CSE Diversity & Climate Community Gathering — April 5, 2021

On April 5th, 2021, the Computer Science and Engineering Division hosted a Community Gathering to discuss concerns and feedback from the community. (Notes on related events are available.)

All were welcome. The Community Gathering focused on issues related to Anti-Asian Racism. The primary goal of the Town Hall was to hear community concerns and suggestions.

The Community Gathering was conducted via online teleconferencing, lasted for 60 minutes, and involved 25 participants.

This report chronicles my personal recollection of the events and should not be considered the official department position. Questions, responses and discussions are paraphrased and any mentions of specific individuals, beyond the panelists, have been elided.

Context

On March 30th, 2021, a collection of student groups and individual faculty sent a message to the CSE community entitled Anti-Asian Racism: Context, Gathering, and Hope. The message expressed outrage at recent instances of violence and anti-Asian racism, introduced this Community Gathering, provided historical context, and ended with an expression of hope an solidarity.

A copy of the message is available.

Discussion Points

The majority of the Community Gathering involved hearing and discussing points raised by community members. Discussion points included those referenced in the original message, those posed or voted on via an anonymous question-and-answer application, and those raised directly during the discussion. In general, participants were prompted to consider "How can CSE help?" and "What are you experiencing?".

The discussion points below are presented in rough descending order of votes in the anonymous application, but the discussion was fairly free-form.

• We should have more language appreciation events (e.g., practicing non-English phrases for English speakers, low-stress English practice, etc.) and more social events (e.g., gatherings, movie nights, cultural events, etc.) to bring people together. There was a consideration that CSE should feel more like a "home away from home" or should provide a sense of home: since many students cannot really go back home directly, it is important to feel included. It was suggested that ECE had some well-received events before COVID (e.g., celebrations of the Lunar New Year) from which CSE could learn. There was support for the notion of hosting multiple events together, instead of isolating particular demographics or cultures separately. Particular suggestions (e.g., having a hotpot social event after COVID) were imagined fondly, with a general notion that in-person events featuring free food and held CSE-wide would be the most useful in helping new students get to know people outside the lab.


• We should have more explanations of policies relevant to Asian, Asian American and international students (e.g., in-person requirements, residency, visa issues, etc.). There was a discussion that many international Ph.D. students are here on a one-year Visa which is quite inconvenient (but is beyond CSE's control). Some encouraged CSE to publicly show support for students who cannot be here physically. Students requested "what if?" guidance (e.g., "What if my Visa is revoked?"). There was an acknowledgment that administrations dislike hypotheticals and that each case may be different, but also an acknowledgment that "students live in fear" of such situations and that silence is not helping. The particular example of thousands of Chinese students being expelled or having Visas revoked because their undergraduate institutions were deemed to have "close relations" with the Chinese army was brought up. This fear is very tangible and has become part of the daily life for many international grad students, with implications for course attendance, conference travel, and subsequent employment. More than zero students anonymously confirmed that they felt they had had their Visa status threatened, even informally, by an advisor, and there was a general consensus that CSE should state more explicitly that such behavior is prohibited. Regarding remote education, students requested more online recordings for courses and encouraged professors to use tablets and avoid whiteboard.


• The department should have more proactive ways of checking in on students. There was a discussion that CSE should follow the LSA undergraduate advising model for reaching out, which notably includes repeated interactions. There was a perception that one needs to establish a trusting relationship via repeated check-ins, and that students will talk about things when they feel comfortable. At the graduate level, there was discussion about the relative merits of speaking with one's research advisor vs. speaking with staff. On the one hand, conversations between students and advisors of different backgrounds were viewed as particularly relevant. On the other hand, staff independence was viewed as important for feeling safe to discuss some issues. There was an acknowledgement of the efforts to reach out to graduate students, but a desire for more or frequent check-ins.


• Can we ask instructors not to mention specific countries when they want to use political events in their lecture (e.g., cyber attacks)? It is uncomfortable for students coming from those countries. There was a general consensus that we should avoid demonizing groups in examples. There was a general acknowledgement that it makes sense to talk about well-known, undisputed facts (e.g., the Chinese government employs censorship) but that rumors (e.g., some say this attack came from country XYZ) should be avoided, and that professors should avoid talking about such situations with an obvious political agenda. However, it was suggested that certain research areas (e.g., computer security) might have strong opinions about how such topics should be discussed. A point was made that faculty members should proactively examine their attitude toward having large contingents of students from specific countries and consciously work toward being more welcoming and inclusive, instead of considering a particular population of our student body to be burdensome.


• People might not know if they are being discriminated against. How can we identify discrimination? An example of how Housing or Maintenance might respond to requests by different people was considered. There was a discussion that this is an often-ignored effect of racism, and that it can be difficult to tell if particular treatment was discrimination or just chance. There was a suggestion that this may be difficult to imagine if one has not experienced it, but that it is a very negative experience if one is on the receiving end. There was a firm agreement that people wanted to be treated equally, even if everyone is unique, as well as a brief discussion on the relative merits of focusing on commonalities vs. celebrating differences.

Near-Term Suggestions

The heart of the Community Gathering was the discussion summarized above. Some suggestions, such as cultural event hosting, may depend on COVID, but others can be pursued in the near term:

1. CSE Public Declaration of Sentiment for the Fall Semester. CSE should make a public commitment of sentiment, support and potential accommodation for students who cannot be here in the Fall, even if the situation is still evolving. Students understand that policies may change, but hearing that CSE cares about this issue would help. Even possibilities (e.g., CSE may strongly encourage professors to offer remote support in grad and undergrad courses but acknowledges that it is up to individual professors; CSE may provide information or guidance to students who need to file for exceptions but acknowledges that exception rules are unknown; CSE leadership are meeting with College- or UM-level leadership to make the concerns of our students known and get information to us as quickly as possible; etc.) would significantly add reassurance and communicate care.


2. CSE Joint Event with the International Center. While students can always ask the International Center directly, many concerns are shared in common and much fear and uncertainty remain. A joint virtual question-and-answer meeting with staff from the International Center, CSE Undergraduate Advising, and CSE Graduate Advising, in which (anonymous) questions about policies are considered would help quite a bit. We acknowledge that many of these questions might officially be answered somewhere on a webpage, and that many answers may be "we do not know yet", but given the amount of fear and rumor, this would help clearly communicate current policies and available support and reassure students. Similarly, certain questions (such as the Visa revocation issues mentioned above) may not be answerable now, but seeing significant student interest in them may help International or Advising Office staff prioritize gathering information about them for the future.


3. CSE Faculty Discussion on the Use of "Country" or "Political" Examples. CSE should formally discuss the use of particular countries, cultures, or groups in classroom examples. The mechanism (e.g., an agenda item at a CSE faculty meeting, a faculty mailing list discussion, a faculty retreat agenda item, etc.) would be left to the CSE Chair's discretion. There may be pedagogical merit in certain examples, and we acknowledge that the ultimate decision rests with the faculty, but we encourage the faculty to discuss what our shared values are in such situations and how to achieve learning goals without making particular groups or political views feel unwelcome.

Next Steps

The CSE DEI Chair will discuss these meeting notes in general — and the suggestions above in particular — with CSE leadership.