Skip to Content

Diversity Committee Minutes 11/17/2010

Minutes:  The Faculty Committee on Diversity

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

GHH 108

Members in Attendance:

Charles Trimbach, Valerie Sloan, Romelyn Woodruff, Jennifer Campbell, Laura Choiniere.  Mike Swanson


Guests:  Kathleen McMahon, Olivia Worden.

The meeting commenced at 2:00.

Dean McMahon and Ms. Worden presented a mini-grant proposal which they, together with Ande Diaz of the Multicultural Center were preparing for submission.  In brief, the proposal requests funding for a one day faculty workshop under the direction of the NCBI  (The National Coalition Building Institute).  Said workshop would be held in late January before the beginning of the Spring Term.  The proposal, together with supporting research is attached to these minutes.

The NCBI conducted a similar workshop at Roger Williams in the Fall of 2008.  Some members of the Diversity Committee had participated in that workshop, and reported they were favorably impressed.  The “Welcoming Diversity” workshops objectives are listed in the introduction of the proposal.

Following the 2008 workshop, a Roger Williams Chapter of the NCBI was formed, and it facilitated six workshops on campus.  Our guests asked us to co-sponsor the faculty workshop, largely through encouraging faculty participation across the spectrum of Schools, Colleges, and Divisions. 

Discussion ensued.  There was some concern about the short timeline between the when the Inclusive Excellence Committee announces the mini-grant awards and the proposed date for the workshop.  Other than that, the sentiments expressed were universally favorable.

A motion was made, seconded, and passed without dissent that the Diversity Committee issue a memo of support for this proposal which could be submitted with it.  The Chair agreed to draft such a memo.

The meeting adjourned at 3:00

N.B.  The Chair did draft that memo.  It is also attached to these minutes:



NCBI Report

Executive Summary

April 2010



Background of NCBI at RWU


President Nirschel announced in the fall of 2006 at the State of the University Address that Inclusive Excellence would be a major initiative of the university going forward.  This initiative strives to build an inclusive and civil environment across campus.  One aspect of a comprehensive inclusive excellence plan is to develop diversity trainings for faculty, students and staff.  In the spring of 2008 RWU sent a team of administrators (from Human Resources, Enrollment Management, and Student Affairs) to the National Coalition Building Institute (NCBI) Diversity Leadership Institute to learn about the NCBI model and return with recommendations about its applicability to our campus.  The National Coalition Building Institute is an international non-profit leadership development network dedicated to the elimination of racism and other forms of oppression. The feedback was positive and in the fall of 2008 the Division of Student Affairs hosted a one day NCBI “Welcoming Diversity” workshop.  The NCBI Prejudice Reduction Workshop has five basic learning objectives:


  • Identifying the information and misinformation we have learned about other groups
  • Identifying and expressing pride in the group(s) to which we belong
  • Learning how groups, other than our own experience mistreatment
  • Learning the personal impact of specific incidents of discrimination
  • Learning how to interrupt prejudicial jokes, remarks and slurs


Attendees included representatives across the divisions – academic administrators and faculty, students, Human Resources, Enrollment Management, Finance, and Development.   Our goal was to experience the program and then assess if it was a useful diversity model for our unique campus environment.  Although this model can be used with faculty, both for faculty training and for classroom learning, the feedback from the workshop evaluation led us to believe that the NCBI model would be most appropriate and useful to train our students and staff. Appendix D outlines how other schools have applied the NCBI model, which includes many schools where faculty have adopted the NCBI model (also see Appendix E with a complete list of schools who are affiliated with NCBI). With support from the President’s Council on Inclusive Excellence the Division of Student Affairs hosted a three day train-the- trainer workshop in May 2009. Two senior NCBI facilitators came to RWU so that approximately 30 staff from the divisions of Student Affairs and enrollment management and one faculty was trained to facilitate the NCBI model on our campus. Since then RWU has developed an NCBI chapter, led by two co-liaisons, and meets monthly for on-going development and to plan student workshops.



Progress of Student Workshops 2009-2010


This academic year we have trained approximately 200 student leaders and will have trained another 50 before the year is over.  We delivered the full one day workshop to the entire student staff of Team C.A.R.E. (RAs, HAWEs, and PEERS), a half day workshop to the Student Advocates, a half day workshop to the FYSOP (First Year Student Learning Opportunity Program) Living Learning Community, and have a half day workshop scheduled for our Orientation Advisors (see Appendix B for summary of exercises that comprise the NCBI Welcoming Diversity workshop).   An evaluation survey was conducted with all three workshops and the survey results indicate very positive student feedback. Specifically, 76% said the workshop was “good/excellent” in terms of applicability to their life; 73% found the content/information “good/excellent”; and 69% responded “good/excellent” regarding their overall satisfaction with the workshop (see Appendix A for a full summary of evaluation results).


Future options


The NCBI chapter plans to continue to facilitate student workshops, particularly for student leader trainings upon request.  It would be beneficial to offer a future train-the-trainer so that other interested faculty, staff and students could have the opportunity to be trained to facilitate the Welcoming Diversity: Prejudice Reduction Workshop, thereby expanding the pool of facilitators.  In the event that the faculty would be interested in conducting a train-the-trainer workshop, the division of student affairs would like to collaborate with them to train more staff and students (see Appendix C for NCBI costs for workshops)



Appendix A – NCBI Evaluation Data


Introduction of NCBI

                The National Coalition Building Institute (NCBI) Prejudice Reduction Workshop has five basic learning objectives:

  • Identifying the information and misinformation we learned about other groups
  • Identifying and expressing pride in the group(s) to which we belong
  • Learning how groups, other than out own experience mistreatment
  • Learning the personal impact of specific incidents of discrimination
  • Learning how to interrupt prejudicial jokes, remarks and slurs

These objectives are achieved through a series of activities that range in intensity and aim to push the audience past their comfort zones. At Roger Williams University, we have found that our most successful learning objectives have been “identifying and expressing pride in the groups we belong” and “learning the personal impact of specific incidents of discrimination”. Specifically, our students have expressed pride in personal achievement and recognition of the impact of discrimination from their peers as factors that matter to them.

Audience Description

                The Roger Williams University chapter of NCBI has facilitated three workshops for the campus community. Starting in the academic year of 2009-2010, these three workshops were presented to three student groups across campus, including Student Advocates, Team CARE, and FYSOP students. Each program reached its own goals, as demonstrated by the data discussed below.

                The first group of students to experience NCBI workshop were Student Advocates (SA’s). SA’s are a group of approximately 50 student leaders from the Enrollment and Advancement Division, who mentor the freshmen class. Each advocate is responsible to help 20-25 freshmen each year to adjust to the college community through both academic and social programming. The Student Advocates took part in the NCBI workshop in August during their yearly training. Our RWU NCBI Chapter was asked to facilitate a workshop for the advocates both to build community among the staff and to increase the knowledge and diversity awareness for the Advocates. This is especially important for the Advocates because they work with approximately 1100 students who display a variety of social identities, personalities and living situations.

                The second student group to experience NCBI training, and the only group to experience the full day workshop, was Team CARE. Team CARE is comprised of RA’s, Health and Wellness Educators (HAWE’s) and Peer Educators with Expertise in Referrals (PEER’s). Together, over 100 students took part in this day long workshop (divided in to three selected groups, including their supervisors). Team CARE also asked to participate in NCBI because of their role in the residence halls, where the ability to recognize diversity issues, and to handle a wide variety of unique situations, is important.

                The third and most recent group to experience the NCBI workshop was the First Year Student Opportunity Program (FYSOP), a group of 40 first year students living together in a Living Learning Community in Stonewall Terrace. These students take two academic classes and a First Year Seminar together. The purpose of FYSOP is to provide a close-knit living environment for students who share courses as well as living space and student leaders. FSYOP’s student leaders requested an NCBI community-building workshop to heighten awareness of stereotypes and to increase their students’ sense of accountability and civility.  The program was a huge success; evaluations indicated that each student walked away with a better understanding of the people they encounter, both in the residence hall and classroom.

Quantitative Data











Applicability to your life   3.3% (4)   20.5% (25)   57.4%(70)   18.9% (23)
Content/ information given was   4.9% (6)   22.13% (27)   49.2% (60)   23.8% (29)
The opportunity for questions was   4.9% (6)   14.75% (18)   45% (55)   35.2% (43)
The time and length of the program   19.67% (24)   39.34% (48)   30.3% (37)   10.7% (13)
Interest and enthusiasm of facilitators   .82% (1)   8.2% (10)   42.6% (52)   45.9% (56)
Facilitators’ sensitivity to participants’ concern   13.11% (16)   13.9% (17)   27.9% (34)   45.1% (55)
Overall performance of facilitators   3.3% (4)   17.21% (21)   33.6% (41)   45.9% (56)
Overall satisfaction with workshop   8.2% (10)   22.96%(28)   44.3% (54)   24.6% (30)

                After each presentation every participant was asked to complete a survey based on their experience with the NCBI training. The survey, which included both multiple choice and open ended questions, demonstrated a highly positive response to the workshops. The grid below shows overall responses to the basic quantitative questions, where respondents were asked to rate their experience on a scale from “poor” to “excellent”.  To clarify, each grid shows the percentage of students responding at that level, followed by the actual number of respondents (per answer) in parenthesis.


Some notable statistics include the 88.5% rating of good or higher for interest and enthusiasm of facilitators. This suggests that our facilitators created a safe and welcoming environment for the participants to experience the workshop. Facilitators also allowed ample time for questions as 80.3% of participants rated “the opportunity for question” as good or higher.  Additionally, 76.2% of the participants gave a rating of good or higher to “applicability to your life”. This is further demonstrated in the qualitative data in the participant’s comments.

Targeted Team Care Data

                As the only group to take part in the full day NCBI workshop, Team Care participants answered several additional questions that were not asked of the other two groups, mostly focused on supervisor participation/ presence.

                When asked “Were you comfortable having your supervisors in the room during this workshop?” 84.3% responded “yes”. Additionally, when asked, “Did you having your supervisors in the room during the workshop cause you to censor responses or alter your participation in any way?” 13.9% answered “yes”; 63.9% answered “no”; and 20.8% answered “unsure”. This again speaks to the environment the facilitators created and the comfort level of the workshop.

Another interesting statistic gained from this survey concerns potential faculty involvement. The participants were asked “Do you think that your classroom experience at RWU would be enhanced if faculty members participated in the NCBI workshop?” 45.2% said “yes”; 21.9% said “no”; and 32.9% said “unsure”. Some of the comments discussed below reinforce the idea that faculty participation in NCBI training could enrich the classroom experience.

Qualitative Data

                As part of the survey, five opened questions were asked of each participant from all three workshops.

Applying NCBI

                When asked, “What aspects of the session can you apply to your own life”, some typical responses were the following:

“Accepting everyone no matter who they are because everyone has different backgrounds and to also, not judge people because of stereotypes;

That everyone harbors judgmental thoughts, and that sometimes, it’s better to acknowledge them and understand how those thoughts are not true;

I took away the consideration of what things actually make diversity, not just race or ethnicity;

It was good to realize that we never know how certain labels or misconceptions can affect people, especially residents. People have different backgrounds which aren’t necessarily obvious so it is important to be sensitive to not group someone into a group which they do not belong;

The sensitivity of the facilitators throughout the session is an aspect of the session that I am going to apply to my own life, especially in regards to my interactions with others.”

Other comments included becoming more open-minded, applying specific aspects of the presentation to one’s individual experience, and being able to communicate clearly about problems as they are presented. Many students were confident they could apply these techniques and behaviors to their everyday life.


                When students answered the question, “What Impact did the workshop have on you?” responses include the following:

“The workshop was very powerful and it made me see people in a different light and actually accept me for who I am;

It made me really think about who I was as a person and some of the experiences that I have had and also made me realize where my own bias are;

I felt relieved to hear stories which I can relate to;

The workshop had a negative impact on me. It made feel like I was an awful person when I had to say things about other types of people. It put me in a box where I never wanted to be.”

Many comments were made about increasing one’s ability to relate to others and seeing people in a new light. In addition to all of these positive acknowledgements, the last quotation, where the writer acknowledges negative impact from specific portions of the workshop, reminds us of the difficult and challenging nature of this endeavor.

Future Participants

                The response was unanimous when the students were asked, “Who do you think would benefit from attending this workshop in the future?” The answer: everyone! Listed are few variations:

“Freshmen, it’s good to open their eyes early to the things they say;

Anyone working with students;

All student leaders and teachers;


Honestly, anyone and everyone. While this can be a very tough program to take part of, it is also very beneficial and eye-opening.”


Appendix B- Outline and Description of One Day NCBI Workshop 


Welcoming Diversity/Prejudice Reduction Workshop Table of Contents

The following table of contents is meant for a full-day workshop split into morning and afternoon sessions.

Part I





First Thoughts

Internalized Oppression

It’s Great to Be


Part II



Role Plays




The Up/Down exercise allows the participants to learn the similarities and differences that exist in the larger group.  Differences and similarities to be established can include: racial, economic, sexual orientation, age, family structure, physical challenges and invisible identities. 


This exercise asks the participants to share their identities with another individual.  The goal is to have the participants start to get to know one another on a more intimate level and to be able to frame and flesh out their identities using some of the groups mentioned in Up/Down. 


First Thoughts

                First Thoughts gives the participants a chance to identify prejudice toward groups that they may carry around both consciously and unconsciously.  In the exercise they are given the opportunity to share these thoughts with a partner in order to understand where they come from and how they affect the groups being stereotyped. 


Internalized Oppression/ Pride

                Internalized Oppression allows the participants to look at the groups that they belong to and how they may be oppressing or stereotyping their own groups.  This section deals with shame that some of us carry surrounding our specific groups or the parts of our group we are not entirely proud of. 

                The second portion of this exercise is Pride.  This exercise allows the participants to take the same group that they identified in a negative light and express the positive aspects or the pride they have for their group. 


It’s Great To Be

                It’s Great to Be allows the participants to identify a group that they belong to and are not entirely proud of.  This interactive exercise combines the act of physical exaggeration with the emotional impact of expressing pride in an identity that they may usually keep private or not regularly share.  It is understood that although the participant may not feel pride in this group immediately, through the act of sharing and being appreciated they will come closer to fully accepting this identity.  



                This activity allows the participants to work in small groups categorized by specific identities.  Within these sections the participants are asked to determine what they never want people to say, think or do toward their specific groups.  Each section has a chance to present their lists to the whole group.   This is a team building skill and creates a support system for those students working together. 


Speak Outs

Speak Outs are a chance for individual participants to share a story in which they were personally discriminated against or oppressed.  Those who agree to participate will share their story and go through a brief exercise that is aimed at assisting them in the healing process.



Role Plays

This segment is meant to encourage participants to practice a specific NCBI skill; shifting attitudes. The group begins by identifying a list of jokes, remarks, and slurs that they often hear and they then decide on one to be used in a role play in front of the group. Every participant then practices how they might try to put their pain aside when hearing these slurs, use a gentle tone, and decrease defensive when engaging others in these situations.

Appendix C – NCBI Dues and Train-the-Trainer Costs


The NCBI annual affiliation fee for a campus is $960.00

The cost for the three day Train-the-Trainer program (mentioned below) is $9,600.00 for the training and around $1,500.00 for travel, lodging, and food expenses.

Train-the Trainer program:

Track I: Leading the NCBI Welcoming Diversity & Inclusion Workshop – In this track, participants will learn, in a train-the-trainer format, how to replicate back home, the award-winning NCBI Welcoming Diversity & Inclusion Workshop. The workshop consists of a series of incremental, experiential activities that engage participants in the leadership skills necessary to build inclusive environments and increase cultural competence.

These skills include:

  • Valuing and welcoming similarities and differences among group members and staff;
  • Examining the stereotypes that impact our actions and attitude toward others;
  • Identifying the harmful effects of stereotypes directed toward one’s own group;
  • Learning specific skills for preventing and interrupting bigoted remarks and behaviors; and
  • Developing empathy toward others by hearing their personal stories.


NCBI’s approach of combining concrete skill development with small group practice enables participants to learn quickly, in a safe environment, how to replicate NCBI diversity workshops.


Appendix D – NCBI Best Practices at other Universities


George Mason University

  • They have 31 active members.
  • They work closely with the Provost’s office on offering NCBI workshops to faculty and students.
  • Gathered video testimonials from faculty on how the work has benefited them, their students, and their classrooms.  They use this in an effort to create more buy in and generate more requests for workshops:
  • General Education provides NCBI training for Faculty
  • If one faculty cannot make a session the whole session is cancelled. 
  • Faculty outreach is done through other faculty members who have participated in an NCBI workshop or are part of the NCBI team.
  • NCBI is integrated into the academic course books.
  • They have targeted the School of Education in providing their students with NCBI workshops and training.
  • They have also focused on Global and Community Health programs (i.e. International Business and Communications).
  • They hold a yearly leadership appreciation ceremony.
  • They customize each workshop to fit the faculty that they are providing the workshop to or the course they are providing the workshop to.


Ohio State

  • Has been using NCBI for 15 years. 
  • Has a long history of training both faculty and staff
  • Hold Diversity Leadership Retreats (off campus) for students.

a)      The overnight retreat is sponsored and funded by the VP of Student Affairs.

b)      Retreat consists of the 1 Day Prejudice Reduction model and Day 2 covers controversial issues and highlights from Day 1.

c)       Many of the participants are part of Greek Life at Ohio State. 

d)      The students facilitate with staff members at this retreat. 

e)      The focus is on student leadership.

  • Faculty and staff are used to recruit students through recommending students or nominating students to attend workshops or receive training.
  • They have giving reports to the Provost and received academic support of NCBI on campus.
  • They hold a train-the-trainer after the retreat to help build a larger NCBI team
  • All new hires, both faculty and staff, at Ohio State must go through an NCBI workshop.
  • Ohio State gets their funding through the VP of Student Life and a co-grant.


Northern Essex Community College

  • They focus on team member support; specifically inter college/university support.
  • The benefit of creating a consortium is that you are able to pool money from between universities and colleges which equals savings.
  • The President of Northern Essex talks about NCBI as a strategic plan.
  • They created a budget for NCBI
  • They were able to receive both the President and the Provost’s support.



Appendix EList of Colleges and Universities Affiliated with NCBI



Aiken Technical College

American University of Bulgaria

Bowling Green State University

Buffalo State College








Bunker Hill Community College

California State University – Fresno

California State University – Monterey

Central Michigan University

Clemson University

Colgate University

Columbia University

Del Mar College

Edinboro University

Emory University

Furman University

George Mason University

Georgia Institute of Technology

Glenville State College

Greenville Technical College

Hawaii Community College (Big Island) 

Hudson Valley Community College

Kutztown University of Pennsylvania

Loyola College of Maryland

Maryville College

Massasoit Community College

Medical University of South Carolina

Michigan Technological University

Middlesex Community College

Darcy A. Orellana

Mount Wachusett Community College

North Carolina Central University

North Carolina State University

Northern Essex Community College

North Shore Community College

The Ohio State University

Onondaga Community College

Oregon State University

Piedmont Technical College

Portland State University

Rhodes College

Roger Williams University

Seton Hall University

Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania

Stetson University



SUNY at Oneonta

Tri-County Technical College

Tompkins Cortland Community College

University of Alaska Anchorage

University of Delaware

University of Hawaii at Manoa

University of Hawaii at West Oahu

University of Houston – Central

University of Houston – Clear Lake

University of Maine at Presque Isle

University of Montana – Missoula

University of South Carolina – Upstate

University of South Florida 

University of Texas at Arlington

Washington State University

Windward Community College



  Roger Williams University Faculty Senate Diversity Committee


To:        The President’s Council on Inclusive Excellence

From:    Michael R. H. Swanson, Ph. D., Chair, Faculty Senate Diversity Committee

CC:       Dean Kathleen McMahon

Date:     12/21/2010

Re:        Co-sponsorship of the NCBI Chapter Proposal for a Faculty Development Workshop

To the Selection Committee, Greetings:

At its November 17, 2010 meeting, the Faculty Senate Diversity Committee voted unanimously to support the proposal submitted by NCBI Chapter members Kathleen McMahon, Olivia Worden, and Ande Diaz, regarding a co-sponsored Faculty Development Workshop to be held in late January, 2011.  We believe such a workshop would be of great value in furthering the University’s commitment to Inclusive Excellence, moving to create a University safe and welcoming to a diverse community of students, staff, administrators, and faculty alike.

We hope this will be the first step toward greater cooperation and coordination between the Academic and Student Services areas, recognizing we are one community with one student body we both serve.  Ultimately we’d like to see a reformed local chapter of the National Coalition Building Institute—one which includes faculty, staff, students, and administrators at all levels.

For the Committee, Respectfully,


Michael R. H. Swanson, Ph. D.

Professor of History and American Studies

Chair, Faculty Senate Diversity Committee.






This entry was posted in Diversity Committee, Minutes (DIVC). Bookmark the permalink.