In the event you do want to check this out, here's the sequence:
1. The first e-mail is my withdrawal sent today (10/28/09);
2. The second e-mail is a response to e-mail #3, which was never responded to by the director of the program; and,
3. The third e-mail, which was the one that started it all.
There have been two other e-mails sent by the university, but I wont bore you with them. Though I will say that neither spoke to my concerns.
__________________________________________
EMAIL #1
The Powers that Be,
I have not responded to correspondence from St. Edward’s University in the past month as I have been at a loss for words, energy and hope. On the ironic or serendipitous date of September 16th (google might be in order), I responded to an e-mail from Tom Sechrest dated a week before. The fact that I still wake up every morning and immediately check my e-mail to see if there is a response is unhealthy and self-sabotaging for me, and an embarrassment for St. Edward’s University.
At this point, the disillusion and disappointment in St. Edward’s University is only becoming deeper. I am clear that St. Edward’s University is not an institution with the capacity to act on a recognition that people of color hold histories and experiences that are not our deficits, but our and the university’s greatest assets. What is more, I am not convinced that St. Edward’s University has the capacity to even recognize these assets, let alone build on them in its classrooms.
I have spent hours upon hours meditating, speaking with colleagues across the country trying to find reasons to continue in this program, particularly upon the dismissal of two Black women in MSOLE. I am uninterested in the reasons behind these actions, but I am interested in the rationale that allows anyone on that campus to sleep at night knowing well that people of color (WOMEN of color) have, yet again, been failed. I am scraping what little faith I have left to believe that anyone on that campus even realizes the impact that these actions has had and the reverberations on people of color like myself.
I am angry. Most of all, I am heartbroken. I came into this program full of hope and dreams that I would cross the stage on graduation day being a stronger, informed, capable leader. I believed that this program would be the catalyst for such leadership development. Today, I see that I have become the leader that I am in spite of the program.
The tone in this e-mail is drastically harsher than that of the e-mail that continues to await response. Indeed, my spirit is drastically harsher in light of the silence, and the communication that only seems to guard the institution under its manufactured bureaucracy. I do not hold hope for self reflection for this program or St. Edward’s University. For to believe in such a fantasy would mean that the institution itself would come to a complete standstill in utter dismay upon realizing how far it stands from its allusions to diversity, multiculturalism or, perhaps in a distant future, cultural responsibility. Might I remind you that only one person of color, out of five in a cohort of 11, graduated on schedule.
As a senior administrator of a national education policy organization I understand bureaucracy and I understand when and how it can be used to protect an institution that has failed to self-reflect or, at a bare minimum, listen and respond. Given the context of our communications, the experiences and realities in this program, and the blatant ignoring of the concerns articulated by me, a queer person of color, I will say that I, too, have been failed. To awake this morning and see that a paper trail has begun, is only an added layer to insult and a deepening of a growing wound (here I speak of Natalia Quintanilla’s e-mail conveying a message from Tom Sechrest about my status and options).
Upon witnessing the dismissal of a communication that took 7 sleepless days to write, I could only find recourse in withdrawing from classes this semester. Putting aside my eurocentric Baptist upbringing of modesty, I am well aware of my contributions to this program. I find it interesting that in the e-mail dated September 9, 2009, there is mention to the progress made by my peers; know that I will not be measured against anyone in this program. I am interested, however, in seeing how any of my peers were measured against my commitment and capacity to bring the type of race, class and gender analysis I brought to every class session, in spite of the resistance of instructors who did not see the relevance of a working class-raised colored voice within their non-people of color paradigm.
I sat through sessions where people developed capstone ideas that focused on such mediocre themes as uncovering why social workers do not access the resources they have to support their clients. There is no mystery behind the classism, sexism and racism that allows social workers to fail at their jobs in such ways. Still, this project was considered worthy in a leadership development and ethics program. All while I was sternly corrected in thinking that my project, an analysis of the development of a simultaneous collective leadership model by a statewide queer people of color organization (the only statewide queer people of color organization in the country), was as cutting edge and innovative as I was claiming. Having nothing left to lose but the loss I already bear, I will counter such an analysis in saying that in this context, in this movement, in this day, and by these bodies, such a model was the first of its kind in the Austin community.
To continue to be ignored in light of the contributions I have brought to this program is inexcusable. At this point, I am the one that must be convinced that the knowledge, history, experiences and cultural capital that I carry should be associated with an institution that managed to see a queer person of color invest thousands of dollars and sit through 8 years of classrooms with absolutely zero people of color teaching him. St. Edward’s University can confer the credibility of a degree. Yet, I, too, hold the power to confer the credibility of my name, the knowledge of those who birthed me, and the wisdom of generations to follow. St. Edward’s University must work just as hard I as do, in fact harder given its legacies, to earn the privilege of listing people of color in its troubled history.
While my relationship with St. Edward’s University has been anything but reciprocally respectful, I continue to insist that I be treated respectfully. I will no longer be told by a non-person of color instructor that I am “very intelligent and articulate” and remain silent. I demand that people of color be respected, honored and valued for who we are and what we bring to your classrooms. We are all very intelligent and articulate. To be where we are today given the white supremacist context we have been forced to survive for centuries, it would be unwise to ever compare our intelligence and articulation capacity with that of non-people of color.
Up to now, I have been unsure as to what steps to take, hence my hesitance to respond. I decided to withdraw from this semester so as to protect myself from further insult at a time when I have little strength left to counter with. And to protect the institution from taking yet another unethical step in accepting my hard-earned money in exchange for its disingenuosity. Given our histories, I know better than to set myself up with expectations to a response to this e-mail. However, should I, my contributions and the thousands I have invested, be worthy of a response, I ask that it not be to engage in discourses of how St. Edward’s University is in fact an institution that honors people of color (excuse me, minorities), as I have witnessed enough and currently embody enough to know otherwise.
Your color-blind approach and its resulting effects harkens MSOLE and St. Edward’s University back to americanization programs blind to the essence of people of color at best, and as detriments in need of extraction at worst. I will continue to develop the project I set out to do. I will continue to center my work within a critical race framework and speak to the institutional barriers, indeed the structural racism, that stands in the way of people of color developing our leadership. Having witnessed what happened to Black women in this program, my thesis shall set out to speak to how Black girls are not born into the societal and public structures that bless them as inherent leaders just as white boys are. St. Edward’s University, MSOLE and the Masters of Liberal Arts programs shall be the context for the development of my work.
It is my hope, for the sake of people of color on that campus, that no other person of color be subjected to an all non-people of color faculty as I have been. I am not asking for St. Edward’s University to engage in affirmative action practices, for if its past is any indication, this would not be sufficient or plausible (note the identities of the recipients of this e-mail, specifically those of you in positions of leadership and power in the university, and remember this as you go to bed tonight). I am asking, in fact demanding that St. Edward’s University hold itself to a higher standard of ethics and justice and refuse to accept tuition from people of color until it has begun to honor the hearts and minds of those investing thousands into your infrastructure.
Do not call on me or look to the people of color on your campus to carry the weight of your inability to honor people of color and our contributions. Just as Black women of the Combahee River Collective stated that “eliminating racism in the white women’s movement is by definition work for white women to do,” it is also your responsibility to do your work to live and embody a higher standard. However, also as stated by these Black women, I too, “will continue to speak to and demand accountability on this issue.”
Perhaps with time, healing and the slow beginnings of transformation of MSOLE and St. Edward’s University, I might be able to return and attribute my work to the body of capstones housed on your campus. Today, in my name, in the name of the women of color you failed, and the other people of color you have and will continue to disappoint, I withdraw my name from your roster.
For now, rather than attempting to communicate with me, I ask that you invest your energy in self-reflection and put aside any attempts to silence me or other people of color by personalizing any of this to protect yourself. The critique I present will not be debated between us given that as non-people of color it is not acceptable for you to disagree. However, it is acceptable, and in fact necessary that you dig deep within the institution, its programs, the body of your faculty, and your own frameworks and ask why you have not been developing this critique on your own.
Broken,
Lorenzo Herrera y Lozano
SEU ID: 345518
__________________________________________
EMAIL #2
On 9/16/09 8:16 AM, "Lorenzo Herrera y Lozano"
The tone in this and previous e-mails dating back to last summer, are extremely disheartening. I stalled in responding to this e-mail so as to not react only on emotion. While I appreciate being held accountable, the tone in these e-mails seems to contradict what I have learned in the program in terms of how we work with the people we lead. I understand that you might be disappointed or frustrated in my progress or lack thereof, but conveying it in this manner is not an approach I appreciate, and certainly not an approach I learned was effective in the MSOLE program. I will be held accountable, but not be disrespected. This approach might work for others; it certainly does not, has not and will not work for me.
I have spent the last two years assessing my place in this program, where my life and career have taken me, and where I hope to move next. This e-mail triggered a series of internal dialogues and several conversations with colleagues in the academy and in my field. I have attempted to take a step back and approach this situation, including my continuation in the program, as pragmatically as possible. Given that my life’s work is rooted in the people I come from, however, emotions are central to making any major decision. I have decided to honor these traditions and my own ways of knowing and being as I move forward. With this, having had some time to think and meditate, I offer the following response:
I did not enter this program with the intention of convincing anyone of anything; I will not start now. “Convince me otherwise” is a hugely problematic and loaded statement given the power and race dynamics between us. For centuries, people of color have had to convince others of our worth, our ability to perform, and, too often, our right to be. I am not suggesting that you are asking me to do any of these, but to “convince” in my world means much more than what you might have intended it to mean. In fact, intention might be the least significant factor when looking at the identities and power we both carry. In the spirit of speaking across cultural borders, this must be said.
I entered this program with the intention of gaining new skills, developing a better analysis around leadership and learn ways to support the leadership development of people of color. I began the program full of excitement and anticipating the opportunities to learn, engage, share and explore the various leadership theories and practices that exist. I hoped to find my own leadership.
As a young queer person of color I have dedicated my life to working with people of color who are trying to survive in a country ideologically built and functioning on white supremacy, and literally built on stolen land and with stolen hands. In this work, I noticed early on that most of us are ill prepared to take on the leadership roles we now find ourselves in. This is not to say that we are not committed, brilliant and skilled, but that we lack the access to public and social institutions that help develop our leadership.
In this country, people of color are not born into leadership, nor is it expected that we one day lead. To the contrary, our public education system’s “factory model” intends to keep us out of the realm of leadership, while maintaining a base of workers who do as we are told and leave the thinking to the “naturally” born leaders. For an example of the race- and racist-ridden analysis on leadership in this country, I need only look at the turmoil around President Obama’s recent speeches on education and health care reform. The disgust with which critics speak of the President reveals their outrage at the audacity of a Black man who dares sleep in a house (involuntarily) built by his ancestors for their white ancestors.
From the eugenics movement framing Black and Brown children as genetically deficient, to more recent notions of cultural deficiencies that fuel our public education system today, it is clear that we were not meant to lead. Children of color are not entering classroom environments that support their development as leaders in ways that builds on the knowing and being of their communities. Instead, they are subjected to boot strap mythologies and receive the wrath of disappointment from the institutions that should be preparing them, yet consistently, historically and intentionally continue to fail in doing so.
I believe I achieved the first two goals I set out to accomplish while in this program. I read the theory on leadership, engaged with classmates and instructors on these theories and attempted to find ways to incorporate these ideas into practice. However, the third goal was not achieved.
Rather than learning about how people of color lead, what mistakes we have made and what lessons we have learned, I sat in classrooms led only by non-people of color; I read texts by non-people of color about non-people of color; heard from guest speakers who were all non-people of color; and now mourn the fact that from the five people of color in a cohort of 11, only one graduated on time. Not only did I starve for the representation of people of color, I also sat through several occasions where fellow classmates (people of color) were dismissed, had their comments chuckled at or given a facial expression from instructors conveying how irrational these students’ responses were. Multiculturalism means nothing if our ways of knowing and being are not engaged in the classroom, however irrational our experiences and our articulation of them might be.
Though this is not a communication regarding another graduate program, I will say that in retrospect I find it discouraging and troubling that I spent the last eight years of my life in the Masters of Liberal Arts and MSOLE programs at St. Edward’s University, without seeing one person of color in front of the classroom. I mention this as the university itself must look at this experience and contrast it with its language and pamphlets on diversity, and any allusions to inclusivity. After eight years, two graduate programs, thousands of dollars spent and not one person of color at the head of the classroom, it is surprising that I have any credibility left with my own colleagues (people of color and not). Having sat through mind numbing class sessions with ill-prepared and pedagogically unsound instructors, I will not accept skills and experience as an excuse for not having at least the token person of color teaching a class.
In numerous occasions instructors failed to recognize the people of color in the room and dismissed students each time one of us dared point to the race dynamics in our class. The most troubling of these incidents being when an instructor attempted to teach us about negotiating tensions among groups. A Black woman in the class noted how all the people of color were sitting on one side of the room, while the non-people of color sat on the other. The instructor, unable to address the situation, simply put an end to the exercise and left us with no skills and no guidance. The lesson learned is that effective leaders walk away from difficult moments (at least those related to race) and leave the group to navigate these tensions on their own. The dynamics among the cohort were never the same after this class.
It is unclear to me why the texts read in the program were typically by non-people of color (mostly men) and about non-people of color. The exceptions were found in optional readings and in reading about global organizations; one would be hard-pressed to talk about global organizations without talking about people of color, the same should apply to this country. Still, if no leadership-related literature were available from and about people of color, it would have been helpful to recognize this and explore this reality. Instead, the people of color in the program were left to imagine leadership in our bodies by seeing how it manifests in foreign bodies. On the other hand, the non-people of color in the program who are or will be leading people of color lacked the opportunity to witness what leadership in people of color might look like, therefore possibly debilitating their capacity to effectively lead in a vastly diverse society. People of color leaders have done great things in this country, and we need not travel to other countries to find these examples, nor do we need to look to Oprah as an (optional) example as she has long been established as an exception, not the rule.
After two occasions I attended sessions with guest speakers cynically and full of discontent. I was discouraged by the fact that I expected the speaker to be a non-person of color and I expected to hear some story about how they once knew a Black person (i.e. Barbara Jordan). My expectations were consistently met, and, adding insult to an already insulting experience, the speaker would look at the Black people in the room while sharing their Black friend/colleague story. These are the outrageous stories used during poorly constructed cultural sensitivity role plays, not something I expect to see in an institution of higher learning, much less in the 21st century.
As for the demographic make-up of our cohort, I was thrilled on the first day of class when I saw that nearly half the room was made-up of people of color. While I appreciated my non-people of color classmates, including my queer peers, I was elated to know that I would be walking this path and making sense of it along with other people of color. Given the race dynamics in this country and the challenges I had experienced and witnessed among other people of color, this demographic make-up was a particularly vital and exciting aspect of the program. It took a few classes, however, before the challenges began surfacing.
It all started with a Black woman in the program being told by a professor that she did not appear ready for graduate school. We all entered the program unsure as to what the program would demand from us and how well equipped we would be to meet these demands. However, whether a student is prepared to be in graduate school or not, is something that I hope would be grappled with during the admissions process; certainly before accepting several thousands in tuition from her. Assuming the admission process was progressive, however, and that we were all being given a chance to stand up to the challenge of graduate school, I would have hoped to see this progressive approach followed-through with the proper supports to ensure we succeeded. Outside of what already exists for other students, as well as public admonishment, no other supports were provided.
At a bare minimum, our experiences could have been reflected in the curriculum, though this would not be an added support, but a basic tenant for the program; this did not happen. Instead, I am left wondering why she would be admitted in the first place, if not for demographic purposes. Obviously, I believe the contrary to be true, however, given the university’s inability to truly engage people of color and build off what we have to contribute, I cannot say I am convinced.
It is clear that life circumstances took place and choices were made. It might be possible that the fact that only one of the five people of color in a cohort of 11 graduated on time is more about what was happening in people’s lives and the choices we made in our respective contexts. Still, the demographic disparities must raise huge flags around what might or might not be working and what the program’s (and university’s) relationship to people of color is. This is not an optional exercise, rather something that the institution must hold itself accountable to if it genuinely intends to one day live up to its multicultural narratives. After eight years, I am clear that this goal has not been achieved.
I mention all of the above, not as a gratuitous critique or a pointless banter within which I can hide my shortcomings. I am and have been consistently aware of where I have failed to meet the expectations I agreed to. My paths in this program, in the MLA program and in a concurrent graduate program I am attending at San José State University, have shown how I do have the capacity to perform within graduate school. Therefore, the idea that I am not performing simply for the sake of not performing would hardly apply.
Rather than raise these points to aimlessly criticize, I raise them, as these are areas I have recognized as standing in the way of my own development and inspiration to move further. While I had intended to focus my Capstone Project on the leadership development of people of color, I have come to realize that this is not possible without first looking at the institutional barriers that stand in the way of our leadership development, and therefore make it necessary for us to have access to spaces where we might thrive. I mentioned earlier in this e-mail that the very institutions we are supposed to rely on to build our leadership have failed to do so. What is more, these institutions have failed us by design, not by accident.
The role of people of color in this country was marked in its inception. The post-race narratives that abound during this Obama era have only exacerbated the significance of race in our every day lives. The outburst of fear and anger against seeing a Black man in the White House and a Brown woman as Supreme Court Justice, are but surface examples of how white supremacy permeates our institutions and is perpetuated by both the outright defense of racism and the collusion that comes from not addressing it. Race neutrality is not possible in the hyper-raced world we live in.
Upon coming to this realization, I tossed aside the work I had been doing as I realized it served no purpose other than to perpetuate the centuries-old farce that there is something inherently wrong with us. The truth is, we have never experienced a level playing field. In fact, most of us have never seen the field to begin with. What is more, I am not convinced that the field is conducive to people of color thriving; another field might be necessary. However, the cost for accessing spaces we were not intended to be in has required that we denounce, resign and often ridicule the very essence of who we are and where our people come from.
In addition, we must sit back and kindly accept faux compliments like the one I received this summer from an instructor, in a memo, stating that I am “very intelligent and articulate.” I wonder if the former Nike exec in the class received the same type of feedback, or if such feedback only applies to people of color when coming from non-people of color. In essence, this is as offensive as telling a Black man he’s well spoken. This was considered ridiculous decades ago, I am baffled as to why I am hearing it today. In a graduate program where I am expected to perform as an adult and a professional, I expect to be treated as such at all points in the process. Working with very intelligent and articulate people of color should not be an anomaly, rather a norm that does not stand out as worthy of mention in a feedback memo.
Being in an Ethics program, I cannot fathom moving forward with this project if not first rooting my work within a critical race analysis. The intent of my work is not to contribute to a body of knowledge that only perpetuates the dysfunctional and race-unconscious leadership models that already exist. Instead, I am interested in contributing by looking at how history, underlying ideologies and public and social institutions are foundational impediments for people of color to thrive and engage in rewarding leadership opportunities.
In this hyper-raced society, it is critical that people of color take reign of the national dialogue on race and put an end to non-people of color defining for us what race and racism means. It is not acceptable that a people who have historically benefited from racism now claim the right to define it. It has never been acceptable to ignore the fact the “founding fathers” of this country owned and performed commercial transactions with humans they deemed inferior, massacred thousands as the good lord blessed them to do, and occupied the land we currently live on. The legacies of slavery, genocide, rape and thievery that are the cornerstone of this country continue to fuel the pervasive narratives and actions of race in ever-insidious ways.
I am not interested in level playing fields or re-writing history by ignoring it. I am interested in the leadership development of people of color that honors our collective truths and recognizes the need and urgency for a racially just approach to leadership development. This will be the foundation of my project.
In the end, I am left with deciding what steps to take as I move forward. As I mentioned previously, I have been in conversations with over a dozen strong and cutting-edge leaders of color across the country and parts of Latin America. In these conversations it has become evident that we continue to urgently need strong, skilled and prepared leaders of color. In fact, the urgency has increased as issues pertaining to the lives and wellbeing of our communities are at stake and being decided by a corrupt media, misinformed policy makers and a cloud of hatred toward people of color.
I still plan on attending the Leadership & Strategy course this fall. It was also my intent to finalize the capstone and graduate this semester. However, given all that I have discussed in this e-mail, I believe the permeations are far too deep to pass over in the name of a deadline. I am committed to presenting a document that does far more than meet a requirement, or contribute to a body of work that has historically and unapologetically excluded us. Instead, I am interested in presenting a document that honors the brilliance, the legacies and the historical conditions that communities of color have experienced, survived and learned to thrive in as an act of resistance.
I have questions around how well my work will fit within the body of work developed in this program. It would have not been possible for me to uphold my ethical principles and the accountability I owe to my communities, had I not centered myself in the truth I experience. This has not been a healthy experience for me and this program has often felt unsafe. Still, I committed to finishing this program and intend to do so, as long as my values are not compromised and my voice is not silenced in the process.
My proposal, then, is to take this semester as an opportunity to work with Julia Curry-Rodríguez, Ph.D., who is a professor in Chicana/o Studies at San José University, Executive Director of the National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies, and a leading scholar on critical race theory, to develop a deeper analysis and root this project in critical race theory. The literature review would be constructed within this context and with this purpose. The engagement of established and emerging leaders of color would then take place during the early part of 2010. I would certainly like to engage in dialogue throughout this process and establish a mutually agreeable timeline to do so. The goal for completion would then be set to mid-Spring, in time for the following graduation.
I offer this communication as the foundation for my thinking. While my emotions run throughout this e-mail, I hope I also convey the reasons why. People of color are experiencing violence today; this is not a thing of the past. Black men continue to be shot in the back in Oakland and Austin. Children of undocumented immigrants are being left to die in their families’ homes out of fear of the repercussions from calling for an ambulance. Over 70% of youth of color are dropping out of high schools in Los Angeles. Our children are being trained and aggressively marketed toward fueling the prison and military systems. To recognize these truths and not have emotion would mean that I have ceased to serve a purpose, for I would already be dead inside.
It is my hope that we can come to an agreement about how to move forward. I decided to write rather than call as I feared that in my emotions I would neglect to thoroughly convey my thoughts.
In hope for my community,
Lorenzo Herrera y Lozano
__________________________________________
EMAIL #3
On 9/9/09 12:27 PM, "Dr. Tom Sechrest, MSOLE Director"
Time is of the essence. I was hoping that you would have already been proactive in submitting some sort of progress report. All others have done so long ago.
At this point I have to presume that you are not making progress and will not be registering for MSLE 6311 in a few weeks.
Convince me otherwise.
Dr. Tom Sechrest
Director
Master of Science in Organizational Leadership and Ethics Program
School of Management and Business
Faculty Advisor, Sigma Alpha Pi-The National Society of Leadership and Success
I'm a Hilltop Mentor!
St. Edward's University
3001 South Congress Avenue CMB 1049
Trustee Hall Room 332
Austin TX 78704 USA
