The Office for Institutional Diversity (OID) was created in the spring of 2006, upon the recommendation of the university president, the provost and other members of the Tufts community. The office was officially established in January 2007 with the appointment of Lisa Coleman as its executive director.
Under University President Lawrence Bacow, Tufts has consistently placed an emphasis on issues of diversity. In his announcement of Coleman's appointment, Bacow stated, "a great university must embrace diversity in every possible dimension. We must sample from the full range of human capital available to us, and invest more in proactive efforts … so that Tufts can enjoy a broadly representative and inclusive community."
The OID was created to lead the institutional effort to advance, coordinate and develop all of the university's efforts and initiatives pertaining to diversity. It encompasses the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO), which is responsible for interpreting and implementing policies "related to best affirmative action and equal opportunity practices in employment and retention."
The Daily supports Bacow's vision for diversity at Tufts and sees the need for the OID and an executive director of that office to promote it. In particular, a more diverse faculty is needed at Tufts, where only 7.7 percent of all tenure−tracked professors identify as either African−American or Hispanic. This is problematic primarily because students are not exposed to the varied perspective and experienced that ethnic diversity offers, but also because it gives minority students few options for academic role models within their communities.
Unfortunately, Coleman in December resigned from her position to become special assistant to the president and chief diversity officer at Harvard University. As the Daily reported yesterday, the position remains vacant almost 11 months after Coleman's resignation and will remain so until Bacow's successor is named.
This decision to leave the position unfilled makes sense, as it would be hard to recruit without knowing who the president will be, given that the director reports to the president. The Daily also reported that there is talk of restructuring the office or abolishing the directorship altogether. We believe, however, that having a dedicated leader to direct the office's efforts would certainly enhance its work.
It is important, though, that the responsibilities and goals of such a director are clearly delineated, so that there is maximum effectiveness in advancing institutional diversity.
For example, the director and the OID as a whole should be closely involved in the process of faculty hiring, retention and promotion, especially given the glaring lack of minority faculty at Tufts. Including a diversity perspective on the university's personnel decisions, in particular recruiting, will go a long way toward advancing institutional diversity.
Another potential area in which the director could be hugely influential is by ensuring that decisions made by Tufts in every sphere are consistent with our commitment to diversity. This is exactly what the Diversity Leadership Council established at the University of Chicago in 2007 is tasked with: to ensure that both the university's internal relationships — with employees — and external relationships — with neighbors and business partners — reflect the university's values. Achieving this consistency is a function that the diversity director is well−suited to fulfill and will play a significant role in ensuring that diversity is truly institution−wide at Tufts.
