Santa Monica College Communications Discussion

Hi please fill out a two page Readings and Synthesis for the attached article below. I also attached an example of how the two page synthesis should look.

Minimum Requirements for this 2 page summary:

-Introduce the article

-3 cited quotations that stood out to you, what did the text say that you found insightful or important

-What did you learn?

Garcia, G. A. (2018). Decolonizing Hispanic-Serving Institutions: A Framework for Organizing. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 17(2), 132–147.

2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE (ALL CAPS NO PAGE # ON FIRST PAGE)
Title of Paper Centered and Double Spaced
Kristo Name Gobin
Loyola Marymount University
The prompt for this synthesis: what does the field of communication say about theory and
praxis?
2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE
2
Kushner, T. (1993). Angels in America: A gay fantasia on national themes. New York:
Theatre Communications Group.
In his modern masterpiece Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes
playwright Kushner (1993) wrote, “You can’t live in the world without an idea of the world, but
it’s living that makes the ideas. You can’t wait for a theory, but you have to have a theory” (p.
144). The incredibly dense play is typically performed over the course of two evenings. The
typical two- and half-hour blocks standard for Broadway productions are performed each night
are postmodern and critical to say the least. The play situates the real life of Roy Cohn, (The
Red Scare’s Joseph McCarthy’s right hand) among six other fictional characters in 1985-1986 in
AIDS ravaged New York. The piece provides a significant deconstruction of Reagan NeoConservative politics, liberal activism, a thorough look at the history of the Mormon Church,
mental illness, religion, God, the nature of forgiveness, and feminism to name a few of the
central themes.
This play is important when examining the connection between theory and praxis,
answering the central question how does the text set up and explore the differences between the
two? This question lends itself to exploring performance and performance studies which is
comfortably housed in Communication Studies.
When examining how theory is applied to the praxis of living, Angels in America
captures life in a rapidly changing world living and dying through a plague. Kushner sets up an
epic paradigm shift and for the first time frames the notion of someone living with AIDS.
“Nothing’s lost forever. In this world there is a kind of painful progress. Longing for what
we’ve left behind, and dreaming ahead” (Kushner, 1993, p. 142). The text allows for the reader
to distinguish between the notion of theory and praxis; theory being ideas about living in the
world, while praxis is the action or summation of the actions of the living.
2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE
3
As the characters trudge through the realities of a modern plague, living life while dying,
the audience is asked to weigh simultaneous and dichotomous juxtaposition of theory and praxis,
Together we organize the world for ourselves, or at least we organize our understanding
of it; we reflect it, refract it, criticize it, grieve over its savagery and help each other to
discern, amidst the gathering dark, paths of resistance, pockets of peace and places from
whence hope may be plausibly expected. (Kushner, 1993, p.155)
Kushner empowers the audience to consider residing in a liminal space, the small doorframe
between theory and praxis. A space where one can consider inherited histories, contextualize
problematics, deconstruct nuance while negotiating hostile dehumanizing institutions, navigating
choice, and residing and relying on communities. The play as text (theory), and the play as
production (praxis) introduced the idea that people afflicted with AIDS were people, and people
living with AIDS were living With AIDS. No longer was the diagnosis of AIDS death. Prior to
medical advancements and the introduction to the triple cocktail in the mid 1990’s which
significantly impacted mortality and morbidity rates, the life between diagnosis and inevitable
death were expanded upon. People lived until they died, which Kushner requires the audience to
wrestle with, much like Jacob wrestling with the Angel. This is important as President Ronald
Regan and modern Neo Conversative policies viewed AIDS as a plague sent by God to punish
and cleanse the earth of homosexuality. The official stance of the United States government was
to keep the plague and those dying trapped in silence, shame, and hidden away from financial or
medical resources much less compassion or love.
When theory is performed in praxis it poetically transforms to take on new life as it did in
the HBO Miniseries (2003) of the same name. Actress Meryl Streep played: Hannah Pitt, Ethel
Rosenberg, The Rabbi, The Continental Principality Oceania would go onto summarize the
intersection of theory and praxis by saying of Tony Kushner, “the bravest thing in the world is
that writer that sits alone in a room and works out his grief, his rage, his imagination, and his
2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE
deep desire to make people laugh, and he makes a work of art that then transforms the world,
with the truth, because that’s all we want, that’s all we need.”
Angels in America is a text that is brought to life through performance or praxis. It is
also a text that seeks to explore the gaps between theory and praxis. The play does not seek to
provide any answers to the profound questions it asks, instead lays out paradoxes that must be
managed.
4
5
2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE
Works Cited
Costas, C. (Producer). Nichols, M. (Director). (2003). Angels In America. New York,
NY: HBO Video.
Kushner, T. (1993). Angels in America: A gay fantasia on national themes. New York:
Theatre Communications Group.
Mischer, D. (Producer). (2004, September 19). 56th Prime Time Emmy Awards. Los
Angeles, CA.
2 Page Synthesis Check List
 2 Full pages
 Cover Page/Header/Page Number
 Citation at top
 Introduction of article
 3 selected quotes
 Set up, quote, synthesize the quote
 Conclusion of article
 Works cited for additional sources. PRIMARY SOURCES ONLY
 Correct APA (see APA Style Manual or APA Cheat Sheet for more details)
2-PAGE SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE
6
Annotated Bibliographies
Synthesize the article based on the question “what does the field of Communication Studies say
about…”
Introduction
Introduce the article, what is the subject, why did you choose this article, what does this article
have to do with your topic? Is the scholar important, are they an authority on the subject, do they
have a robust body of research pertaining to this topic?
Are there key words, operational definitions that are vital to understanding your topic?
The Body
What theories are used?
What is the thesis?
What are the main arguments, findings?
Quote 1- use the text to discuss the text
Quote 2- set up the quote, provide the quote, explain what the quote means
Quote 3- make sure your APA is on point, no secondary citations
If someone asked what this article is about, how would you explain it to them?
Conclusion
Reiterate why this article is important to your topic.
Every article is different so focus on explaining why this article helps you situate the research.
Outline the method and provide details about the study.
o
o
o
o
o
o
crucial historical information
operational definitions
information that currently situates the article
important context about the article
important facts or data; statistical information, qualitative information, critical claims
use quotes to justify your summary
Be sure to only cite the authors. There are no secondary citations allowed in this paper. If you
like a quote from the literature review by another author, you need to find the citation in the
works cited, locate the article, and properly cite it. Tactile read it so you are properly citing the
article. Remember we do not read to memorize, we read and mark up important information so
that you can find it later when you need it.
Finally, notice my use of the phrase “this work” as opposed to “I think…” Do not use “I” you
are synthesizing a research article.
734289
research-article2017
JHHXXX10.1177/1538192717734289Journal of Hispanic Higher EducationGarcia
Article
Decolonizing HispanicServing Institutions:
A Framework for
Organizing
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education
2018, Vol. 17(2) 132­–147
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192717734289
DOI: 10.1177/1538192717734289
journals.sagepub.com/home/jhh
Gina Ann Garcia1
Abstract
Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) should realign their organizational approach in
order to liberate themselves and their students. As colonized institutions enrolling
colonized people, HSIs must recognize their history of colonialism before moving
toward an organizational model grounded in decolonization. The Organizational
Framework for Decolonizing HSIs has nine elements and is grounded in organizational
theory, yet it challenges the white normative ways in which postsecondary institutions
have been studied and the models that have been used to organize them.
Resumen
Instituciones de Servicio a Hispanos (HSIs) deben re-alinear su modelo organizacional
para poder liberarse ellas mismas, así como a sus estudiantes. HSIs como instituciones
colonizadas deben reconocer su historia de imperialismo antes de avanzar hacia un
modelo organizacional basado en decolonización. El modelo organizacional para la
Decolonización de HSIs tiene nueve elementos y se apoya en la teoría organizacional.
Sin embargo, este nuevo modelo reta la normatividad Blanca con la cual instituciones
de educación superior han sido estudiadas así como los modelos que han sido usados
para organizarlas.
Keywords
Hispanic-serving institutions, decolonization, colonization, Raza, organizational theory
1University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Gina Ann Garcia, Administrative & Policy Studies, University of Pittsburgh, 5907 Posvar Hall, 230 South
Bouquet Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA.
Email: ggarcia@pitt.edu
Garcia
133
Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs), defined as nonprofit, degree-granting institutions
that enroll 25% or more full-time equivalent undergraduate Raza1 students, now enroll
over 60% of all college students who identify as Raza, and confer 60% of all associate’s degrees and 40% of all bachelor’s degrees to this group (Cunningham, Park, &
Engle, 2014, Excelencia in Education, 2016; Harmon, 2012). But as HSIs increase in
significance, there is continual pressure to define what it means for postsecondary
institutions to be “Hispanic-serving.” This article calls on scholars and practitioners to
consider this question through a lens of decolonization, more specifically, through the
lens of “coloniality of power” that began with the conquest of Latin America by
European forces, yet continues in modern times as seen through the political, economic, and social subjugation of racially, culturally, and ethnically minoritized people
(Quijano, 2000, 2007). Arguably, this coloniality of power is what plagues HSIs,
inhibiting their ability to fully serve Raza students from enrollment through graduation. In proposing an organizational framework for HSIs that is grounded in decolonization, this article calls on HSIs to organize for the empowerment and liberation of
racially minoritized students.
An organizational framework specifically for HSIs must recognize that they are
institutionally diverse and have a variety of missions. What most have in common,
however, is that serving Raza students is not the historical mission of these institutions. Instead, HSIs must actively embrace what it means to liberate Raza students
alongside their historical organizational mission. Continuing to operate as they have
traditionally done so, with little regard for the racial and cultural ways of knowing of
Raza students, is negligent on their part. This article offers an organizational framework that recognizes that Raza, as a colonized people, are subjected to educational
domination as a result of their position within modern society. This framework is
designed to work with any institution that is committed to the liberation of Raza,
regardless of type (2-year or 4-year), control (public or private), or mission (e.g.,
research, liberal arts, religious). Suggestions are offered for reorganizing and transforming priorities, practices, and processes, with the goal of disrupting the historical
values espoused by institutions of higher education, and instead focusing on organizational approaches that are Raza centric, or considerate of the unique needs and ways of
knowing of Raza people.
Why Decolonize HSIs?
A call to decolonize HSIs is grounded in the history of colonization in the United
States system of higher education, which is politically and economically tied to the
transatlantic slave trade and indigenous genocide (Wilder, 2013). The term “decolonization” is not used in the literal sense to call for the repatriation of indigenous land and
life, as suggested by Tuck and Yang (2012), but rather as a term that recognizes the
“colonial matrix of power” that is grounded in historical coloniality and operates in
four realms of modernity, including economic, political, civic, and the epistemological
realms (Cervantes & Saldaña, 2015). From this perspective, coloniality, much like
white2 supremacy, is a system at play within all aspects of modern day U.S. society.
134
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
The argument to decolonize HSIs is also supported by the fact that the coloniality
of power is intertwined with race, as colonization allowed for the subjugation of conquered groups based on a false assumption of biological and hierarchical differences
by race (Quijano, 2000, 2007). Chicanx scholars have specifically used the theoretical
term “mestizaje” to describe the racial and cultural mixing that resulted from historical
exploitation, subjugation, and dehumanization of indigenous people in Latin America
(Pérez-Torres, 2006). This call to decolonize HSIs, therefore, is grounded in race and
acknowledges that the identity of Raza people in the United States is connected to
colonization and continues to subjugate Raza people in modern day as a result of a
systemic racial order in the United States (Hernández, 2016).
The process of racialization has led to the exclusion of Raza people along the entire
educational pipeline. A racial caste system resulting from the forces of colonization
subjected mestizos, or those of mixed Spanish and Indian heritage, to the lowest levels
of society (Menchaca, 2008) and forced them into mission schools, which were intended
to rid them of their culture, politics, and economy (MacDonald, 2004). Between 1513
and 1821, access to education for Raza was determined by skin color, race, ethnicity,
and national origin (MacDonald, 2004). The end of the Mexican American war in 1848,
ratified by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, solidified a long history of exclusion of
Raza from all levels of education in the United States (MacDonald, 2004; Menchaca,
2008). At the postsecondary level, exclusion dates back to the founding of the United
States system of higher education in 1636, when access was limited to most, regardless
of race (Cohen & Kisker, 2010). Yet, egregious race-based educational practices have
undeniably limited access to higher education for racially minoritized groups and have
hindered institutions from effectively serving them.
The negative effects of colonization can be seen in segregated schooling patterns and
exclusionary policies for Raza students. Although little has been written about the participation of Raza students in higher education prior to World War II, racial segregation at the
primary and secondary levels limited Raza students’ access to postsecondary education.
Unlike the de jure segregation that Black Americans experienced based on race, Raza
children were discriminated against based on unwritten policies related to language, standardized tests scores, and personal hygiene (G. G. González, 2008; MacDonald, 2004).
At the postsecondary level, policies such as the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944
(GI Bill) also had limited democratizing power for Raza (Muñoz, 2007).
Raza began to push for equity at the postsecondary level in the 1960s, as leaders of
the Chicano and Puerto Rican movements fought for culturally relevant curricula,
equitable admission programs, and Raza faculty (Muñoz, 2007). Despite the success
of youth movements at advocating for increased access to higher education for Raza
students, Acuña (1988) posited that the movement died by the end of the 1970s, with
university administrators lessening their commitment to Raza students. Although large
strides have been made in creating opportunities for Raza students, they continue to be
underrepresented at every level of the educational pipeline and have low representation in 4-year universities, are concentrated in 2-year community colleges, and have
low transfer and graduation rates (Cuádraz, 2005; Solórzano, Villalpando, & Oseguera,
2005; Solórzano & Yosso, 2000). Research also shows that Raza students often
Garcia
135
experience unwelcoming environments at historically white universities (Yosso,
Smith, Ceja, & Solórzano, 2009). These realities are the remnants of the coloniality of
power and the historical exclusion of Raza from education.
When HSIs gained federal recognition in 1992, it was a victory for Raza students.
Educational leaders and advocates fought a long battle, starting in 1979 with the
Hispanic Higher Education Coalition’s (HHEC) testimonies during the reauthorization hearings for the Higher Education Act (Valdez, 2015). With a commitment on
behalf of the federal government to invest in institutions that enrolled a large percentage of Raza students, a small effort was made to address previous educational injustices that had long-term implications for these students. Yet, HSIs are still failing to
produce equitable outcomes for Raza students (Contreras & Contreras, 2015;
Contreras, Malcom, & Bensimon, 2008). Arguably, the coloniality of power must be
recognized before HSIs can reconcile the patterns of oppression and exclusion that
have kept Raza students on the margins at the postsecondary level.
Theoretical Foundation
There is a void within organizational theory that centers antiracist approaches and
decolonizing ideologies. Sociologists and organizational behaviorists have been theorizing about organizations for decades, dating back to Max Weber’s work on organizations as bureaucracies, and Frederick Winslow Taylor’s ideas about scientific
management. These early scholars laid the groundwork for organizational theory, with
their ideas about organizations continuing to be relevant nearly 100 years later. Some of
the most developed, tested, and disputed theories of organizations include environmental theories, such as resource dependence theory, population ecology theories, and institutional theory; theories of organizational culture and organizational identity; and social
movement theory (Garcia, 2015a). Yet these theories are nearly void of coloniality and
race, likely because they were developed within white organizations (often postsecondary institutions) where colonial mentality and whiteness is normative, rarely questioned, and regularly performed (Cabrera, Franklin, & Watson, 2017). Arguably, the
most effective way to study HSIs is through an organizational lens, particularly as a
way to encourage HSIs to “take social action in order to dismantle racist structures and
discriminatory policies that continue to plague students of color in the postsecondary
pipeline” (Garcia, 2015a, p. 93). This article draws from some of the most common
organizational frameworks used in higher education, including bureaucratic, political,
cultural, collegial, and anarchical (Birnbaum, 1988; Manning, 2013). Within each of
these approaches, theorists have laid out various dimensions, including authority, goals,
decision making, ways of operating, division of labor organization, span of control, and
staffing (Manning, 2013). Less attention has been given to alternative approaches to
organizing, including those that are grounded in race and coloniality.
Chesler, Lewis, and Crowfoot (2005) proposed a framework for organizing antiracist postsecondary institutions. The framework includes eight distinct dimensions to
be used to assess various stages of the institution’s antiracist development including
mission, culture, power, membership, climate, technology, resources, and boundary
136
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
management. The authors argue that even as organizations progress toward becoming
antiracist, they often reinforce white hegemonic values and undermine any attempt to
achieve racial equity within the organization. As such, these dimensions must be considered as important ways to disrupt whiteness within the organization. A second
model is the Multi-Contextual Model of Diverse Learning Environments (MMDLE),
which is a useful approach for understanding postsecondary organizational structures
that center on the experiences of people of color (Hurtado, Alvarez, Guillermo-Wann,
Cuellar, & Arellano, 2012). Hurtado and colleagues highlight three organizational
dimensions to consider in an attempt to achieve equity in educational outcomes for
racially diverse people including compositional, historical, and organizational. Both of
these models were useful in developing a framework for organizing HSIs.
Postcolonial organizational theories, although nearly as uncommon as race-centric
frameworks, are also growing in popularity within organization studies. As noted by
Prasad (2012), postcolonial organizational scholarship,
is firmly rooted in the recognition that the Western discourse of management—broadly
understood here as an evolving set of interdependent and mutually reinforcing networks
(of ideas, institutions and practices) that ongoingly (re)-produce Western management
“knowledge” as well as Western management practices/institutions—is deeply complicit
with the discourse of modern Western colonialism and neo-colonialism. (p. 21)
Postcolonial organizational theory has been used in the last few decades to critique
Eurocentrism and to challenge and reorient dominant organizational perspectives, particularly within management (Prasad, 2012). In higher education, there is also a growing body of research that uses decolonization as an organizational framework,
particularly within Canadian institutions (Battiste, Bell, & Findlay, 2002). Battiste
et al. (2002) proposed eight organizational dimensions for addressing the need for
recognizing indigenous knowledge within postsecondary education, including (a)
relationship with elders, (b) ethical guidelines, (c) educational materials, (d) sui
generis (distinctive citizenship) curriculum, (e) critical indigenous mass, (f) dialogues
and networks, (g) indigenous resistance, and (h) coda (recognition and teaching of
Indigenous knowledge). These ideas were also incorporated throughout.
Organizational Framework for Decolonizing HSIs
Grounded in an ideology of decolonization and antiracism, the Organizational
Framework for Decolonizing HSIs is a way to effectively fulfill the mission and purpose
of “serving” Raza students (and all racially minoritized students) at HSIs. The framework is holistic and addresses both internal and external aspects of the institution.
Purpose
The first dimension is purpose. Although postsecondary institutions, administrators,
and legislators spend a significant amount of time talking about “outcomes,” with this
Garcia
137
framework there is a shift to overall purpose, which may or may not include traditional
outcomes. This approach resists graduation and degree completion as the only legitimized outcomes, assuming that the organization should fulfill other purposes, including enhancing members’ racial and cultural understanding of self and others (Garcia,
2016, 2017). In assuming an organizational identity that values Raza people, decolonized HSIs should work toward the advancement of knowledge related to understanding the racial and cultural history, values, languages, epistemologies, and methodologies
of people with indigenous roots in the colonized Americas.
Decolonized HSIs should work toward the development of critical consciousness and
democratic participation, with a specific focus on the development of reflective (Anzaldúa,
2002) and/or oppositional consciousness (Sandoval, 1999). Moreover, they should work
toward the overall holistic development of students, which may include advanced academic self-efficacy (Cuellar, 2014), civic engagement ( R. G.González, 2008), or the
development of racial/cultural identity (Garcia, Patrón, Ramirez, & Hudson, 2016).
Although the institution’s purpose should shift from purely academic outcomes to more
holistic endeavors, it should continue to be concerned with academic progress, incorporating multiple indicators, including the attainment of a degree, the completion of a certificate, successful transfer to another institution, and single-term course completion.
Mission
The second dimension is mission, which is grounded in antiracist, anti-oppressive,
decolonizing ideologies. Much can be learned from Tribal Colleges and Universities
(TCUs), as they teach cultures and languages of Indian nations, preserve and revitalize
Native culture, and respond to and empower Native communities (Guillory & Ward,
2008). Decolonized HSIs should do the same, centering the experiences of Raza people
in the curriculum and within the classroom, with the goal of fulfilling the purpose of
promoting racial and cultural understanding. Moreover, the mission of the institution
should be to sustain the environment, recognize the land as originally inhabited by indigenous peoples, and revitalize the local community. Although HSIs are different from
TCUs, in that a majority of TCUs are located on tribal lands, HSIs tend to be situated
within communities that are predominantly Raza. A core mission of the institution,
therefore, should be to work with and for local communities. This includes working for
and promoting equitable educational, health, and legal outcomes in these communities.
Membership
The third dimension, membership, is grounded in an ideology of racial and cultural
mixing (i.e., mestizaje), not with the intent of erasing difference or assimilating members, but instead with the intent of valuing and respecting all ways of being and knowing. Despite the designation of HSIs being entangled with the Raza identity, decolonized
HSIs should not be exclusionary spaces. Quite the opposite, members should be from
various racial, ethnic, cultural, national, and religious backgrounds and united by their
desire to disrupt dominant structures such as white supremacy, patriarchy, heteronormativity, Christian dominance, and racist nativism.
138
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
Membership includes students, faculty, staff, alumni, trustees, and community partners who must believe in the mission and work toward the purpose. Students, therefore,
shall be admitted based on their desire to learn about the race and culture of colonized
people now living in various parts of the Americas. Students should also have a desire to
learn with and from diverse communities while working toward the enhancement of
local communities and the promotion of equitable outcomes for minoritized groups. This
has nothing to do with academic training, as indicated by historically oppressive indicators such as high school grade point average (GPA) and standardized test scores, but
rather is determined through admissions methods that are holistic and allow students to
highlight their desire to work toward liberation. Faculty, staff, and administrators, similarly, should be hired based on their ability and knowledge to work toward the decolonization of the institution and the liberation of Raza and other minoritized students.
Importantly, this framework calls for the inclusion of alumni, trustees, and community partners. Although these members are essential to all postsecondary institutions,
their role is missing from the current scholarship on HSIs, and may be missing from
organizational conversations within practice at HSIs. With the continual decrease in
state and federal support for institutions of higher education, HSIs must develop a plan
for engaging alumni, philanthropists, foundations, and community partners (Drezner &
Villareal, 2015). Moreover, like the people hired to work at HSIs, those appointed as
trustees must be committed to the ideals of decolonization and antiracism.
Technology
The fourth dimension is technology, which includes all inputs, or forms of delivery,
that lead to the intended purpose, mission, and outcomes of the organization. This may
include curricular and cocurricular options that are centered on the racial and cultural
ways of knowing of Raza, decolonized pedagogical approaches, and anti-oppressive
policies and practices for educational delivery. This is an essential dimension, as
nearly all members interact with, experience, develop, and/or deliver the curriculum,
pedagogy, or services of the institution. There are numerous examples of how these
practices are being transformed at HSIs (e.g., Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015; Cervantes,
2015; Martinez & Gonzales, 2015; Núñez, Murakami-Ramalho, & Cuero, 2010). And
although many have called for “culturally relevant practices” in HSIs, here the call is
for decolonized curricular, pedagogical, and support services, falling in line with a
critical lens and with the purpose of liberating Raza.
In recognizing that curricula and pedagogy have historically been used as tools for
colonization, meaning they have always been intended to “Americanize,” assimilate,
and acculturate those from minoritized background (de los Ríos, 2013), decolonized
HSIs must aim for technological practices that are grounded in principles of liberation.
This means that the curriculum, or what is taught, should center the experiences of
racially minoritized people, including their history and current state of oppression,
while privileging their ways of knowing. This is challenging considering that only 2%
of the courses being taught at HSIs are centered on a racial/ethnic experience (Cole,
2011) and often times, this type of curriculum is limited to ethnic studies programs
(Garcia & Okhidoi, 2015). Within a decolonized HSI, all courses and all departments
Garcia
139
across the institution, including those within the social sciences, natural sciences,
humanities, education, social work, arts, engineering, computer science and so on,
should utilize books, address topics, and teach histories that are racial/ethnic centric.
Within the classroom, students should be encouraged to explore their own identities,
resist oppressive structures, and engage with their communities with the goal of consciousness development (de los Ríos, 2013).
Governance
The fifth dimension is governance, which has been an essential concept for postsecondary institutions since their founding. Depending on who is defining it, governance may
encompass several different elements, including rules, authority, and decision-making
processes within the institution (Austin & Jones, 2016). In this framework, governance
is centered on authority, decision making, and organizational structure, while “rules”
are considered separately as community standards. Drawing on concepts of indigenous
governance, a decolonized HSI shall be theoretically rooted in pluralism and integrity,
rather than sovereignty and self-determination, which are legal terms that may not be
necessary at the organizational level (Reilly, 2006). Pluralism, instead, refers to authority and decision making both at the micro-level and a macro-level of the organization.
Governance within a decolonized HSI includes the rejection of centralized reporting structures, bureaucratic hierarchies, and single authority. More specifically, there
should be a rejection of the power structure that dominates most institutions of higher
education, with decision making falling into the hands of mostly white men who base
their leadership practices on white normative standards (Ledesma & Burciaga, 2015).
Instead, leadership and authority are shared, decentralized, and evenly distributed.
There is intentionality in ensuring that those who have been historically marginalized
within power structures are granted full access to leadership and decision making,
including Raza and other minoritized groups (e.g., women, queer, indigenous). This is
essential, as there is evidence that Raza-identified people are missing within the faculty and administrative ranks of HSIs (Gonzales, 2015; Ledesma & Burciaga, 2015).
At the micro-level of the organization, there shall be autonomy in decision making,
policies, and structures. This type of governance structure may be most conducive to
postsecondary institutions, as they are typically decoupled or loosely coupled, meaning that micro-level aspects of the organization often work toward different goals and
means (Weick, 1976). With this organizational approach, this type of governance is
valued and reinforced, meaning that individual programs and departments are given
the autonomy to determine their own purpose, goals, and outcomes, while simultaneously working toward the antiracist, decolonized mission of the university. Even further, at the micro-level, there is autonomy in determining the best approaches for
liberating Raza people within the organization.
Community Standards
Rather than rules, the sixth dimension is community standards, which are dynamic and
fluid. In a decolonized organization, members develop rules, regulations, and policies
140
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
as needed to protect the community and to progress as a community. Community standards are complimentary to the decentralized governance structure in that standards
can and should be created by multiple people within the organization, including students, faculty, and staff. The community standards should be grounded in the mission
and purpose of the institution, with the goal of liberation, democratic citizenship, and
critical consciousness. By including all members in the development of standards, the
desired outcomes include civil integrity, involvement and ownership of the community, moral and intellectual development of those involved, and utilization of alternative methods for conflict resolution and accountability (Illsley, 2000).
Justice and Accountability
The seventh dimension has to do with justice and accountability within the community. The idea of justice is grounded in a restorative process, which is growing in popularity within K-12 schools, and should be considered within a postsecondary setting.
Restorative justice practices are centered on relationship building, social networking,
personal responsibility, and community restoration (Macready, 2009; Teasley, 2014).
Moreover, restorative principles include seeing all members of the community as valuable contributors, resources, and learners capable of problem-solving and developing
socially, emotionally, spiritually, and educationally through a restorative justice process (Ashworth et al., 2008). There is evidence that these practices are effective in
school environments that enroll large percentages of racially minoritized students, as
an alternative to punitive practices often used with these populations (Ashworth et al.,
2008). Within a decolonized HSI setting, justice and accountability should be grounded
in similar principles, leaving these elements of the organization to community members in a decentralized, communal way. When people are harmed within the community, the leaders within the community must facilitate networking and shared learner,
with the goal of healing the community, rather than criminalizing people who may
have harmed others. Restorative justice practices may be used as alternatives to judicial hearings, academic hearings, and other hearings in which people are held accountable for their actions as members of the community.
Incentive Structure
The next dimension is the incentive structure. Incentives should advance the mission
and purpose of the organization, which is to develop all members into critically conscious, democratic participants working in solidarity for the advancement of the internal and external community. As such, within a decolonized HSI, people shall be
rewarded for acting in ways that fall in line with the other elements of the framework.
For all faculty, staff, and administrators, tenure, promotion, and advancement should
be determined based on progress and commitment to admitting and enrolling a diverse
group of people, providing an educational environment that is decolonized, and working toward the enhancement of people’s racial and cultural ways of knowing. Incentives
are not grounded in individualism and personal advancement. With extensive knowledge on the negative experiences of faculty and staff of color (Mayhew, Grunwald, &
Garcia
141
Dey, 2006; Turner, González, & Wood, 2008), even within HSIs (Garcia, 2015b), the
incentive structure must be created with the goal of retaining the diverse group of
people within the organization. This includes valuing scholarship that is grounded in
racial/cultural methodologies, evaluating teaching based on decolonized approaches
laid out in the technology section, and incorporating service to the internal and external community, including mentoring and advising students from minoritized groups,
in reward structures.
External Boundary Management
The final dimension is external boundary management, which includes the ways in
which the organization works with external entities including boards of trustees, neighborhood associations, elected officials, local governments, community partners, and
other HSIs. The foundational values of collectivism and community that are embedded
within a decolonized organization shall extend into this final dimension. The relationship that institutions have with elected officials, local, state, and federal governments,
and foundations that support their mission are essential, especially considering the reliance that HSIs have on these entities for financial stability and progress (Ortega, Frye,
Nellum, Kamimura, & Vidal-Rodríguez, 2015). Moreover, HSIs must connect with the
Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU), the main organization lobbying on behalf of HSIs and their students. Other important external relationships worth
considering are those with community partners and other HSIs. In building relationships with other HSIs, institutions have the ability to mentor one another, reassess their
current initiatives and thinking, learn from one another, and engage in actions that are
mutually beneficial (Hurtado, González, & Calderón Galdeano, 2015).
Implications and Conclusions
The Organizational Framework for Decolonizing HSIs has implications for multiple
­stakeholders, including students, administrators, faculty and staff at HSIs, and the communities housing HSIs (see Table 1). It calls for HSIs to recognize the effects of imperialism
and the coloniality of power that has subjugated Raza students within education. It is also
holistic, calling on HSIs to address recruitment and retention issues, focusing primarily on
the value of racial and ethnic diversity, as well as promotion issues for administrators,
­faculty, and staff, calling attention to elements within the organization that are often tainted
by unconscious bias toward minoritized people. It also challenges stakeholders to rethink
the purpose and mission of postsecondary institutions, the role of community, the value of
racial and cultural ways of knowing of minoritized people, and a decentralized approach to
organizing. This type of framework will allow for democratic participation of all people,
including students, administrators, faculty, staff, and external community members.
The framework also has significance to legislators at the state and federal level. As
various entities grapple with the best ways to hold postsecondary institutions accountable for providing an affordable, high quality educational experience, this framework
pushes them to think beyond traditional metrics of success. There are many ways for
postsecondary institutions to be successful; this framework encourages legislators to
142
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
Table 1. Organizational Framework for Decolonizing HSIs.
Dimension
Decolonized organizational approach
1. Purpose
To advance outcomes that are holistic and grounded in racial and
cultural ways of knowing; outcomes may include degree attainment,
certificates, course completion, critical consciousness, democratic
citizenship, or racial/cultural identity development.
The mission is grounded in antiracist, anti-oppressive, decolonizing
ideologies. This includes teaching members from a decolonized
perspective grounded in indigenous ways of knowing. It also means
working toward environmental sustainability and land recognition, as
well as community revitalization, enhancement, and engagement.
Grounded in the ideology of racial and cultural mixing, not with the
intent of erasing difference or assimilating members, but instead
with the intent of valuing and respecting all ways of knowing. The
institution is not exclusionary, but instead recruits from various
racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, all united with the desire to
disrupt and challenge dominant structures such as white supremacy,
patriarchy, heteronormativity, Christianity, nationality, and ability.
Technology includes all forms of delivery that lead to the intended
outcomes of the organization; this may include curricular and
cocurricular options that are centered on the racial and cultural
ways of knowing of Raza, decolonized pedagogical approaches, and
anti-oppressive educational practices.
Governance, or the authority and decision making within the
organization, is communal, decentralized, and evenly distributed,
drawing on themes within indigenous governance. This includes
eliminating a centralized reporting structure and embracing
autonomy and pluralism at the micro- and macro-levels.
Community standards are fluid; organizational members develop rules,
regulations, and policies as needed to protect the community and to
progress as a community.
Justice is grounded in a restorative process grounded in relationship
building, networking, personal responsibility, and community
restoration.
Incentives advance the mission and purpose of the organization;
incentives are developed in solidarity and toward progression of the
community, and not grounded in individualism.
Includes the ways the organization works with external entities
including boards of trustees, neighborhood associations, elected
officials, local governments, community partners, and other HSIs,
grounded in collectivism and community.
2. Mission
3. Membership
4. Technology
5. Governance
6. Community
standards
7. Justice and
accountability
8. Incentive
structure
9. External
boundary
management
Note. HSI = Hispanic-serving institutions.
allow HSIs to define what success looks like for them. In reality, as state and federal
governments continue to divest in postsecondary education, HSIs may be more
inclined to fully liberate themselves, without the threat of funding and regulations
from external stakeholders, who may not have the interests of all students in mind.
Garcia
143
As the fastest growing racialized group in the United States and in postsecondary
education, it is essential to focus on the educational needs of Raza. Even further, there
must be greater attention given to the institutions that are federally recognized as educating a large percentage of Raza: HSIs. HSIs, however, must first recognize themselves as colonized institutions, meaning they must acknowledge that they have been
expected to operate and organize like white, Western institutions. Postsecondary institutions in the United States were established alongside the birth of this nation and are
now accountable to state and federal governments that have a developed a set of standards based on white, Western ways of functioning. To decolonize HSIs, institutional
leaders must recognize that traditional values and approaches to leading postsecondary
institutions are grounded in colonization and imperialism, which is why Raza students
have not reached a level of equitable outcomes. The Organizational Framework for
Decolonizing HSIs presented here calls for a centering of Raza students’ histories, cultures, languages, epistemologies, and methodologies, as well as a disruption of white
normative approaches to organizing postsecondary institutions. The goal of the framework is to liberate Raza people.
Acknowledgment
The author acknowledges the American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education for commissioning her to write this article and for providing her the space to think about the decolonization of Hispanic-serving institutions.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
Notes
1.
2.
The term “Raza” is used instead of “Latina/o/x” or “Hispanic” to refer to people who have
indigenous roots in México, Central and South America, and the Caribbean. The term recognizes that this racial/ethnic group evolved as a result of colonization, rape, and subjugation of indigenous peoples.
The term “white” is intentionally written with a lowercase “w” throughout this article as a
way to decenter whiteness.
References
Acuña, R. (1988). Occupied America: The history of Chicanos. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Anzaldúa, G. (2002). Now let us shift . . . the path of conocimiento . . . inner work, public acts.
In G. E. Anzaldúa & A. Keating (Eds.), This bridge we call home: Radical visions for transformation (pp. 540-578). New York, NY: Routledge.
144
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
Ashworth, J., Van Bockern, S., Ailts, J., Donnelly, J., Erickson, K., & Woltermann, J. (2008).
The restorative justice center: An alternative to school detention. Reclaiming Children &
Youth, 17(3), 22-26.
Austin, I., & Jones, G. A. (2016). Governance of higher education: Global perspectives, theories, and practices. New York, NY: Routledge.
Battiste, M., Bell, L., & Findlay, L. M. (2002). Decolonizing education in Canadian universities: An interdisciplinary, international, indigenous research project. Canadian Journal of
Native Education, 26(2), 82-95.
Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cabrera, N. L., Franklin, J. D., & Watson, J. S. (2017). Whiteness in higher education: The
invisible missing link in diversity and racial analyses. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Cervantes, M. A. (2015). Culturally relevant performance pedagogies: Exploring the value of
AfroLatina/o music performance projects at a Hispanic-serving institution. Association of
Mexican-American Educator Journal, 9(2), 69-77.
Cervantes, M. A., & Saldaña, L. P. (2015). Hip hop and nueva canción as decolonial pedagogies of epistemic justice. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education, & Society, 4(1), 84-108.
Chesler, M., Lewis, A., & Crowfoot, J. (2005). Challenging racism in higher education:
Promoting justice. Boulder, CO: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cohen, A. M., & Kisker, C. B. (2010). The shaping of American higher education: Emergence
and growth of the contemporary system (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cole, W. M. (2011). Minority politics and group-differentiated curricula at minority-serving
colleges. The Review of Higher Education, 34, 381-422.
Contreras, F. E., & Contreras, G. J. (2015). Raising the bar for Hispanic serving institutions: An
analysis of college completion and success rates. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
14, 151-170. doi:10.1177/1538192715572892
Contreras, F. E., Malcom, L. E., & Bensimon, E. M. (2008). Hispanic-serving institutions:
Closeted identity and the production of equitable outcomes for Latino/a students. In M.
Gasman, B. Baez, & C. S. V. Turner (Eds.), Understanding minority-serving institutions
(pp. 71-90). Albany: State University of New York.
Cuádraz, G. H. (2005). Chicanas in higher education: Three decades of literature and thought.
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 215-234.
Cuellar, M. (2014). The impact of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), emerging HSIs, and
non-HSIs on Latina/o academic self-concept. The Review of Higher Education, 37, 499530. doi:10.1353/rhe.2014.0032
Cunningham, A., Park, E., & Engle, J. (2014). Minority-serving institutions: Doing more with
less. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.
de los Ríos, C. V. (2013). A curriculum of the borderlands: High school Chicana/o-Latina/o Studies
as sitios y lengua. Urban Review, 45, 58-73. doi:10.1007/s11256-012-0224-3
Drezner, N. D., & Villareal, R. C. (2015). Engaging the Latino community: Enhancing Hispanicserving institutions’ Latino donor base. In J. P. Mendez, I. F. A. Bonner, J. Méndz-Negrete,
& R. T. Palmer (Eds.), Hispanic-Serving Institutions in American higher education: Their
origin, and present and future challenges (pp. 178-193). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Excelencia in Education. (2016). Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs): 2014-2015. Retrieved
from http://www.edexcelencia.org/gateway/download/17265/1453981347
Garcia, G. A. (2015a). Using organizational theory to study Hispanic-Serving Institutions: An
imperative research agenda. In A.-M. Núñez, S. Hurtado, & E. Calderón Galdeano (Eds.),
Garcia
145
Hispanic-Serving Institutions: Advancing research and transformative practices (pp.
82-98). New York, NY: Routledge.
Garcia, G. A. (2015b). Exploring student affairs professionals’ experiences with the campus
racial climate at a Hispanic Serving Institution. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education,
8(2). doi:10.1037/a0039199
Garcia, G. A. (2016). Complicating a Latina/-o serving identity at a Hispanic Serving Institution.
The Review of Higher Education, 40(1), 117-143.
Garcia, G. A. (2017). Defined by outcomes or culture? Constructing an organizational identity for Hispanic-Serving Institutions. American Education Research Journal, 54(1S),
111S-134S. doi:10.3102/0002831216669779
Garcia, G. A., & Okhidoi, O. (2015). Culturally relevant practices that “serve” students at a
Hispanic Serving Institution. Innovative Higher Education, 40(4). doi:10.1007/s10755015-9318-7
Garcia, G. A., Patrón, O. E., Ramirez, J. J., & Hudson, L. T. (2016). Identity salience for Latino
male collegians at Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), emerging HSIs, and non-HSIs.
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 1-15. doi:10.1177/1538192716661907
Gloria, A. M., Castellanos, J., & Kamimura, M. (2006). Entendiendo la historia de Latina/os
en el camino a la universidad (Understanding the history of Latina/os on the road to the
university). In A. M. Gloria, J. Castellanos, & M. Kamimura (Eds.), The Latina/o Pathway
to the Ph.D. (pp. xxiii-xxxv). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Gonzales, L. D. (2015). The horizon of possibilities: How HSI faculty can reshape the production and legitimization of knowledge within academia. In A.-M. Núñez, S. Hurtado, & E.
Calderón Galdeano (Eds.), Hispanic-serving Institutions: Advancing research and transformative practices (pp. 121-135). New York, NY: Routledge.
González, G. G. (2008). Segregation and the education of Mexican children, 1900-1940. In J.
F. Moreno (Ed.), The elusive quest for equality: 150 years of Chicano/Chicana education
(pp. 53-76). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
González, R. G. (2008). College student civic development and engagement at a Hispanic
serving institution. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 7, 287-300. doi:10.1177/
1538192708320472
Guillory, J. P., & Ward, K. (2008). Tribal colleges and universities: Identity, invisibility, and
current issues. In M. Gasman, B. Baez, & C. S. V. Turner (Eds.), Understanding minorityserving institutions (pp. 91-110). Albany: State University of New York.
Harmon, N. (2012). The role of minority-serving institutions in national college completion
goals. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy.
Hernández, T. K. (2016). Envisioning the United States in the Latin American myth of “racial
democracy mestizaje.” Latin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies, 11, 189-205.
Hurtado, S., Alvarez, C. L., Guillermo-Wann, C., Cuellar, M., & Arellano, L. (2012). A model
for diverse learning environments: The scholarship on creating and assessing conditions for
student success. In J. C. Smart & M. B. Paulsen (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook for
theory and research (pp. 41-122). New York, NY: Springer.
Hurtado, S., González, R. A., & Calderón Galdeano, E. (2015). Organizational learning for
student success: Cross-institutional mentoring, transformative practice, and collaboration
among Hispanic-serving institutions. In A.-M. Núñez, S. Hurtado, & E. C. Galdeano (Eds.),
Hispanic-serving institutions: Advancing research and transformative practice (pp. 177195). New York, NY: Routledge.
Illsley, R. E. (2000). Community standards: A hands-on approach to their implementation in
­residence halls (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
146
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 17(2)
Ledesma, M. C., & Burciaga, R. (2015). Faculty governance at Hispanic-serving institutions
through the lens of critical race theory. In J. P. Mendez, I. F. A. Bonner, J. Méndz-Negrete,
& R. T. Palmer (Eds.), Hispanic-serving institutions in American higher education: Their
origin, and present and future challenges (pp. 5-29). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
MacDonald, V. M. (2004). Latino education in the United States: A narrated history from 15132000. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Macready, T. (2009). Learning social responsibility in schools: A restorative practice.
Educational Psychology in Practice, 25, 211-220. doi:10.1080/02667360903151767
Manning, K. (2013). Organizational theory in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Martinez, E., & Gonzales, L. D. (Eds.). (2015). Bridging academic and student affairs: Working
together to craft pathways that advance Latinos and Latinas in higher education. Sterling,
VA: Stylus.
Mayhew, M. J., Grunwald, H. E., & Dey, E. L. (2006). Breaking the silence: Achieving a positive
campus climate for diversity from the staff perspective. Research in Higher Education, 47, 63-88.
Menchaca, M. (2008). The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the racialization of the Mexican
population. In J. F. Moreno (Ed.), The elusive quest for equality: 150 years of Chicano/
Chicana education (pp. 3-29). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
Muñoz, J. C. (2007). Youth, identity, power: The Chicano movement revised and expanded edition. Brooklyn, NY: Verso.
Núñez, A.-M., Murakami-Ramalho, E., & Cuero, K. K. (2010). Pedagogy for equity: Teaching
in a Hispanic-serving institution. Innovative Higher Education, 35, 177-190. doi:10.1007/
s10755-010-9139-7
Ortega, N., Frye, J., Nellum, C., Kamimura, A., & Vidal-Rodríguez, A. (2015). Examining the
financial resilience of Hispanic-serving institutions. In A.-M. Núñez, S. Hurtado, & E. C.
Galdeano (Eds.), Hispanic-Serving Institutions: Advancing research and transformative
practice (pp. 155-176). New York, NY: Routledge.
Pérez-Torres, R. (2006). Mestizaje: Critical uses of race in Chicano culture. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota.
Prasad, A. (2012). Working against the grain: Beyond Eurocentrism in organization studies. In
A. Prasad (Ed.), Against the grain: Advances in postcolonial organization studies (pp. 1331). Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School.
Quijano, A. (2000). Coloniality of power and Eurocentrism in Latin America. International
Sociology, 15, 215-232.
Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21, 168-178.
doi:10.1080/09502380601164353
Reilly, A. (2006). A constitutional framework for indigenous governance. Sydney Law Review,
28, 403-435.
Sandoval, C. (1991). U.S. third world feminism: The theory and method of oppositional consciousness in the postmodern world. Genders, 10, 1-24.
Solórzano, D. G., Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities and Latina/o
undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race of analysis of their educational
progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4, 272-294.
Solórzano, D. G., & Yosso, T. J. (2000). Toward a critical race theory of Chicana and Chicano
education. In C. Tejeda, C. Martinez, & Z. Leonardo (Eds.), Charting terrains of Chicana(o)/
Latina(o) education (pp. 35-65). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Teasley, M. L. (2014). Shifting from zero tolerance to restorative justice in schools. Children
& Schools, 36, 131-133.
Garcia
147
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity,
Education, & Society, 1(1), 1-40.
Turner, C. S. V., González, J. C., & Wood, J. L. (2008). Faculty of color in academe: What
20 years of literature tells us. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1, 139-168.
doi:10.1037/a0012837
Valdez, P. L. (2015). An overview of Hispanic-serving institutions’ legislation: Legislation policy formation between 1979 and 1992. In J. P. Mendez, I. F. A. Bonner, J. Méndez-Negrete,
& R. T. Palmer (Eds.), Hispanic-serving institutions in American higher education: Their
origin, and present and future challenges (pp. 5-29). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 21, 1-19.
Wilder, C. S. (2013). Ebony and Ivy: Race, slavery, and the troubled history of America’s universities. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.
Yosso, T. J., Smith, W. A., Ceja, M., & Solórzano, D. G. (2009). Critical race theory, racial
microaggressions, and campus racial climate for Latina/o undergraduates. Harvard
Educational Review, 79, 659-690.
Author Biography
Gina Ann Garcia is an assistant professor in the department of Administrative and Policy
Studies at the University of Pittsburgh. Her research centers on issues of equity and diversity in
higher education. In addition to exploring the ways in which Hispanic Serving Institutions
(HSIs) embrace and enact an organizational identity for serving minoritized populations, she
studies the identity development of Latinx college students and writes about race and racism in
higher education.