. Ethnic studies and the hiring of minority faculty members offer benefits to the University.

This editorial attempts to make a case for two ideas that challenge academic institutions in this country to acknowledge a history of racial bias, that such bias persists (albeit in less direct ways) and the impact of this bias on current scholarship. The first idea is ethnic studies, the second minority faculty hiring, both controversial because of the emphasis they place on race and ethnicity.

These ideas recognize that people of color, whether they identify or not, are force-fed a racial identity by the larger American society, forced to shoulder the associated burdens and responsiblities; and that out of this force-feeding comes an experience very different from that of whites. Enforced on the easily-distinguished basis of skin color, this fundamental difference threatens to remain indefinitely, unlike the discrimination that faced European immigrants earlier this century. In general whites, regardless of where they come from and what their history has been, because they are white,can opt out of their ethnicities. People of color cannot, being constantly reminded by the larger society who they "really" are. Consequently, the experience of currently-marginalized groups stands distinct from that of European immigrants who were once similarly marginalized.

What is ethnic studies? In the broadest sense, it is the study of the experience and relationships of socalled minority groups in a larger society. In practice, ethnic studies departments in the United States have focused on different minority groups' experiences in this country, incorporating aspects of history, literature, psychology, sociology, and so on. Ethnic studies does not simply address "what happened to such-and-such ethnic group?" but examines why, looking at the motivations and reasoning behind past exclusion by the larger American society, as well as at how the members of different ethnic groups responded to this exclusion, so that ongoing exclusion can be better understood. Ethnic studies also does not preclude the study of white ethnic groups, although one may argue that the importance of these groups to American life is diminishing (unlike the importance of race and nonwhite ethnicity) and that their experience in fact dominates traditional treatments of 19th and early 20th century American history--suggesting that a separate ethnic studies is not necessary to study them.

Why ethnic studies? First, wistful notions of a color-blind America aside, a marginalized status has characterized and continues to characterize the experiences of Latinos, African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Jewish Americans and other groups in this country to an extreme degree. Traditional approaches to American history tend to sanitize the "immigrant-minority experience" of these people, often reducing it to meaninglessness by simplifying and genericizing the effects of marginalized status. Only an interdisciplinary approach that recognizes the defining impact that marginalized status has had on the history of ethnic groups in this country achieves a rigorous and therefore useful understanding of both the experience of a particular ethnic group and the larger sociohistorical context that shaped that experience.

Secondly, the breadth of material related to ethnic studies requires specialization to ensure broad coverage without risking oversimpliflcation. We need to study the histories and cultures of particular groups because each is different, and assumptions made for one probably will not apply to another. Take the example of Asian Americans. Comprising a diverse array of groups which differ both in their points of entry and place of origin, Asian Americans can on more be indiscriminately lumped together than Asian Americans as a group can be assumed to be just like all other Americans. Important commonalities do exist, but careful study also reveals key differences that cannot be ignored.

Thirdly, reality dictates that only an independent entity can sponsor a strong program of instruction and research in ethnic studies. Established departments view ethnic studies as marginal, and are reluctant to divert resources to it. Faculty specializing in ethnic studies, consequently, will only be hired if an independent body with independent funding to hire then is created. This argument is advanced not to say that ethnic studies exists or ought to exist in a vacuum, independent of existing methods and areas of study; ethnic studies is actually interconnected with so many different areas and incorporates so many different methodologies that it cannot be logically subsumed under any one existing department.

Ethnic studies is not about separatism, but all about informing our picture of the United States by examining its interactions with its residents of color. In elementary school we read big survey textbooks on American history, in which each chapter revolved around one of the 42 presidents. But "America" wasn't created by 42 white men. Some textbooks did discuss the participation of various ethnic groups, but always superficially.

Even at Harvard, many feel that the experience of ethnic groups in this country isn't significant enough to warrant careful study, and instead ought to be tacked onto broader surveys. Ethnic studies refutes this assumption by its output, helping forge a more accurate picture of "America" in the process. It completes the big picture, rigorously studying issues if exclusion and responses to such exclusion that are at the heart of America's most excruciating problems.

At Harvard, the few courses outside Afro-American Studies that deal with specific ethnic groups are taught by visiting professors or by professors whose specialty is something other than ethnic studies. And, a recent proposal for a standing committee on ethnic studies was rejected by the Faculty Council, not once but on three occasions. Bound by tradition to study so-called mainstream subjects, relevant departments (sociology and Afro-American Studies being exceptions) view ethnic studies as being less worthwhile; therefore here a department is really the only way to ensure a secure and strong program. The sociology department's interest in ethnic studies is encouraging, sociological study being an important dimension of ethnic studies, but at the same time limiting, being one that de facto lacks the interdisciplinary approach necessary to achieve a full understanding of the ethnic experience in America.

With regard to minority faculty hiring, the numbers speak for themselves. Out of 402 senior faculty in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 32 are of color. None of these are U.S. Latino or Native American. While Harvard should celebrate the arrival of professors Cornel West and Evelyn Higginbotham next year, both jointly tenured in the Afro-American studies department and the Divinity school, we should not forget the essential role an independently strong Afro-American Studies department played in their appointments. Nor should we necessarily settle for one tenured female African American. This is not a matter of politically correct tokenism. A diverse faculty has influence within and beyond the classroom, sorely needed for the sake of balance.

Minority professors add to student perspectives, having experiences that come with being a member of a marginalized group and the opportunity in the classroom to infuse these experiences into discussions of relevant topics. They can also be role models, counselors and advocates for students of color, realizing that racism is not dead and that facing a disproportionately white, male faculty is living proof that the University is not for women and people of color. At Harvard, minority senior faculty are especially important; tenured professors, being secure in their positions, have the greatest say in hiring and curricular decisions.

The issue isn't one of competence with regard to topics important to people of color--white professors can and should teach ethnic groups' histories, literature, etc., and advise their students of color--but of breadth. Most minority faculty can illuminate their presentations of, for example, American history with a parallel account of how this history was perceived by members of an outgroup, being a member of such an outgroup, whereas a white professor probably could not. And, being of color, minority faculty can also provide a degree of empathy to students of color that white professors, probably not having experienced racism first-hand, most likely cannot.

The College is sympathetic to the problem of underrepresentation, but in apologizing for its short-comings, cites the low pool figures for people of color in the same breath with its concerns regarding lowered standards. But to imply that looking to hire minority faculty automatically risks lowering standards, as this dangerous bipartite excuse does, can only lead to undue bias against all candidates of color, qualifications notwithstanding. In addition, with such a pronounced lack of support for ethnic studies by the relevant departments, excellent minority professors in this field face the double Harvard whammy of being a person of color as well as specializing in a field that is assumed to be on the margins of academia.

The arguments presented above are not meant to be ethnocentric, but to reflect the reality we face. The experience of, for example, Asian Americans in this country is in many ways different from that of other groups--to gloss this over or to shove it to the margins of academia is to deny reality. Therefore studying the origins and significance of this difference is important, not only for Asian Americans but for the betterment of the larger society. And professors of color, by virtue of having experienced marginalization, can offer important insights that other professors often miss.

With the nation still trying to come to terms with the rise of urban ethnic conflict, institutions such as Harvard must lead in the development of new methods of studying the rapidly changing social fabric. The institution of permanent courses in ethnic studies and the hiring of more minority faculty world fill tow glaring holes in Harvards's academic and educational resources, contributing mightily to a better understanding of a complex American society that increasingly defies traditional analyses.

Alex H. Cho '96 and Jennifer Ching '96 are members of Students for Diversity and Ethnic Studies and are also co-presidents of the Asian American Association.