Final Report on the External Review of the African American Cultural Center

1. There’s a movement afoot at North Carolina State University... it’s a bold movement... and it’s a diversity movement. In this first year of existence, the activities of the Office of Diversity and African American Affairs are directed at moving the campus from silence to dialogue about diversity.

2. To do this, we must, of course, know what we mean by diversity. In the university, diversity exists when the mix of people from a variety of niches of society is such that the occurrence of a conflict of ideas is inescapable. Universities are built on the claim that a debate of ideas is good. Indeed, universities seek to create an environment where the debate of ideas is valued and nurtured because that debate of ideas leads to new, innovative and unforeseen ideas. In order to ensure this debate of ideas, the university must ensure a diversity of ideas, and to have a diversity of ideas you must have a set of people with a diversity of experiences that represent a wide distribution. So defined and conceptualized, diversity then is the heart of the university.

3. Attracting and retaining faculty and students from underrepresented groups is a high priority in the diversity movement. North Carolina State University has a major resource that has the potential to influence retention and graduation of African American students and the attraction and retention of faculty with diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds; the African American Cultural Center. Believing that, the Office of the Provost through the Office of Diversity and African American Affairs set in motion an external review of the Cultural Center in order to create a base of information that would allow intelligent decision making about how to improve the Cultural Center. Connected to the academic mission of the university, the Cultural Center can serve as a powerful “attractor” for faculty and students from underrepresented groups; it can be a powerful recruitment and retention tool.

4. To help us see how to do this, the Office of the Provost commissioned four experts to provide us with an external review of the Cultural Center:

• Dr. Fred Hord, Chair, Black Studies, Knox College,  Executive Director/Founder, Association of Black Culture Centers
• Dr. Paul Finkelman, Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Tulsa College of Law
• Dr. John Roberts, Deputy Chair of the National Endowment for the Humanities
• Mr. Lawrence Young, Director, Paul Robeson Cultural Center, Pennsylvania State University

5. During the week of November 13, 2000, by design the reviewers came to us in teams of two. On November 13-14, Dr. John Roberts and Mr. Lawrence Young visited, and on November 16-17, Drs. Paul Finkelman and Fred Hord were with us. In a letter from the Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs, the reviewers were given this commission:

“This review of North Carolina State University’s African American Cultural Center is being done so that we may gain some guidance about how to move the Cultural Center forward. We believe that at this 10 year point in its history the African American Cultural Center should move to a new level of involvement with and influence on our academic community.

As a “cultural” center at a research-extensive university, we believe that moving forward and getting better must involve a deeper interdependence with the whole academic mission of the university.  Surely that means being connected to the academic lives of students and faculty so as to positively influence retention and graduation of students from underrepresented groups, and recruitment and retention of faculty of underrepresented groups. It likewise must mean a connection with all students.

Our beginning questions are the following. (1) What are we doing right? (2) What are we doing that might be getting in the way? (3) What are we doing that we are not aware that we are doing? (4) What need we do to move forward to make the Cultural Center a more integral part of the academic mission of the University?

... as a product we would like a written report of your observations, reactions, and recommendations about NCSU’s African American Cultural Center.”

6. During their visits the reviewers lived within a strenuous schedule. Upon arrival, the reviewers went straight to the Cultural Center for a 1½ hour tour/information session conducted by Dr. Moses. Following that, the schedules varied between the two teams but over the two days included: (1) blocks of times (which students knew of well in advance) for students to drop in and talk to the reviewers, (2) meetings with Chancellor Fox (all reviewers), Provost Hall (except for Dr. Roberts and Mr. Young), Dr. Craig Brookins, Director of Africana Studies, African American faculty, African American Coordinators (lunch) (3) dinner with African American student leadership (and student leadership of Native American groups, and the CHASS Multicultural Society). No university administrators were present during the drop in times for, and the dinners, with students. This was done to allow students the opportunity for unencumbered interaction with the reviewers and free expression of their opinions.

Each reviewer did provide a report that resulted from the two days spent here at the University. What follows are the observations, reactions, and recommendations of the four reviewers. I have put these in the following categories: Contextual Notes, General Observations, Materials/Documents, Interactions with African American Coordinators, Interactions with Faculty, Interactions with Students, Facilities, Cultural Center Library, Programming, Review Process, Summary Conclusions, and Specific Recommendations. Within each of these categories, I have provided direct quotes from the reviewers.

Contextual Notes:

Reviewer A:

Many individuals seem to feel that the very existence of the Center is currently threatened with complete or partial extinction. While this view seems to be based on recent actions and rumors, it seems fairly entrenched as a widely held perspective. Even when it was not fully articulated in conversations, this view seemed to emerge in the stridency of individuals’ unprovoked defenses of the Center’s importance to African Americans, in unsolicited dissertations on how the Center would be “watered” down if made into a multicultural center, and in strongly expressed views that the community would be left vulnerable without the Center. Moreover, some individuals suggested that the external review itself was confirmation of their sense that the future of the Center is in jeopardy.

Reviewer D:

Three... contextual matters related to this review need to be elucidated before proceeding to the analysis of the visit.  First, Black Culture Centers in this country have developed at least three primary missions in their history...: create an optimal environment for black students and other students of color, provide educational resources and activities which will impact the entire institution and the surrounding community, and foster networking beyond the immediate environment with other black and multicultural centers. Second, the growing phenomenon (sic) of Centers’ voluntary self-studies... have focused as much on the history of institutional support as on strong and weak points of the Center. Third, it is important to note that the African-American Cultural Center under review has established a solid national reputation as a Center extremely supportive of black students, with appreciable resources, and with strong ties to the community.

General Observations:

Reviewer A:

The primary observation to be made about the African American Cultural Center at North Carolina State University is that diverse constituencies view it as a vital institution on the campus. From students, faculty, and staff, we learned much about both the actual and potential contribution that the Center can and does make to the quality of life on campus. To these individuals, the Center has as much symbolic significance as practical value. To most, it symbolizes NC State’s commitment to African American presence and sense of well-being on the campus. In addition, they see the existence of the Center as a signal to the rest of the campus community that African American culture, traditions, and people are valued and that their presence can contribute to the social and intellectual life of the University. In a practical sense, it provides students in particular with a focus for activities that they deem important.

In both the written material about the Center and in conversations with various constituencies, it became clear that the Center has served a vital though uneven service to African Americans at NC State during its ten-year history. During that time, it has developed several programs that all point to with pride, such as the Symposium that introduces many students to the Center, its Martin Luther King festival that brings community people together with campus groups, and its SPACE program that serves public school students. To many, these programs alone would seem to constitute sufficient grounds for having the Center. At the same time, these constituencies often seem confused about the larger mission of the Center. While most of the individuals to whom we spoke easily articulated values for the Center that support a view of it as a symbol of black presence on campus, few could actually articulate what they viewed as its actual mission and role. While students frequently spoke about the function that the Center has for providing them with a focus for social and cultural interaction, the faculty and staff seemed to be particularly interested in the role that the Center could play in promoting the academic and intellectual interests of the African American community both on campus and in the Raleigh area. In all of these assertions, a note of incompleteness, of missed opportunities, and of potential rather than actual accomplishment tended to creep into the conversations. In essence, the Center emerged in conversations as a campus institution with great potential yet with neither an articulated and focused mission nor a solid record of accomplishment at this point in its history.

Reviewer B:

“The site visit covered a two day period... In [the meeting] sessions the participants were unanimous in their support for the Cultural Center and in their desire to see the Cultural Center prosper. There was some variance in the suggested means and process of making the Center stronger, but no lack of enthusiasm at the prospect of a stronger, more viable, more utilitarian center.”

Reviewer C:

A) The Center provides a valuable sense of "place" for some African-American students on campus. Some of the students speak glowingly of the center as an important institution in their college career.

B) It is not clear that the center effectively reaches out even to all black students. It has clearly failed in its attempt to reach out to black faculty, and has apparently made no attempt, or at least no serious attempt, to reach out to white faculty, even those whose research and teaching interests are directly connected to the mission of the center.

C) It is also apparent that the Center has made no attempt (or utterly failed in its attempt) to introduce the majority population of students and faculty to African-American culture.

Reviewer D:

“The exchanges with other administrators and with faculty were both revealing and enigmatic. Perhaps, most puzzling was the small percentage of black ‘coordinators’ and faculty who attended their respective sessions. Only five faculty met with the reviewers, and just one or two of the anticipated ten ‘coordinators’ shared lunch later that day.”

Materials/Documents:

Reviewer A:

The administrative and organizational structure of the Center seems to be in a state of disarray. Although we were provided documents that supposedly served as the administrative, organizational blueprint for Center operations, it became abundantly clear that the elaborate administrative and organizational apparatus outlined in the documents is not currently being used. To its credit, this structure had been developed to provide for maximum input from various constituencies. With the passive dismantling of this structure, it is not clear that the Center has any systematic way of soliciting or receiving input from any constituency.

Reviewer B:

No comments.

Reviewer C:

A) Documentation. According to Vice Provost Nacoste, all documentation sent to the reviewers came directly from the Center itself and its director, Dr. Moses. The decision to proceed in this manner indicated a desire on the part of the Vice Provost to allow the Center to put its best foot forward, without any influence from the Office of the Provost. In their first encounter with the Center, the outside reviewers read what the Center wanted them to read.

The Center provided the reviewers with four documents: (1) A document of approximately 55 pages, titled "Organizational Structure for the Council of Directors of the African American Cultural Center" (Hereinafter cited as OSCD) which is paginated (although not always correctly) and dated 30 November 1993; (2) a 43 page document with a title page describing it as the "African American Cultural Center -- NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, PROGRAMS" {hereinafter cited as PROGRAMS) which is unpaginated and undated; (3) seven pages stapled together with the first page declaring it to be AFRICAN-AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER RESIDENT ORGANIZATIONS: STATEMENT OF PURPOSE (hereinafter cited as STATEMENT) which is unpaginated, and dated on the bottom of the first page as September 17, 1998, but with other pages dated September 28, 1998; and (4) a four page document, OFFICE PROCEDURES INFORMATION (hereinafter cited as PROCEDURES) which is unpaginated and dated on the last page as 8/3/99). The quality of this documentation suggests a program that is in disarray and lacks competent leadership within a University setting... ...The PROGRAM document is 43 pages and is both undated and unpaginated, which makes it difficult to use, analyze, and cite... Equally troubling is the fact that this material is terribly outdated. The OSCD is from 1993, and suggests that since 1993 the Director of the Center has seen no reason to reevaluate the direction, policy, or goals of the Center.

It is not possible in a short space to give a full and complete critique of the documentation of the Center, but here are some highlights. Some of these highlights are factual in nature; others show the fuzzy and sometime incoherent and inconsistent thinking of the authors of this documents; much of the material here reveals the extent to which this is riddled with cant, jargon, and rhetoric that has little place in an academic setting. Equally significant, it is clear from some of the documentation that the Center is more interested in offering up a political agenda than a serious inquiry that interrogates as well as teaches the many disciplines that make up African-American history and culture.

Reviewer D:

First, a number of documents were useful in explaining the organizational structure of the Center, its guidelines for student groups that occupy it, and the nature of some programmatic activities. Second, in spite of whatever reasons for the datedness (sic) of some materials, this remains a concern. Third, some of the language related to the philosophy underlying the Center’s mission and programs needs to be more precise. Language regarding an Afrocentric ideology, ostensible conflation of African and African American experiences, and the intended educational uses of African culture are less than lucid. Finally, there is questionable emphasis on overall academic activities.

Interactions with African American Coordinators:

Reviewer A:

No comments.

Reviewer B:

No comments.

Reviewer C:

No comments.

Reviewer D:

The meeting with college ‘coordinators’ left... questions, because those staff members seem to have an ongoing working relationship with the Center. Only one or two of the four persons in attendance were ‘coordinators’... Those there were generally enthusiastic about the Center’s record, especially its programs and support of students. It was mentioned, however, that more systematic planning would be useful.

Interactions with Faculty:

Reviewer A:

Faculty and staff often expressed the view that the Center could play a more pronounced role in reaching out to other academic programs as well as the citizens of Raleigh. They seemed to believe that the Center needed a more pronounced intellectual focus and that such a focus could be achieved through more cooperative activities with other programs and greater utilization of expertise available within the faculty and the community. However, some faculty and staff members in particular lamented the lack of active engagement on the part of the Center’s staff with individuals on campus who could bring needed expertise into the Center.

Reviewer B:

Faculty expressed concern that the Cultural Center’s programs could involve more of the community and could use the arts as an important educational tool.

The faculty expressed concern that the Council of Directors has not been functioning as it should and could possibly serve as a means for outreach and connection to other units. There was feeling that AACC should be more closely linked to academic units and be able to impact on the offerings of those academic units. Faculty see the AACC as a potential magnet for all students where programs like a scholar-in-residence would add prestige and attractiveness to the Center’s programs across the campus.

Reviewer C:

The Faculty: The team met with the director of the African Studies program, Dr. Brookins. There is, astoundingly, no connection between the Center and the Africana Studies program. The next day the team was to meet with black faculty. Although there are about 65 black faculty members on the campus, only 5, plus one administrator, met with the team. Their comments confirmed what [we had already heard]; the small number who showed up speaks for itself.  The faculty voted with its feet, and voted against the Center as it exists and its current leadership. The Faculty who were present indicated the Center needs more resources and staff and has great potential, but it is currently without direction. Some were angry about the lack of University support... The faculty would be likely to support a Center that had adequate resources, provided it was scholarly and run well...The faculty said the institution must reach out across the campus; it cannot "stand alone," must get rid of its "isolated, siege mentality"; must "reach out through faculty and students"... The faculty was highly critical of the way the center is run, without any serious planning, with notices of events sent out a day or two before the event.

Reviewer D:

“The morning session with faculty members... brought certain issues to the surface.  Principal among those were the organizational structure of the Center, its efforts at co-sponsoring activities with academic units, its effectiveness with outreach, the adequacy of its academic orientation, and the adequacy of the resources provided by the institution.  Regarding the first matter, there was some concern and confusion about the current status of the Council of Directors.  Apparently, it functioned well at an earlier point, but is minimally active now... Second, there was clear enthusiasm of its co-sponsorship of programs, especially the African summer experience and the Martin Luther King celebration.  Third, concern was registered about the lack of the Center’s outreach, although most felt it was largely a consequence of being understaffed and without sufficient resources. Fourth, there was some awareness of academic speakers being brought to campus and that the Center’s library had research possibilities for students.“

The late afternoon session with the director of Africana Studies was a very useful one. I had already been introduced to his work in Psychology and had subsequently asked him to serve on the editorial board of the forthcoming academic journal of the national Association for Black Culture Centers. Thus, it was not surprising that he resonated with the Center’s missions, and desired to connect even more with its operations. It is a very good sign when any director of Black Studies is clearly interested in supporting the culture center. But, in this case, because much of the director’s academic publishing is intimately related to black students, the connections between the program and the center are even more important.

Interactions with Students:

Reviewer A:

Students... frequently articulated the view that the Center should play a much larger role in educating other cultural groups at the University about the African American cultural, historical and social experience. Through such programming, students felt that the Center could be a focal point on campus for addressing such issues as cultural diversity and racism.

Reviewer B:

“Students described the AACC as an ‘invaluable resource’ for all students who use it. The AACC is seen as a place to raise the consciousness and improve the education of students, particularly in the areas of political and social awareness. The Center is viewed as a base for African American student activity and the many programs offered by the Center; speakers, etc., are greeted with appreciation. Some students felt that there needed to be greater publicity for the programs of the Center...”

Several students expressed some frustration with the fact that few White student[s] took advantage of the educational features of the Center and that there was a ‘that’s not for us’ attitude toward the Center’s programs by White students.  Students did not feel that there was animosity or resentment toward the Center by White students but rather apathy and ignorance. Several spoke to the ‘Witherspoon-Talley’ dichotomy, where Witherspoon is viewed as the ‘Black’ student center and Talley is just the student center.”

Reviewer C:

Student comments. At dinner the students praised the "student centered" (their language) aspects of the Center. They showed pride in having a Center and felt they learned something about African-American culture and history from the Center. Nevertheless, the students also expressed a number of disappointments. They noted that the Center was "invisible" (their language) to non-black students, and that it failed to reach out to Black students in some programs, such as ROTC, the graduate programs in science (they had no knowledge in other fields), and the College of Agriculture.  Students think more needs to be done to educate whites about African-American culture, and that the Center had failed to do this. The students think that more academic programs might bring majority students to the Center. One suggested that tutoring sessions now conducted at the Center for blacks should be opened up to whites.  [If they are actually closed to whites, this raises serious legal issues.]...

The conversations with the students were most striking because these students, although supportive of their Center, were clearly aware of, and uncomfortable with, the lack of visibility and scholarly integrity of the Center. They discussed the need for joint programs with other parts of the campus. They also believed the Center needed greater faculty support and greater interaction between the Center and both black and white faculty.

Reviewer D:

“The three hour session with students in the evening was... very productive. The three African American students and one Native American spoke with a single voice about some matters. First, they all supported the Center, believing in the importance of its mission for the entire campus. Nonetheless, they felt that the campus did not take the Center seriously; their perception was that even black faculty did not support it. Finally, they believed that the Center needed more resources and that students of color should take the lead in developing new strategies to attract white students.”

Facilities:

Reviewer A:

...the use of office space by student groups seems poorly defined and managed. While there seems to be a sense on the part of Center staff as well as students that these groups should have space in the facility, there seems to be little benefit either to the student groups or the Center from their presence. In most respects, the Center seems to have done a poor job in defining the role and relationship of student groups to the mission of the Center. Finally, the multi-purpose room appears to be a largely wasted space. With the exception of the occasional student party or lecture, this space simply goes begging for constructive use most of the time. The Center’s staff seems to have given little thought to how this space might be used to further the mission of the Center.

Another issue that emerged during our visit had to do with the building in which the African American Cultural Center is housed. In fact, the housing of the Center constituted something of a theme in many of the conversations. The concern with the building arises from the awkwardness created by its existence as part of a larger structure/Center and its placement on three floors without connection. While many on the faculty and staff are very much aware of the history that led to the current structure, they, as well as many students, feel that a freestanding building would be far more desirable and functional. In defense of their position, they argue that the identity and value of the Center is obscured, if not negated, by its placement in the Witherspoon building. This placement sometimes creates confusion, especially among majority students who frequently identify the Witherspoon Center as the “black student center” and therefore a less desirable building to visit. Furthermore, they suggest that the physical arrangement of the Center’s space has negative consequences for creating the kind of environment and programmatic activities that they would like to see the Center develop.

Reviewer B:

The multipurpose room serves many functions, academic, cultural and social. The administrative suite holds offices for staff, student organizations, and a newspaper, as well as a large, flexible meeting/classroom. Several of those interviewed noted that this area of the AACC was “cramped and crowded.”  The current configuration has the director in a small office which of necessity also serves to store some items since there is little dedicated storage space in the Center. Several of the offices are quite small and some are shared by more than one person or organization. Several students indicated that the current arrangement of reception, lobby, and offices gives the Center an “antiseptic” and “un-welcoming” atmosphere and that the arrangement discouraged “casual” use of the center.

Reviewer C:

The Gallery at the Center has had some excellent exhibits of major artists, but have failed to capitalize on these programs because of the general isolation of the Center from the rest of the Campus. This isolation is structural and intellectual.

Reviewer D:

Dr. Moses provided a general history of the Center, including information about the different spaces within the Center as well as the student activity orientation of the contiguous spaces. There was some sense that the multipurpose room—the largest space—was essentially without black cultural artifacts because there was an attempt to keep it “neutral” for all of the different campus groups using it.

Cultural Center Library:

Reviewer A:

In the case of the library, there seem to be issues related to both funding and staffing. Both of these issues arise from a less than clear relationship between the Center’s library and the main university library. Although the main library apparently provides both funds for the purchase of materials and part-time staff, some individuals expressed the view that the main library’s quasi support for the Center’s library is insufficient if this facility is to become a functional and useful academic resource on the campus.

Reviewer B:

The library is well furnished and contains useful materials reflective of the African Diaspora experience. The relationship and funding of the Center library by the main library is an excellent feature and from my experience rather unique. That the main library has maintained this relationship to the Center is commendable.

Reviewer C:

The library at the Center is underfunded but can potentially become a major asset of the Center and of the University.

Reviewer D:

The librarian seemed clear about an overall strategy to build the library, including electronic components, and [how to] connect its holdings to university course offerings.

Programming:

Reviewer A:

At present the Center seems to lack programmatic direction and focus. The absence of direction and focus seems to be evident both among the staff and its constituencies. In many respects, the Center’s staff appears to define its role primarily in terms of administration and devotes an insufficient amount of time developing meaningful programmatic activities. That is, the staff seems to spend much of its time on such concerns as room reservations, the regulation of space use by student groups, and day-to-day operations of the facility in a rather mechanical way. Although the staff shared with the review team an ambitious slate of programs for the Center, it became clear in the course of conversations that very few of these programs are actually occurring in the Center, even those described as ongoing such as lecture series, faculty brown bags, and the African American Heritage Society... Not surprisingly, when other constituencies were asked about programmatic activities, few were able to identify Center sponsored activities in which they had participated.

The concern of the staff with administrative details has contributed to an environment and perhaps an understanding of the Center’s mission that is primarily internally focused. That is, the Director of the Center seems to be primarily concerned with the nuts and bolts of running the Center to the neglect of strong academic and cultural programming, audience definition and development, outreach and engagement, and long range planning. With the exception of the several historic programs that the Center sponsors in cooperation with other groups, there seems to be in general a lack of outreach and inclusion on the part of the Center of other programs and constituencies on campus. Ironically, African American constituencies of the Center seem to view outreach as an important role that the Center could play in the community.

...the inadequate use of the art gallery is another issue that concerns some constituencies. Whether the under use of this space is a problem of staff or one of outreach is a matter of dispute. Currently, many agree that it is not being used to its full potential. At the same time, they argue that there is ample expertise in art and artistic endeavors on campus in the School of Design, for example, to address this problem. However, the gallery space in the Center is not currently benefiting from this expertise, although individual faculty on campus seem eager to assist in developing it as a showcase for the community.

Reviewer B:

The gallery was empty during my visit, but has the potential to be an attractive display area. However, ...the physical configuration is problematic, with entry to the library through the gallery. This has implications on the programming possibilities for the gallery since an artist’s talk, a class visit, or a reception in the gallery might necessitate the closing of the library. This would also be true of installations and hanging of exhibits.

Reviewer C:

The volume of usage and enthusiasm for the center is not... at all clear.... A few faculty members use the center as a supplement to their own teaching. The majority of African-American faculty members, however, have little or no contact with the center and believe it, at best, irrelevant to their lives. For most members of the NCSU community, the Center is invisible and has no impact on the University at large.

Reviewer D:

The recent successes of the Ella Baker Conference and the annual Martin Luther King Celebration are examples of programs that had at least regional reverberations; they also provided models to other Centers of programs that both focus on the home institution and go beyond it. It should be added that NC [State’s Cultural Center] has also provided a model of student behavior at national conferences...

Review Process:

Reviewer C:

The review process, as conceived by the Office of the Provost, promised an opportunity to fully examine the Center.  The Center itself, however, failed in the implementation of this process...

The Vice Provost provided for significant opportunities for the review team to interact with students. The reviewers were to eat dinner with about 12 students involved with the Center on Thursday night and meet with students in the late morning and early afternoon on Friday. Only 4 students showed up for dinner on Thursday. One of those who came to dinner briefly spoke with us again on Friday. The reviewers met no other students from the Center. The schedule called for the reviewers to meet with students in the center on Friday morning and Friday afternoon. When the team arrived at the Center... there was no room reserved for the team to meet students, the staff person there had no idea the review team was coming and had no room available for the review team. There were no signs posted directing students to the reviewers and no students lined up to meet the reviewers. The team eventually settled into the multipurpose room on the ground floor of the Witherspoon Center, where only one student, who had been at dinner the night before, spoke with the team.

Reviewer D:

The Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs is to be commended for structuring these external reviews of North Carolina State University’s African American Cultural Center. His decision to sit in on the faculty session seemed a useful way to garner insight from some who had worked directly with the Center. His willingness to provide the reviewers orientation regarding recent developments at the institution related to the Center was helpful. His thoughtfulness in providing the Center’s director more autonomy with budgetary matters has not gone unnoticed by her.

Summary Conclusions:

Reviewer A:

The Center’s placement [in the administrative structure of the university] might... be a factor in its failure to create meaningful links between itself and academic programs on campus when clearly such linkages would be both desirable and important to the Center’s growth as a site for serious intellectual and cultural work. Presently, the Center seems to have little interaction with academic departments including the Africana Studies program. Moreover, while there seems to be a close relationship between the Center and social groups on the campus, it does not enjoy a similar relationship with African American cultural groups. For instance, sororities and fraternities have been provided space in the Center, while the African American gospel choir and theater group have not. These would seem to be missed opportunities to promote the cultural mission of the Center. While it is clear that factors other than the building housing the Center are at work here, there is at least some evidence that it plays a role.

Reviewer B:

The catalog states that the mission of NCSU is “...leadership for intellectual, cultural, social, economic, and technological development for the state, the nation, and the world.” The African American Cultural Center and Africana Studies certainly can and should play a role in carrying forth that mission in a state, nation, and world which require a broader understanding of all peoples of each other. NCSU should examine the idea of adding a diversity requirement in the area of general education for all students with an emphasis on African Studies and the resources of the African American Cultural Center.

Reviewer C:

As it now functions, the Center does not adequately serve the needs of the community of scholars at NCSU. This Center offers some valuable programs and provides [some] useful services for some of the African-American students on the campus. It does not, however, seem to add, in any serious or meaningful way, to the intellectual life of the NCSU community. It is irrelevant, at best, for the vast majority of the African American faculty on the campus. It is disconnected to the larger campus and the majority population of students and faculty.

Reviewer D:

In spite of the potential benefits of these reviews and recent shifts to strengthen the Center, several things need to be done before making any radical changes in the way the Center functions. No doubt, the most crucial initiative is for the institution to undergo a self-study to determine the historical nature of its support to the Center. ...[Indeed] certain questions about the Center’s adequacy may be answered by an assessment of institutional support. First, what has been the level of ongoing active legitimization of the Center by top administrators? Second, what has been the level of ongoing active involvement in the Center’s activities by faculty, staff and students? Third, what has been the level of institutional resources available to the Center and what discretion has the Center over those resources? Knowing the answers to these questions would assist in understanding the following issues that emerged during the review: 1) Why do students feel the campus does not take the Center seriously? 2) Why have the vast majority of faculty members not been involved in the academic initiatives of the Center? 3) Why has there ostensibly been an uneven level of involvement by college coordinators? 4) Why have mainstream student activity offices ostensibly been less than fully supportive of the Center? 5) Why do students who believe in the Center and its mission feel so pessimistic about the future of white student involvement?

Specific Recommendations:

Reviewer A:

Summary recommendation: The Administration should take steps to make the Center into a viable academic component of the campus that will provide an opportunity for all members of the University community to learn about African-American Culture in a setting that is conducive to scholarly discourse at the highest level. While doing this, the Center should continue its successful programs, such as the MLK Cultural Festival, the SPACE program, and its support for black students on campus. Other programs, such as the African-American Heritage Society, should be continued, but with invigorated leadership from the faculty and reconsideration of its mission and purpose.

1. The administration should communicate to the African American community its commitment to and support for the Center’s continued existence as a viable institution on campus, if this is indeed the case. It became clear that many in the African American community at North Carolina State University do not feel that the administration supports the Center to any great extent. A failure to alleviate this concern will make it very difficult to make any meaningful or substantial changes in direction for the Center. Within this atmosphere of suspicion, any actions designed to address identifiable deficiencies in the Center at the present time will most likely serve to confirm rather than allay concerns about its future viability.

2. The administration should explore the issues raised by the current placement of the Center, especially the impact that this placement may have on its ability to enhance academic and cultural programming. This exploration should include a consideration of the implications of the Center’s placement in a student services facility for creating an academic and cultural identity, mission and programming. Based on only a cursory examination, its seems that currently many of the activities of the Center reflect a view of it as having primarily a student services, i.e., social, function. That programming supportive of the academic mission of the university and reflective of the cultural traditions of African Americans has in the past and continues to occur in the facility is readily conceded. Nevertheless, it seems worthwhile to explore the idea that the placement of the African American cultural center in a student center may very well have a negative impact on the Center’s ability to be taken seriously as a program with an academic mission.

3. A) The library should be made a branch of the main library and fully integrated with it. B) Oversight and administration for the art gallery should be given to a faculty member (or group) with expertise and interest in maximizing the educational benefits that this facility could bring to the campus. It could be used as a laboratory for students interested in exploring arts education and programming within an African American cultural context. C) The multipurpose room should be furnished to serve as a study lounge for students when it is not in use for lectures or other programs. This kind of transformation of the space would provide a rationale for students to come into the facility, discover its other programs and resources, and build the kind of community atmosphere that many students spoke about as desirable and needed on campus.

4. The administration should appoint an internal review committee or working group to develop a clear, concise and forceful plan for enhancing the academic and cultural mission of the Center on the North Carolina State campus. This plan should be based on careful assessment of the needs that the Center can address on this particular campus. In the documents that I read about the history and mission of the Center, there seems to be little if any focus on the specific needs that the Center should address on the North Carolina State campus. The current articulated rationale for the Center concerns larger questions about the history and culture of Africans in America rather than a focus on issues specific to this campus and region. This group might want to look especially at how the Center’s mission might be articulated as it moves into its second decade, especially in terms of the emerging and changing demographic and intellectual landscape at the university. For example, there would seem to be a need to think about the future role of the Center in light of the projected growth of Africana Studies, an increasingly diverse student body, and the existence of other programs and opportunities for promoting the interests and well-being of African diasporic peoples on campus.

Reviewer B:

1. It will no doubt come as no surprise that the first recommendation will be a review of the budget of the AACC with the goal of enhancing the program budget to a level which will allow the Center to carry out its mission effectively. The stated support for making the Center more effective will be directly related to the institutional commitment of sufficient funds to act effectively as a major educational component of the University.

2. The Center must be fully staffed with a qualified and committed assistant director to share the program and services load with Dr. Moses. Having an additional staff person will provide the necessary personnel to develop the liaisons and collaborations with academic units, which is viewed as a desirable process.

3. The Council of Directors should be re-activated and mobilized as a resource to the director and to the students.  This Council has the potential for being the catalyst, which raises the profile of the Center on campus. The addition of representatives from one or more of the colleges (Assistant Deans) to the Council might be considered.

4. Some consideration should be given to the re-structuring of the physical facilities of the AACC. Perhaps a renovation to Witherspoon, which moves the library and Gallery to spaces on the administrative level, could be considered as a practical way of enhancing the utility of the Center and creating a more identifiable space that encompasses the African American Cultural Center.

5. If there is not to be consideration of the construction of a discrete structure designated as the AACC, then efforts must be made to insure that the AACC in Witherspoon is given a higher profile campus-wide. In the University catalog, Witherspoon Student Center has a prominent place and exposition, while the AACC is mention as a name only. Whether it is true or not, the campus perception of the “Witherspoon=them; Talley=us” should be addressed at the highest levels of the University. White students, faculty, and staff must be made aware that there are unique benefits for them available only in the Cultural Center. Black, Native American, and Latino students must be reassured that the AACC will remain their resource and “home” even with an expanded mission.

Reviewer C:

1. The Center should emphasize scholarly and intellectual programs that will introduce students and faculty, as well as the non-university community, to the richness of African-American history and culture. Distribution of information about the Center should be professionalized. The Gallery can be part of this process, but only if exhibits are well publicized and curated. This will require additional resources, but it is a small investment that can reap large dividends.

2. The Center should strive to become integrated into the larger university community. This must include inviting non-minority scholars of African-American history and culture to participate in programs and activities. The Center's board should be integrated to include faculty working in these areas without regard to their race.

3. The Center library is one of the potential strengths of the Center. Currently, the library is understaffed and lacks sufficient resources. It should receive a greater book budget, and should concentrate on books of high academic value, with only a very small budget for more popular books. It can, and should be, a center in its own right for the study of African-American history and culture. Down the road, it might include the collection of primary source material on African-American history in North Carolina. The library might begin now to collect the papers of civil rights leaders and activists, and black political leaders, of the last half century. The library needs a full-time librarian and either a part-time bibliographer, or a bibliographer from the main library who can work with the Center.

4. The Center might offer courses for credit, through the MDS program... These courses must be integrated into the larger curriculum of the campus. Minority and non-minority faculty should teach them.

5. The Center should create positions with a title such as Fellow of the Center, to be filled by existing faculty members on the campus. With a small amount of resources, either in salary supplement, release time from teaching, or in-kind support (extra travel money, research funds, etc.) and some office space, the Center can attract excellent faculty to participate in the activities of the Center. Center Fellows might have an office in the Center where the fellows can write, hold small seminars, and meet with other Fellows. Indeed, being a "Fellow of the Center" could become a mark of excellence and a position that faculty, black and white, will compete for. The Center could also attract outside scholars with a very light teaching load (perhaps a small seminar on some aspect of African-American history and culture). Faculty from other campuses would compete to be Fellows of the Center, just as the National Humanities Center in the Triangle attracts scholars. Indeed, the Center might link up with the NHC, as well as with programs in nearby universities. With the state archives nearby, the Center could attract first rate scholars to interact with the NCSU faculty and students.

6. The Center should plan large programs that will tie the Center to the rest of the University. An initial program might be on "Cotton and African-American culture." This program could tie in with many programs in the University, such as agriculture, textiles, engineering (impact of cotton gin and mechanical pickers and other technology), the biology of insects and pests (boll weevil), literature, poetry, geography, economics, business, and of course history. It could be national or international in scope and bring attention and prestige to the Center and to NCSU. Fellows of the Center might participate in such programs, and if done right, Fellows could be recruited because of the "theme" of the year and the conference that would go with that theme.

7. The Center should be moved within the University structure to the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. This makes sense for many reasons... If the Center is to be taken seriously by the NCSU faculty, the Center should be part of an interdisciplinary academic program with the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. This will allow the Center to coordinate courses, perhaps eventually develop some faculty lines, or joint lines within the College. In this way, the Center can move from the periphery of NCSU life to the center of scholarly life. Seeing African American history and culture in its broadest context, it is possible to argue that all of the United States is an African-European-Indian Culture. By bringing scholars of all races and background to the Center, which would be a vital component of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, the Center can become a driving force in the academic life of the University.  Combined with the Fellows program and conference described above, the Center, located in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, can bring prestige to the entire University.

Reviewer D:

1. No radical reordering of the Center’s structure should be attempted prior to a full evaluation of institutional support.

2. The Center’s director should be supported for the things that she has done well in spite of whatever obstacles: mentoring students, connecting with the larger local community, and planning relevant programs of outstanding black speakers.

3. Growing ties between Center and Africana studies should be systematically encouraged.

4. Co-sponsorship arrangements with academic departments that have worked, such as the African summer experience, should be encouraged.

5. Budgetary and staff resources should be strengthened.

6. The recent structural arrangement of the Center reporting to the Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs should be pursued for its connecting the Center to the academic part of the institution.

7. The Center should complete its updating and reorganization of materials sent to reviewers, including revisiting its mission statement.

8. Arrangements on other campuses where the Center reports to academic administrators should be explored to determine strengths and weaknesses and for potential applicability to this institution.

9. The administration should make a clear state of its support of the Center to the entire campus.

10. The Center should prepare for an exhaustive self-study process to be completed after the evaluation of institutional support.

Concluding Thoughts:

Reviewer A:

...the administration as well as the African American community must realize that an African American Cultural Center cannot be all things to all people. At present, it seems to me that the Center is not only awkwardly positioned between the academic and student services side of things, it is also viewed as having to serve too many functions as they relate to African Americans--a situation that serves merely to confuse its mission. While it probably can and should contribute to the university’s overall effort to provide for the unique and diverse needs of people of African descent, there needs to be a clear recognition of how the Center is to position itself in terms of these needs. In so doing, the role of the African American Cultural Center should be defined within a larger constellation of programs designed to serve the African American community whether they exist as student service programs, retention programs, recruitment programs, academic programs, etc. The Center can not and should not be asked to duplicate or be the center for all of these kinds of activities.

Reviewer B:

...the health and welfare of the African American Cultural Center is as important to the University as are the... colleges and intercollegiate athletics. This must become a part of the mind-set and the value system of the major players of the University. Sufficient resources and prestige must be invested in the Cultural Center so that it is perceived by all students, faculty, staff, and alumni as a source of their growth and development and as an element of their pride in the University.

Reviewer C:

...to reiterate the theme of this report, the vision, mission, and purpose of the Center must be to provide an intellectual, scholarly, and academically vital component of the Center. As one student noted at dinner, the way to attract people to the Center is through academics. It is time to begin that process.

Rupert W. Nacoste, Ph.D., Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs, Alumni Distinguished Undergraduate Professor of Psychology, North Carolina State University

June 1, 2001

North Carolina State University’s African American Cultural Center has had a significant presence on our campus for 10 years. As a presence, the Cultural Center has been a place where African American students have been able to feel at home and to use as a home base. Indeed, at the 10th year anniversary celebration in March, Kim McNair, an undergraduate student and president of the Society of African American Culture said, “For me, [the AACC] serves as a home away from home.”

With as important an institutional structure as is the Cultural Center, we must always be looking for ways to strengthen the foundation, and further build on what has been accomplished. To do that we have to consider what we will do that is innovative so that we can have something new and better to contribute in the future. That is why an external review of the Cultural Center was undertaken by the Office of the Provost through the office of the Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs.

Having established a presence at NC State University, the next step is for the African American Cultural Center to become an influence on the campus. Each of the external reviewers said that this is a strong possibility that should be turned into a reality. Indeed, it is not only the external reviewers who have seen this possibility but our own campus constituencies have expressed the same belief.

All are aware and applaud the fact that our Cultural Center has done the work to be a permanent presence at NCSU. That being accomplished, the obvious next step is to have this Cultural Center become a force that influences the academic mission of the University.

Discussions of this next step were actually begun in June, 2000 through a retreat on African American Affairs conducted by the Office of the Provost.  At that retreat were African American senior faculty, African American college coordinators and the Deans of each of the colleges. Following the retreat came the external review in November, 2000.  Following the external review was a retreat in January, 2001 for the African American Cultural Center staff and Africana Studies faculty to discuss ways to develop a link between these entities. All these discussion groups have come to the same conclusion; that to move forward, the African American Cultural Center must be helped to develop a strong academic presence on the campus. Indeed, when African American undergraduate and graduate students met with the external reviewers, the students expressed this same point vigorously.

“Students... frequently articulated the view that the Center should play a much larger role in educating other cultural groups at the University about the African American cultural, historical, and social experience. Through such [academic] programming, students felt that the Center could be a focal point on campus for addressing such issues as cultural diversity and racism.”

External Reviewer A:

“The conversations with the students were most striking because these students, although supportive of their Center, were clearly aware of, and uncomfortable with, the lack of visibility and scholarly integrity of the Center. They discussed the need for joint programs with other parts of campus. They also believed the Center needed greater faculty support and greater interaction between the Center and both black and white faculty.”

External Reviewer C:

Knowing that the constituencies have all come to the same conclusion, the only question is how do we move forward with this agenda. The answer is that what must happen now is that the Cultural Center must be given the guidance and resources to develop the skills and strategies to draw the colleges into collaborations with the Cultural Center. What follows is a skeleton plan of action for revitalizing the links between the Cultural Center and the NCSU community.

Mission Revitalization

It is very striking that students argued for more academic/research component to be a part of the mission of the African American Cultural Center. Why would students who are committed to the Cultural Center believe this is necessary? Why would African American students not be satisfied with the Cultural Center as a social gathering place?

“...students expressed some frustration with the fact that few White student[s] took advantage of the educational features of the Center and that there was a ‘that’s not for us’ attitude toward the Center’s programs by White students.  Students did not feel that there was animosity or resentment toward the Center by White students but rather apathy and ignorance.”

External Reviewer B:

African American students want more from the Cultural Center for the obvious reason that in their everyday experiences at NCSU, students see the University’s currency of exchange is ideas about research. Students want the Cultural Center to connect to the “investment capital” of the campus so that they and their non-black colleagues look to the Cultural Center knowing that it is an active member of the university “stock exchange.”

From the external review and the retreat between the Cultural Center and Africana Studies, we found out that we have to refresh and renew the mission of the Cultural Center. Through a process of rekindling and redefinition, we will create a mission for the Cultural Center that links to the University as it currently operates, in order to have an influence on the academic, social, cultural experiences of all students. Such a mission will be consistent with the idea of the Cultural Center as a hub of academic and cultural activities that enhances the diversity environment of the campus.  Hence, the Cultural Center mission will be to be a unit where, like diversity on the campus, the mix of people is such that a debate of ideas is inescapable.

To accomplish this reinvigoration of the mission of the Cultural Center as a part of the diversity movement, we must look closely at the structures that hold up the major organizational components of the Center: administration, programming, and physical arrangement.

Administrative Revitalization

Responsibilities of the Director

“The concern of the staff with administrative details has contributed to an environment and perhaps an understanding of the Center’s mission that is primarily internally focused. That is [there seems to be a primary focus on] ...the nuts and bolts of running the Center to the neglect of strong academic and cultural programming, audience definition and development, outreach and engagement and long range planning. With the exception of the several historic programs that the Center sponsors in cooperation with other groups, there seems to be in general a lack of outreach and inclusion on the part of the Center of other programs and constituencies on campus. Ironically, African American constituencies of the Center seem to view outreach as an important role that the Center could play in the community.”

External Reviewer A:

Administrative Responsibilities of the Director: The Director of the African American Cultural Center is to enact a vision for the Center. The duties and responsibilities of the Director should be specified to give major emphasis to leading the Cultural Center in such a way as to:

1) Develop the Cultural Center into the unit the campus turns to for leadership in understanding culture and cultural dynamics and in doing cultural analysis.

2) Develop the Cultural Center into an operation that is inclusive by taking into consideration the many diversity interest groups on campus while maintaining its African American identity.

North Carolina State University is not what it used to be because the university community is now so diverse and is every day becoming more and more diverse. The Director of the African American Cultural Center will enact a vision that is consistent with the University’s approach to diversity so that the Cultural Center embraces a mix of people in order to create and nurture a debate of ideas about African American culture and culture in general. The idea is to have an African American Cultural Center that fully accommodates the diversity interests on the campus without assimilating those interests or being assimilated to those interests.

A job description for the Director with this template as a guide will be developed by the Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs in consultation with the Center’s Council of Advisors (see below).

Advisory Board

“The administration should appoint an internal review committee or working group to develop a clear, concise and forceful plan for enhancing the academic and cultural mission of the Center on the NCSU campus. This plan should be based on careful assessment of the needs that the Center can address on this particular campus...”

External Reviewer A:

Board of Advisors: In the past the Cultural Center has had a Council of Directors. For some time now, however, that advisory board has not functioned. A new advisory board will be commissioned, made up of faculty, staff and students. Immediate leadership for specifying the mission and membership of the new board will be handled by Dr. Rupert Nacoste, Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs, and Dr. Paul Biting, Associate Professor of Education, who in the past has served on the board of advisors.

“In many respects, the Center’s staff appears to define its role primarily in terms of administration and devotes an insufficient amount of time developing meaningful programmatic activities. That is, the staff seems to spend much of its time on such concerns as room reservations, the regulation of space use by student groups, and day-to-day operations of the facility in a rather mechanical way.”

External Reviewer A:

Room Scheduling: A number of actions will be taken to lift the burden on the Director imposed by the time spent on the administration of mundane tasks like scheduling rooms. Room scheduling for the African American Cultural Center will no longer be the responsibility of the Cultural Center but will be moved to the Office of the Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs. To make this shift in responsibility smooth and coherent, Vice Provost Rupert Nacoste, Associate Vice Chancellor Evelyn Reiman and Director M. Ilayu Moses will fashion a memorandum of understanding that specifies how this arrangement will work.

Gallery Use Policy: Administrative decisions about the use of the Cultural Center gallery space have been made without a formal, written policy. Here again there is a need to develop a policy. A use policy will be developed by the newly formed Cultural Center Board of Advisors. That use policy will be guided by the philosophy that seeks to make the Gallery a place that encourages a debate of ideas about African, African-American, and Pan-African art and the relationship of these art forms to the art of other groups.

Programming Revitalization

“At present the Center seems to lack programmatic direction and focus. The absence of direction and focus seems to be evident both among the staff and its constituencies.”

External Reviewer A:

“The Center should emphasize scholarly and intellectual programs that will introduce students and faculty, as well as the non-university community, to the richness of African-American history and culture.”

External Reviewer C:

There is general agreement that there needs to be more substantial programming coming out of the Cultural Center. Such programming should be systematically designed with less emphasis on the programming coming from student organizations’ housed in the Center. Two steps will be taken immediately in the interest of boosting programming.

First, an agreement between the Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, the Africana Studies program, and the Office of the Vice Provost for Diversity and African American Affairs will bring in a post-doctoral scholar to work in the African American Cultural Center for academic year 2001-2002. In the Cultural Center, this scholar will work with the Heritage Society to revitalize and expand the research component of the group. Part of that duty will entail recruitment of students from the colleges and organizing a focused conference based on the year of work done with the group. This experiment will give us an opportunity to assess the role that visiting scholars might play in the African American Cultural Center.

Second, a group of NCSU scholars will be organized to begin some discussions on research on community social change. Here the idea is to start to develop a research discussion group with the aim of creating an opportunity for faculty and students to begin collaborations that will lead to a forum for encouraging research on issues important to the local African American community. This activity is expected to bring students into the Cultural Center in a way that connects them to the research enterprise of the university that is uniquely connected to issues that they will find personally relevant. Dr. Craig Brookins, Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of Africana Studies, has agreed to take the lead for this activity.

Physical Reorganization

Another issue that emerged during our visit had to do with the building in which the African American Cultural Center is housed. In fact, the housing of the Center constituted something of a theme in many of the conversations. The concern with the building arises from the awkwardness created by its existence as part of a larger structure/Center and its placement on three floors without connection.

External Reviewer A

Each of the reviewers commented on the negative impact of the current physical arrangement of the African American Cultural Center. One possible solution is to develop a one-floor plan for the Cultural Center. This might be accomplished by moving the components of the Cultural Center that are on the third floor down to the second floor, essentially exchanging spaces with second floor units such as Student Government. No doubt this will have to be carefully studied.

The proposal here is to bring together those individuals responsible for the units that would be affected to begin a dialogue about the feasibility of a one-floor plan for the Cultural Center. Evelyn Reiman, Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, who has oversight for Talley and Witherspoon Student Centers, in principle, has agreed to exploring the one-floor plan idea and to being a part of a feasibility study group. Aside from Dr. Moses and Dr. Nacoste, others who will be called on to be involved would be:

• Larry Campbell, Assistant Director, University Student Center
• Paul Cousins, Director, Office of Student Conduct
• Donald Patty, Director, Business & Planning, Talley Student Center Administration
• Daryl Willie, Student Body President
• Michael Anthony, Student Senate President
• Paul Biting, Associate Professor and Cultural Center Board of Advisors
• Charles Joyner, Professor, College of Design

Goal of the Proposal

“Institution building is what history is all about.” --Mamphela Ramphele, Vice Chancellor, University of Cape Town, South Africa

The goal of this proposal is to set in motion actions to build the African American Cultural Center into the academic fabric of North Carolina State University. The idea is to closely link the Cultural Center to the academic mission of the University by establishing a substantive rapport between the Cultural Center and the academic units of the University. Indeed, the point is no less than to have the Cultural Center function to bind up the social fabric of the University and in so doing make the Cultural Center an essential part of the North Carolina State University of the 21st Century.

Without question, taking actions with this goal as the target will have a positive influence on the intellectual landscape of North Carolina State University. Through a connection to all of the colleges, the exploration of culture and cultural dynamics will touch and have the potential to influence all students, so that no student leaves this university unaware of the meaning and importance of cultural diversity. And that link will likewise attract and empower African American students in a new way. Students will be attracted to the Cultural Center because it is a visibly active participant in the life of the campus. The empowerment will come through a new participation in the intellectual life of the campus through the academic exploration of culture and cultural dynamics with the African American Cultural Center as the hub of this activity.

Where Do We Go from Here?
(Source: Nubian Message, December 9, 2000)

“The black American experience is a subject that is supremely American. It is the history of a centuries-long war in which one group of people strove for justice, for a fair share. Relegating black history to an elective or a ghetto or a moment in the past holds us all back. Black history is a torch that can lead us out from the darkness.” -- Walter Mosley 

Ideas represent.

Ideas you see, are an attempt to represent a pattern of reality or proposed reality. So ideas cannot simply be dismissed. Given that they represent, ideas can be evaluated against standards of better reality, worse reality or no change in reality. That is why ideas do not simply go away when we do not want to deal with the pattern of potential reality the idea brings to light.

Ideas are resilient. Sure, you can attack the person who offers an idea, but the idea remains. Yes, you can question whether the person offering the idea should have been the one put in the leadership position, but the idea remains. And history shows that you can even kill the person who offers the idea, but the idea remains, lingering like a ghost; haunting. Ideas, you must understand, have a life of their own. That is the power of ideas.

For example, in my work as a scholar of affirmative action, some tried to discredit the psychological theory, the ideas I put forward to explain people’s reactions to affirmative action. Yet, because I continued to publish papers that provided support for them, the ideas I developed have had influence. Although the story is not over, writing in their recent book, “Affirmative Action: A Psychological Perspective,” the authors say,

“The [psychological] theory which may hold the most promise as a guide to affirmative action research is that offered by Nacoste... Not only would Nacoste’s theory appear to hold great promise in terms of directing future research... Nacoste’s work extends beyond simple description of reactions to affirmative action into the realm of explanation.”

Knowing that ideas are resilient in this way, when ideas are being discussed we should all be suspicious of attacks that focus on the person who has offered an idea. Attacks on the person who brings the idea are always an attempt to distract from the real issues. An idea is an idea and it must be evaluated by the reality it represents.

Ideas not only represent, they travel well; ideas are mobile. Ghandi’s idea of a nonviolent strategy of rebellion found its way from the other side of the world to Martin Luther King Jr. With that in mind I thought it might be useful for us to think about an idea that is being talked about by African American cultural observers who do not happen to be local. World renowned novelists Walter Mosley and Toni Morrison have both put forth the idea that in order to understand American culture we must engage in an open analysis of the influence of African Americans on American identity.

The idea that Mosley and Morrison are discussing seems to be one answer to the question, what is the value of understanding the African American presence in America? For local reasons I think we should think of the question as “What is the point of having an African American Cultural Center?”

I have offered a set of ideas about how to move the African American Cultural Center forward to avoid stagnation, to interact with the academic mission of the university. My proposal is based on the idea that,

“Through a connection [of the Cultural Center] to all of the colleges, the exploration of culture and cultural dynamics will touch and have the potential to influence all students, so that no student leaves this university unaware of the meaning and importance of cultural diversity. And that link will likewise attract and empower African American students in a new way.”

Relevant to this point, both Morrison and Mosley use an analysis of the African American presence in America as a springboard for a radical analysis of American culture. Without denying the existence of racism and its power, both Mosley and Morrison deliberately decide not to think from the weak position of worrying about what racism is doing or might do to black people. Rather they both decide to think from the strong position that says that the very presence and incomparable survival of black people in America is the real source for understanding the strengths and weaknesses of American society.

In his short (114 page) book titled “Workin’ the Chain Gang: Shaking Off the Dead Hand of History,” Mosley says

“The oppression of racism is a palpable part of life in America, so much so that the broader problems facing us today might have their solutions in understanding the opposition that African Americans have put up against the system that has kept us down.”

Mosley offers us the idea that

“The black American experience is the history of America. Our struggle to survive in the face of blinding hatred is in part a key to understanding how the chains forged in the modern world might be slipped and avoided in the future.

The black race has learned, the hard way, what white Americans are only just beginning to understand: not to believe the promises of politicians and corporate leaders.”

Mr. Mosley shows us what he means with the compelling example of the American dissatisfaction with Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). He says,

“Black American history... is American history. There is an echo of Jim Crow in the HMO; people shunted aside, denied access, and allowed to suffer with no real democratic recourse.”

That is why the core of Mr. Mosley’s idea is that black American history can be used to shine a light on the contemporary circumstances of all Americans.

“Black history is a torch that can lead us out from the darkness. In order to find the way, we have to work together and follow one another’s strengths.”

In her short book (91 pages), “Playing in the Dark,” Nobel Prize winner Toni Morrison states her belief that it is important to begin “...an investigation into the ways in which a nonwhite, Africanlike... presence or persona was constructed in the United States...” But Morrison’s goal is as broad as that of Walter Mosley’s in that Morrison sees her work as giving us a way to understand how the Africanist presence has influenced the psychology of all American culture. “What I propose...” Morrison writes,

“...is to examine the impact of notions of racial hierarchy, racial exclusion, and racial vulnerability and availability on nonblacks who held, resisted, explored or altered those notions. The scholarship that looks into the mind, imagination, and behavior of slaves is invaluable. But equally valuable is a serious intellectual effort to see what racial ideology does to the mind, imagination, and behavior of masters.”

As her example, Morrison’s compelling claim is that the very concept of freedom in America was, and is, dependent on the Africanist presence. Morrison says, “The concept of freedom did not emerge in a vacuum. Nothing highlighted freedom -- if it did not in fact create it -- like slavery.”

To my mind, as a social psychologist, this is the right focus; a focus on the relationship that looks at the basis on which both parties in the relationship intersect and interact with and influence each other. That is the context that Morrison uses to set up an agenda for exploring the defining impact of the Africanist presence on American identity.  And that is the kind of approach that I believe we must take in setting the agenda for our African American Cultural Center. That agenda, I believe, must rest on a foundation that acknowledges that the Africanist presence has always existed in a relationship with the larger society and has and continues to be the major influence on the culture of that larger society.

If we were to incorporate these ideas into an agenda for our Cultural Center, we would develop a Cultural Center that helped all our students. African American students would gain even more psychological strength, as they would learn the many dimensions of influence of the African American presence on American culture. For the first time on this campus, you would learn that African American history has the potential to help all Americans understand the social system that is America. And white students would be relieved of their mis-education by learning the many ways that being white has always depended on the powerful presence of blacks, thus teaching them the true essence of American culture.

To successfully put that agenda in motion would make plain the many reasons that we, African Americans, have nothing to fear about having a Cultural Center that interacts with the whole campus. We are the core element of American identity. One should never fear sharing one’s self. If you fear sharing yourself, that means that you believe you have some flaw that you must hide.

To move past the shackles of a dead history, that is a belief, an idea, representation of reality, to be analyzed closely and carefully.

Provost's Page  |  NCSU Calendar  |  NCSU Directory  |  Campus Map  |  Ask NC State  |  Help  |  Search

Updated on 9/27/02 by EMS