Author: Isabelle

FYSM Color and Money: Race and Social Class

Interview Analysis Essay Final

College is ideally a time when young people broaden their horizons, gain new experiences and, for perhaps the first time, interact with individuals of backgrounds very different from their own.  But, meeting new people of different backgrounds can be intimidating or uncomfortable, especially when one feels subject to preconceived notions and stereotypes.  Paradoxically, college campuses like Trinity’s may be places of greater segregation and social divisions than of integration of diverse and harmonious living and learning.  Thus, the idealized image of college as a time of broadened horizons and greater understanding of differing viewpoints may be more true in theory than in practice.

To investigate this topic, our seminar conducted an interview-based study of students’ perceptions of race and social class at Trinity. Our interview guide posed ten open-ended questions and three demographic questions that explored topics such as personal awareness, social interactions, and other students’ assumptions regarding racial and social class differences at Trinity. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning provided our professor with a stratified random sample of 55 sophomores from the Class of 2016, categorized by race (white or non-white) and first-year financial aid status (receiving or not receiving). Our professor sent personalized email invitations to this group, and assigned each of us to conduct an interview with all who responded and agreed to participate. The typical interview lasted about ten minutes, and was transcribed by the interviewer. The final sample consisted of 18 interviews: 10 students who received financial aid (four white and six non-white), and 8 students who did not receive financial aid (four white and four non-white). All names are pseudonyms and personally identifiable details have been masked, in accordance with our research ethics confidentiality agreement approved by the Trinity College Institutional Review Board.

The data and perspectives presented in this study show significant social divisions Trinity’s campus– divisions on the bases of both race and socioeconomic class.  When confronted with different cultures, backgrounds, and perspectives, students tend to surround themselves with others who share similar backgrounds, cultures, and viewpoints.  Thus, rather than acting as an incubator for the mixing of customs, cultures, and ideas, college campuses like Trinity’s instead can become rot with division, cliques and, paradoxically, homogeneity.

A common theme that emerged from the interviews was the observations of self-segregation and racial divisions in Mather dining hall.  Five out of 18 interviewees noted racial divisions inside and outside the main dining hall.  Interestingly enough, all five of these students happened to be non-white—making up half of all the non-white students interviewed.  Kristen, an Asian student receiving financial aid, described the Mather dining hall as “very segregated in terms of seating area,” noting what she and others perceived as the “sports side” and the “minority side” (Kristen, 18).  Other interviewees reported being most conscious of their race in Mather dining hall, feeling unsure of where they should sit.  Kristen even admitted to avoiding Mather altogether and choosing other campus dining options to escape the segregation in the main dining hall (Kristen, 18).  Even outside of the dining halls, interviewees reported signs of racial segregation.  Kaylie, a Black and Hispanic student receiving financial aid, noticed “that Black people making in general… they tend to hang out together…” (Kaylie, 37).

Beverly Daniel Tatum offers a possible explanation for such divisions as she explains the racial identity development processes for both Black and White individuals in her book, Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?.  Tatum posits that for many Black individuals, encounters with racism lead them into the second stage of racial identity development, appropriately called the “encounter” stage.  This stage of racial identity development is characterized by the active desire to surround oneself with those who have shared similar experiences (Tatum, 56).  Furthermore, desires for self-segregation are heightened during the next stage of racial identity development, the “immersion/emersion” phase.  During this stage of racial identity development, one views races other than one’s own as simply irrelevant (Tatum, 76).  Moreover, the “immersion/emersion” phase is very typical of college students—Tatum herself notes being so deeply in the “immersion/emersion” phase while in college that, to this day, she “can’t remember the name of one White classmate” (Tatum, 75).  The prevalence of the “immersion/emersion” phase on college campuses in general could further explain the self-segregation observed in Mather dining hall.

As previously noted, an encounter(s) with racism is a necessary catalyst for Black individuals to enter into the “encounter” stage.  And while we might not want to admit it, potential catalysts are certainly present on Trinity’s campus.  When asked whether or not people at Trinity had made assumptions—whether correctly or incorrectly—about his race, Fred, an African American student receiving financial aid, mentioned being stopped by campus safety and, on more than one occasion, being asked to present his Trinity ID.  Fred states, “Well, I assume it’s because [I’m African-American]… they’ll (Campus Safety) stop and ask me if I go to school here, questions like that…” (Fred, 23).

Such interactions were not limited to African American men.  Yvonne, an African American female student receiving financial aid, noted being asked to present ID while ordering at the Cave– a practice that is very atypical.  Moreover, Yvonne recounted an incident in which she misplaced her Trinity ID card, and had to ask a fellow student to let her into her dorm– a very common request between students.  However, presumably because of Yvonne’s race, the student refused to let her into her dorm, fearing Yvonne might be trying to rob the dormitory (Yvonne, 21).

While no other interviewees of color reported such blatant encounters with racism, several reported feeling in some way isolated from or judged by White students.  Victoria, an Asian, non-financial aid student adopted by a White family, claims, “at times, people may have made jokes or assumptions about me” (Victoria, 26).  Juan, a Hispanic student receiving financial aid, told the following story about when his freshman year roommate moved out at the end of the school year:

… [T]oward the end of the year when everybody is leaving, they’ll put a sign on the door saying that anything that hasn’t been taken out, anything that is still in the dorm that wasn’t originally a part of the school when you moved there is gonna be taken out (05:58).  Toward the end of the year, this person, they left, in our room, they left their stuff, and I didn’t have his phone number because I had a new phone.  So I like had to call his father and tell him that his stuff was going to be taken away if they didn’t come and pick it up.  I had to call his father’s office.  And I feel like a lot of that had to do with their perception of me.  And I feel like had I been a Caucasian maybe I wouldn’t have had to do that because they would’ve automatically assumed that the school took it (06:40).  Whereas, certain aspects of my interactions with his parents made me feel like they would’ve assumed that I took the stuff after the sign had been removed (Juan, 5).

        Moreover, Kaylie, a Black and Hispanic student receiving financial aid, claimed culture clashes and feelings of disjointedness even between her and her roommate, a White southerner.  Kaylie described her roommate as having, “her own sense of culture” (Kaylie, 37) that she didn’t always understand.  Kaylie claimed these differences in culture occasionally resulted in disagreements, and that these cultural divisions were not anything she believed would change or be alleviated in the future (Kaylie, 37).

        Based on these feelings of isolation and unnecessary anxieties (as demonstrated in Juan’s case), it is understandable why students of color would seek solace among individuals who share their experiences and culture.   These sentiments were most clearly summarized by Andres, a Hispanic student receiving financial aid, as he claimed:

…[Y]ou could say that like, ‘oh all those minorities aren’t trying to meet white people, or they’re not trying to meet other people different from them.’ Or, you can say that they’re just trying to be friends with people who are similar to them, which is another way to view it because there are so few of them you might as well be friends with the people that are most similar to you (Andres, 14).

        In addition to divisions on the basis of race, our interview study produced substantial evidence of social divisions on the basis of socioeconomic class.  11 of 18 students interviewed noted social divisions on the basis of socioeconomic class, claiming “it defines who people hang out with; it defines who people talk to more often” (Andres, 12).  Moreover, seven of the 11 interviewees to note socio-economic social divisions were students receiving financial aid.

Abe, a White (Middle Eastern) student receiving financial aid, noticed “[n]ot a lot of people from the lower social class hangout with the higher/upper social class, and not a lot of people from upper class hang with socially lower…” (Abe, 45).  Luisa, a Hispanic student paying full tuition, felt, “Trinity’s really cliquey in the aspect that, like, they [wealthy students] won’t approach someone who they perceive as, um like, in a less economic standing…” (Luisa, 8).

Five of the 11 interviewees who spoke of socio-economic divisions on campus cited clothing as the primary factor used in determining one’s perceived socio-economic class.   All five of these students receive financial aid.  Kaylie (who, as discussed above, mentioned race related cultural tensions with her roommate) observed students on Trinity’s campus, “attempt to wear same kinds of clothing and same brands and tend to stick together” (Kaylie, 36).  Kaylie stated that if she, or anyone else, does not wear the “right” clothes, wealthier students will assume her to be of a lower social status, and will refuse even to talk to her (Kaylie, 36).

Yvonne, an African American student receiving financial aid, agreed that how she dressed or what she looked like on a day-to-day basis determined who did or did not speak to her, who did or did not open doors for her, etc (Yvonne, 20).  Yvonne admitted to trying to work this pattern of behavior in her favor, occasionally splurging on expensive brand-name items and attempting to dress and carry herself in such a way that people might assume her to be of a higher socioeconomic class (Yvonne, 19-20).  And, Yvonne is far from alone.  Abe also admitted to dressing up so that people might think he is from a higher socioeconomic class (Abe, 45).  Thus, social hierarchy on campus resulting from socio economic divisions among students is a significant source of anxiety for students who feel they cannot compete.

While clothing may be the first indicator of one’s socioeconomic status on campus, seven of the 11 interviewees who identified socioeconomic divisions on campus agreed that divisions were most evident during nightlife, when social class influences what one is able to do with his or her friends (Kaylie, 36).   Luisa identified situations in which some of her friends were left behind on weekend trips to New York City or dinners off campus because they either had to work, or could not spare the necessary expenses (Luisa, 8).  Victoria (previously mentioned as a victim of race-related jokes) mentioned wealthier students had greater access to sports clubs, and several even had cars on campus, allowing for greater social opportunities than those available to students with lesser means (Victoria, 24).

Such social divisions brought about by socioeconomic class and its implicit social opportunities are consistent with Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton’s theory of social class and organizational analysis.  Under their theory, college experiences are shaped by individual characteristics and resources associated with class background, and organizational characteristics of the college itself (Armstrong and Hamilton, 7-8)  Therefore, certain students of higher socioeconomic classes are generally afforded greater social opportunities than students of lower socioeconomic classes.

Thus, even though college is ideally a time of broadening horizons and exposures to new people, perspectives, and cultures, our data suggests that this is not always the case.  According to quantitative and qualitative data presented in our seminar’s interview study, the prejudices that many students bring on to the Trinity campus lead many minority students to engage in self-segregation.  Moreover, socio economic differences and lack of understanding from the higher socioeconomic classes with regard to the lower result in further social divisions.  Based on these accounts from Trinity students, it appears that with regard to race and socioeconomic class, Trinity students “tend to stick to people who are similar to them” (Andres, 14).

 

 

Works Cited

 

Beverly Daniel Tatum, “Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” and Other Conversations about Race, revised edition (New York: Basic Books, 2003).

Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton, Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2013)

Having arrived from an integrated high school in a black neighborhood, Brian Allen is startled to find that he is one of few Black students on his university campus.  Despite having had many White friends in high school, the discomfort he feels as a minority in college, which he expresses in the 1986 documentary Skin Deep, leads him to surround himself with people of his own race with whom he feels understood.  Brian explains, “Coming to a school where there’s not a lot of other minorities, we sort of had to pull together” (Skin Deep, 18:26).

Initially, it is clear that Brian Allen is in the immersion/emersion phase of racial identity development.  It is a phase Beverly Daniel Tatum describes in her book, Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?, as a period characterized by a, “strong desire to surround oneself with symbols of one’s racial identity, and actively seek out… the support of same-race peers” (Tatum, page 76).  Brian presents himself as a young man who, after having encountered both overt and covert racism, feels the need to surround himself with people who share his experiences and can provide him the support he needs as he continues to explore his racial identity.

However, by the end of the documentary Brian is clearly entering the internalization phase, described by Tatum as a sense of security about one’s racial identity, or a willingness to transcend racial lines and commit to the concerns of one’s racial group (Tatum, 76).  Brian’s participation in the documentary itself is a testament to his desire to transcend racial boundaries, and he tells the group on the final night that to combat racism, “you have to interact [with other races]… wake up with the idea that, yo, this has got to end… and don’t believe in the stereotypes” (Skin Deep, 48:30). Brian is a fascinating example of youth navigating and developing racial identity.   

 

Works Cited

Skin Deep. Dir. Fraces Reid. Iris Films, 1986. Videocassette. Trinflix. Trinity College. Web. 20 Oct. 2013.

Tatum, Beverly Daniel. “Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?”: And Other Conversations about Race. New York: Basic, 2003. Print.

Isabelle Boundy

September 22, 2013

Color and Money: Race and Social Class

Persuasive Essay: Debating policy in The College simulation

This essay was assigned to be written from the perspective of a class matters advocate, and does not necessarily represent the views of the author.

            Since at least the time of President Lincoln, the United States has embraced the idea of social mobility– idea that everyone, regardless of socio-economic class, has the opportunity to climb the social ladder and achieve a higher standard of living than that of the previous generation.  The United States’ Educational System has long been regarded as the engine of this meritocratic society, and the system through which all people have the opportunity succeed and achieve a better standard of living than that of the previous generation.  However, recent sociological studies into the education world and college admissions in particular have shown a very different reality.  These studies have shown monetarily disadvantaged students to be at an incredible disadvantage begins the day they start kindergarten, and follows them to the admissions decision round table when college admissions and financial aid committees come together to discuss who will receive admission and necessary aid, and who will be let go.

When evaluating various applicants for admission, one should not assume that all candidates were afforded equality of opportunity.  The steps and achievements necessary to receive a letter of acceptance from any one of the nation’s elite institutions comes with a hefty price tag, and thus more privileged applicants are provided a significant advantage.  In a system so infested with inequality, it has become the job of the admissions officers to evaluate discrepancies of opportunity among applicants, and take these differences into consideration throughout the decisions process.  However, during The College simulation, it does not appear that such an evaluation took place as less affluent students repeatedly lost their letters of acceptance to more affluent students.  Although actions taken by the simulation admissions committee may have been legal, the process as a whole most certainly did not promoted equal educational opportunity, and thus did not necessarily result in the best possible entering class.

With regard to the college admissions process, students who come from lesser means are put at a significant disadvantage that begins the day they are born.  For most privileged families, decisions regarding college are made even before their children are born: they buy homes in communities with strong public schools, and start trust funds and savings accounts in anticipation of future tuition payments.  Some families pay for prestigious kindergartens and eventually prep schools, SAT/ACT prep classes, and nearly all sign their children up for a laundry list extra-curricular that surely included athletics and performing arts (Stevens, 243).  However, the ability to provide these opportunities for their children is a luxury enjoyed almost exclusively by America’s most privileged elites, leaving less affluent applicants at a significant disadvantage.

It is the responsibility of the admissions officers to consider issues such as the aforementioned regarding inequalities of opportunity throughout the admissions process.   However, participants in the simulation admissions process did not necessarily follow through on this task.

Throughout the beginning stages of the simulation, issues of socio-economic class were disregarded almost entirely.  Students were evaluated largely in the arenas of academic and extra-curricular accomplishment, and while many saw this as a meritocratic and therefore just system, this was not so.  Students were given a rating for academic and extra-curricular accomplishments respectively, and received extra points for their enrollment in Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) classes, in addition to their achievements in various performing arts and athletic competitions.  However, many high schools, particularly schools in less affluent areas, do not offer AP and/or IB classes, and thus these students are penalized in the college admissions process for circumstances which are beyond their control.  Moreover, it is very common for more affluent students to attend SAT/ACT prep courses that can raise an applicant’s score by several hundred points.  However, these classes are expensive and thus available almost exclusively to the wealthy.  Additionally, it should be noted that while that nearly all individuals have the opportunity to participate in athletics to some degree, nurturing a strong athlete requires quality medical care, good nutrition, routine physical training, and quality coaching- all of which are more readily accessible to those with greater means (Stevens, 99).

Despite the simulation admissions officers’ total indifference towards socio-economic class during earlier rounds of admissions, when it came time to make final admissions decisions each student’s financial history and ability to pay tuition was very much a part of the conversation.  After receiving an admissions grand total rating based largely on academic and extracurricular achievements, each applicant submitted to an “F-Round” in which a Net Price Calculator was used to determine the dollar amount the admissions committee could except the families of each applicant to contribute, and how much would need to be supplemented with various forms of financial aid (primarily in the form of grants, in addition to work study and student loans) (F-Round financial aid).

Each candidate’s admissions grand total rating and estimated family contribution became the primary determining factors during the final round of admissions, although it soon became clear that estimated family contribution was perhaps the dominating factor in the decision making process.  The clearest indicator of this phenomenon was that regarding the applicants Caitlin Quinn and Rosa Martinez.

Caitlin Quinn was the first applicant to be offered admission to The College.  With her near perfect GPA and dual-sport varsity captains (Caitlin Quinn), Ms. Quinn certainly demonstrated herself to be both a stellar student and an accomplished athlete.  However, it was undoubtedly her family’s legacy and substantial financial means that granted her the position of most desirable candidate.  According to the simulation calculations, the Quinn family would be able to pay full tuition, and more (F-Round financial aid).  A letter from The College’s Vice President of Development reminded simulation participants of Ms. Quinn’s legacy status and her family’s generous financial support of The College in previous years (Correspondence from Dean of Admissions).  Ms. Quinn’s privileged background and the before-mentioned letter provided her with considerable clout at the simulation committee table, and thus she was the first to be offered admission to The College.

Next, it came time for the simulation admissions committee to discuss Rosa Martinez.  With a phenomenal GPA, stellar SAT scores, and leadership positions on her highs school yearbook committee and Student Advisory Council (Rosa Martinez), Ms. Martinez proved to be an excellent candidate at least as impressive as Caitlin Quinn.  However, coming from a less affluent family, Ms. Martinez would require 52219 dollars in grants from The College that would create a deep hole in The College’s 70000 dollar financial aid budget.  Her hefty price tag proved to be a significant blight on her application as she was waitlisted upon her first review by a vote of 5-7 with 6 simulation participants abstaining from the vote (Decision day).  Consequentially, Rosa Martinez’s place in the entering class was given to an apparently less promising candidate with a smaller price tag.

Many argue that higher education does promote social mobility, pointing to various heart-warming success stories of individuals born into poverty who worked hard and, with the help of scholarships and financial aid, managed to obtain a college degree. However, stories like these are few and far between.  And, while The College in this simulation did provide nearly 55000 dollars in grants to needy students, this was not enough for Rosa Martinez and countless other students just like her who were denied acceptance simply because they were too poor.

While the actions of The College simulation admissions officers may seem unfair and unjust, it should be acknowledge that, with regard to the legality of the simulation admissions committee’s actions, no laws were broken as there virtually are no laws regarding socio-economic class and college admissions.  When the issue of race-based affirmative action is challenged in a legal setting (as it frequently is), it is often suggested that the nation, state, or institution switch to a system of class-based affirmative action that would arguably maintain racial diversity while simultaneously providing a leg up to students who have been born into a lower socio-economic class (Gaertner, 1).  However, it remains that no such class-based alternative to affirmative action is currently on the books, and thus The College simulation was well within legal bounds.

Despite the legality of the simulation committee’s actions, they undoubtedly provided a significant advantage to more affluent applicants.  These advantages have made higher education a cloak over existing class inequalities, and a system by which less privileged students are held back, and more privileged families are provided the opportunity to justify their own class advantage (Stevens, 11).

These inequalities could be greatly diminished if the country were to adopt a class-based system of affirmative action, and the federal and state government provide greater funds to colleges and universities to decrease tuition and increase financial aid budgets.  Although the higher education system may seem grim for those of lower socio-economic classes, there is certainly hope in the future for greater equality and restoration of the American dream.

Works Cited

Caitlin Quinn, Simulation Applicant Files, Color & Money seminar at Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.

Correspondence from Dean of Admissions (from simulation), Color & Money seminar at Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.

Decision day, Color and Money Admissions Simulation Data, Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.

F-Round financial aid, Color and Money Admissions Simulation Data, Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.

Gaertner, Matthew, and Melissa Hart. “Considering Class: College Access and Diversity.” U of Colorado Law Legal Studies Research Paper 12.18 (2012): n. pag. Social Science Research Network. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

Rosa Martinez, Simulation Applicant Files, Color & Money seminar at Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.

Stevens, Mitchell. Creating a Class: College Admissions and the Education of Elites. N.p.: n.p., 2007. Print.

4th round review, Color and Money Admissions Simulation Data, Trinity College, Fall 2013, http://commons.trincoll.edu/colorandmoney.