “diversity/inclusion”) into mission and strategic plans.

Reframe metrics and outcomes

Define and adopt “liberatory outcomes” (critical consciousness, racial identity development, civic/activist engagement).
Disaggregate all performance data (by race, income, first‑generation status, etc.) and act on inequities.

Curriculum transformation

Form department‑level learning communities to redesign curricula together.
Incentivize curriculum redesign with course releases, small grants, or buyouts.
Add ethnic studies requirements and culturally sustaining content in core coursework.
Audit syllabi for whose knowledge is represented; diversify authors/readings (Latinx, Black, queer, trans, Indigenous scholars).

Reimagine “high‑impact” practices

Adapt internships, study abroad, and research opportunities so they fit working, parenting, undocumented, and part‑time students (local/paid/remote options; short‑term alternatives).
Reinterpret civic engagement to include organizing, advocacy, mutual aid, and campaigns (not just voting/volunteering).

Grant and narrative practices

Build grant teams that include on‑the‑ground staff and ethnic studies faculty who bring asset‑based narratives.
Avoid deficit language in funding proposals; emphasize students’ cultural capital and strengths.

Hiring and composition change

Use cluster hires and targeted searches that require demonstrated commitment to HSIs, anti‑racism, and student liberation.
Embed equity and anti‑racism criteria into review rubrics, job announcements, and interview questions.
Recruit at pipeline institutions and create retention supports for diverse hires.

Accountability and microaggressions

Develop clear policies and transparent processes to address classroom microaggressions and hold faculty/staff accountable.
Train faculty and staff on anti‑racist pedagogy and microaggression prevention.

Community & boundary work

Engage neighborhoods and local authorities proactively to protect and integrate students (e.g., address policing bias affecting commuting students).
Build reciprocal partnerships with local schools and community organizations.

Funding and incentives

Conduct financial/diversity audits to map where money goes and align budgets with equity goals.
Create internal grant programs or incentives encouraging interdisciplinary teams (faculty + staff + students + community partners) to redesign practices.

Land recognition and decolonial attention

Move beyond land acknowledgements toward meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities and consideration of settler colonial histories in curricular and institutional decisions.

Practical advice by audience

Faculty / program leaders Count and diversify course readings, create departmental plans for curriculum change, use funds to buy release time for redesign.
Grant writers / program officers Involve staff and ethnic studies experts; write asset‑based narratives; avoid portraying students as “deficient” to win funding.
Administrators / boards Put anti‑racism in mission, fund structural change (hiring, program redesign), disaggregate data, and create accountability mechanisms.
Researchers / doctoral students Study institutional finance & equity, boundary management, microaggressions in HSIs, and publish evidence to inform policy.

Framing cautions and nuances

“Decolonizing” is conceptually powerful but complex in practice; “transforming” HSIs may be preferred in some contexts because decolonization raises difficult historical and geopolitical questions (e.g., settler colonialism, Indigenous and Latinx intersections).
Changing faculty and governing composition is slow (tenure systems, long careers). Diversifying hires is necessary but simultaneous structural change is required so institutions don’t simply replicate white‑normative cultures with new faces.
Avoid race‑neutral policy fixes; explicitly name race and systemic injustice when addressing racial equity. Promises like Black Lives Matter commitments must be accompanied by sustained, concrete institutional action.

Selected works, theories, and examples cited

Theories and frameworks: racialization theory; equity‑mindedness (Stella Bensimon et al.); Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed; Craig Wilder’s Ebony and Ivy; Alexander Astin (stratification/selectivity).
Examples and practices: UC system HSIs; University of Arizona cluster hiring for HSI work; Santa Cruz governance examples; Alliance for HSI Educators.
Critiques and references: critiques of guided pathways, SAT/ACT, and conventional high‑impact practices.
Funders and organizations mentioned: Ford Foundation, National Academy of Education / Spencer Fellowship, AERA (Hispanic Research Issues SIG), Association for the Study of Higher Education, American Council on Education, ACCJC/other accreditors, NSF.

Speakers and notable names referenced

Primary webinar participants

Laurie Shriner — Chair, Dept. of Higher Education, Azusa Pacific University (opening/host)
Dr. Christopher Newman — Associate Professor, Azusa Pacific University (introduced Dr. Garcia; co‑facilitated Q&A)
Dr. Gina Ann Garcia — Associate Professor (University of Pittsburgh), main presenter and author (Becoming Hispanic‑Serving Institutions)

Other scholars and figures cited (names as spoken in captions; some spellings may be imperfect)

John Lewis; Adriana (Adriana Kezar); John Tagg; Bill Tierney; Mitch Chang; Darnell Cole; Alyssa Rockenbach; Susan (uncertain); Daryl Smith; Sean Harper; Alexander Astin; Julie Park; Wade Cole; Nick Vargas; Stella Bensimon; Tinto; Z. Nicolazzo & D. L. Stewart; Craig Wilder; Paolo Freire.

Optional follow‑up (note from the webinar summary)

The presenter offered to convert the organizational model and concrete recommendations into a one‑page checklist tailored for one of three audiences: (a) department faculty, (b) HSI grant teams, or (c) campus leadership (president/board).