1. An Assessment of an Inclusive Community: Affirming the Living Learning Environment Marguerite McClinton, Ed.D Washington and Lee University

2. Presentation Format A brief description of the institution A brief description of the institution Getting the Grant! Getting the Grant! The purpose for starting a “Content of Character Workshop” at W&L The purpose for starting a “Content of Character Workshop” at W&L Program structure & results of pre-post test Program structure & results of pre-post test

3. What about at W&L In Lexington, Virginia (isolated) In Lexington, Virginia (isolated) Over 1000 courses all of which is taught by a professor. Washington and Lee has a student/faculty ratio of 11:1 (intense academic experience) Over 1000 courses all of which is taught by a professor. Washington and Lee has a student/faculty ratio of 11:1 (intense academic experience) 1766 FTE Undergraduate students with 889 men and 877 women (small liberal arts school) 1766 FTE Undergraduate students with 889 men and 877 women (small liberal arts school)

4. The racial/ethnic makeup of W&L is: Non-Resident Aliens 3.6% Non-Resident Aliens 3.6% Black, non-Hispanic 4.4% Black, non-Hispanic 4.4% American Indian or Alaskan Native.3% American Indian or Alaskan Native.3% Asian or Pacific Islander 3.3% Asian or Pacific Islander 3.3% Hispanic 1.2% Hispanic 1.2% White, non-Hispanic 86.6% White, non-Hispanic 86.6% Multiracial or Unknown.6% Multiracial or Unknown.6% (not very diverse) (not very diverse)

5. So why at W&L Each institution has its specific cultural and social dynamics. One other major issue that affects the community is that there is over 80% of our student population is Greek. In order to be a part of the system and subscribe to the social dynamics some students find the social scene a challenge to navigate, especially at times our students of underrepresented populations. Each institution has its specific cultural and social dynamics. One other major issue that affects the community is that there is over 80% of our student population is Greek. In order to be a part of the system and subscribe to the social dynamics some students find the social scene a challenge to navigate, especially at times our students of underrepresented populations.

6. Key Point We, as an institution, have been disappointed: Student mediaStudent media Comments made in the classroomComments made in the classroom Informal discussion among peers and in open forumsInformal discussion among peers and in open forums Parents and alumni who have made racial and inappropriate comments about admission standards of the University and the worthiness of students of color attending the institution.Parents and alumni who have made racial and inappropriate comments about admission standards of the University and the worthiness of students of color attending the institution.

7. Getting the Grant from ACS? The purpose of the event would be to educate our Greek student leaders and new members of the Greek community to basic issues surrounding diversity. Since the inception of four new Black Greek organizations, we have struggled with insensitive comments toward students of color and students from different ethnic and racial backgrounds The purpose of the event would be to educate our Greek student leaders and new members of the Greek community to basic issues surrounding diversity. Since the inception of four new Black Greek organizations, we have struggled with insensitive comments toward students of color and students from different ethnic and racial backgrounds

8. Developing the Program Advisory Council Advisory Council VCCJ VCCJ Partnering/Coalition Partnering/Coalition Sponsors: Leadership Development, Office of Multicultural Affairs, IFC, Panhellenic, Office of Greek Life and Student Activities, ACS, Campus Activities, Department of Psychology Sponsors: Leadership Development, Office of Multicultural Affairs, IFC, Panhellenic, Office of Greek Life and Student Activities, ACS, Campus Activities, Department of Psychology

9. Program Goal Provide training for students at Washington and Lee University to create a more inclusive and Provide training for students at Washington and Lee University to create a more inclusive and affirming living and learning environment (academic and co-curricular) across lines of ability status, affirming living and learning environment (academic and co-curricular) across lines of ability status, class/socio-economic status, ethnicity/race, gender, and sexual orientation class/socio-economic status, ethnicity/race, gender, and sexual orientation

10. Objective 1. Express an increased awareness of how attitudes, beliefs, behavior and language can impact the relationships with/between students, staff, and faculty of Washington and Lee University 2. Develop strategies to involve others throughout the school year to increase cohesiveness and increase inclusion of different groups within Washington and Lee University 3. Increase understanding of the communication skills needed when working within a diverse community 4. Be empowered to be leaders in educating and motivating members of the broader Washington and Lee population 5. Be prepared to develop personal Action Plans that will promote a diverse and inclusive environment

11. PROGRAM SERVICES Pre program Pre program Planning and communication with key stakeholders Planning and communication with key stakeholders Customized program design Customized program design Optional Pre-Training for Student Facilitators $1,750.00 Optional Pre-Training for Student Facilitators $1,750.00 3 hour training 3 hour training 2 VCCJ trainers 2 VCCJ trainers Program materials & supplies for up to 20 participants Program materials & supplies for up to 20 participants Program $4,000.00 Program $4,000.00 3 hour training 3 hour training 5 VCCJ trainers 5 VCCJ trainers Program materials & supplies for up to 125 participants Program materials & supplies for up to 125 participants Post Program Post Program Follow-up communication with key stakeholders Follow-up communication with key stakeholders

12. TRAINING DESIGN Saturday, February 3 1-4 1:00pm Welcome, Introductions, Norms 1:00pm Welcome, Introductions, Norms 1:10pm Split into 5 groups (determined by W&L) and move to breakout areas 1:10pm Split into 5 groups (determined by W&L) and move to breakout areas 1:20pm Small Group: “Exploring Personal Identity” pair conversations 1:20pm Small Group: “Exploring Personal Identity” pair conversations 1:50pm Large Group: “Break the Cycle: Be the Change” presentation 1:50pm Large Group: “Break the Cycle: Be the Change” presentation 2:50pm Break/return to breakout rooms-Pizza 2:50pm Break/return to breakout rooms-Pizza 3:00pm Small Group: “Anticipating Challenges & Identifying Resources” role playing 3:00pm Small Group: “Anticipating Challenges & Identifying Resources” role playing 3:50pm Distribute and complete evaluations 3:50pm Distribute and complete evaluations 4:00pm Large Group: Closure 4:00pm Large Group: Closure

13. Results of Pre-Post Test One hundred and nineteen (119) of the students who participated completed a pre- and post-test to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. The pre- and post-tests consisted of 12 items designed to measure the program goal stated above (Please see Appendix A for a copy of the evaluation). Participants indicated their agreement with each of the items using a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). One hundred and nineteen (119) of the students who participated completed a pre- and post-test to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. The pre- and post-tests consisted of 12 items designed to measure the program goal stated above (Please see Appendix A for a copy of the evaluation). Participants indicated their agreement with each of the items using a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

14. Demographics of Sample Of the 119 students who completed both parts of the evaluation, 70 (59%) were male and 49 (41%) were female. Most of the participants self-identified as White (80%), followed by Black (10%), Asian (4%), and Latino (1%). Five percent of the sample described their ethnicity as “Other.” Participants in the workshop described themselves as mainly Christian (77%), followed by Atheist (7%), Jewish (4%), Agnostic (3.5%), and Buddhist (2.5%). Of the students who self-identified as Christian, most stated that they belonged to the Assembly Church of God or were simply “Christian” (29%) or that they were Catholic (23%). Anglican/Episcopal (8%) and Presbyterian (8%) were also common affiliations. Of the 119 students who completed both parts of the evaluation, 70 (59%) were male and 49 (41%) were female. Most of the participants self-identified as White (80%), followed by Black (10%), Asian (4%), and Latino (1%). Five percent of the sample described their ethnicity as “Other.” Participants in the workshop described themselves as mainly Christian (77%), followed by Atheist (7%), Jewish (4%), Agnostic (3.5%), and Buddhist (2.5%). Of the students who self-identified as Christian, most stated that they belonged to the Assembly Church of God or were simply “Christian” (29%) or that they were Catholic (23%). Anglican/Episcopal (8%) and Presbyterian (8%) were also common affiliations.

15. Overall Effectiveness of Program A total pre- and post-test score was calculated by averaging across all of the items on each scale. Thus, average scores on both the pre- and post-tests could range from 1 (indicating a very low interest in diversity) to 7 (indicating a very high interest in diversity). A total pre- and post-test score was calculated by averaging across all of the items on each scale. Thus, average scores on both the pre- and post-tests could range from 1 (indicating a very low interest in diversity) to 7 (indicating a very high interest in diversity). The mean pre-test score across all participants was 3.69 (SD =.57) and the mean post-test score was 3.91 (SD =.61). A dependent t-test reveals that this pre-post test difference is statistically significant, t (117) = 7.92, p <.001. This significant difference means that after the workshop participants indicated more support of diversity related ideals than before the workshop. The mean pre-test score across all participants was 3.69 (SD =.57) and the mean post-test score was 3.91 (SD =.61). A dependent t-test reveals that this pre-post test difference is statistically significant, t (117) = 7.92, p <.001. This significant difference means that after the workshop participants indicated more support of diversity related ideals than before the workshop.

16. Effectiveness of Program as Measured by Individual Items Dependent t-tests were also computed for each of the 12 individual items. A statistically significant pre-post difference (p <.05) was present for all the items except items 4 (likelihood to discuss religion) and 11 (confidence interacting with different people). For all of the items except #4 and #11, post-test scores revealed more acceptance of diversity related concepts than did pretest scores. The means and standard deviations for each of the item pairs (pre and post) are listed below. Again, scores for each item can range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Dependent t-tests were also computed for each of the 12 individual items. A statistically significant pre-post difference (p <.05) was present for all the items except items 4 (likelihood to discuss religion) and 11 (confidence interacting with different people). For all of the items except #4 and #11, post-test scores revealed more acceptance of diversity related concepts than did pretest scores. The means and standard deviations for each of the item pairs (pre and post) are listed below. Again, scores for each item can range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

17. Group Differences in Pre-Post Test Effectiveness Scores To examine group differences in total effectiveness scores, along with any possible interactions of group differences with pre-post scores, three Mixed Group ANOVAs were computed with pre-post scores as the within group variable and either sex, race, or religion as the between group variable. To examine group differences in total effectiveness scores, along with any possible interactions of group differences with pre-post scores, three Mixed Group ANOVAs were computed with pre-post scores as the within group variable and either sex, race, or religion as the between group variable.Gender Across the pre- and post-tests, females (M = 3.96) scored higher than did males (M = 3.69), F (1, 116) = 6.77, p =.01. A significant interaction of sex and pre-post scores was not found meaning that the difference in pre-post scores were not dependent upon participant sex. Across the pre- and post-tests, females (M = 3.96) scored higher than did males (M = 3.69), F (1, 116) = 6.77, p =.01. A significant interaction of sex and pre-post scores was not found meaning that the difference in pre-post scores were not dependent upon participant sex.Race Because only a small number of participants self-identified as Black, Asian, Latino, and Other, these ethnicities were combined to create one “Students of Color” category (N = 24). This was done because the original categories were too small to produce valid results. Analyses revealed that across the pre- and post-tests, Students of Color (M = 4.26) scored significantly higher than did White (M = 3.69) students, F (1, 116) = 22.04, p <.001. Again, the interaction between race and pre-post test scores was not significant Because only a small number of participants self-identified as Black, Asian, Latino, and Other, these ethnicities were combined to create one “Students of Color” category (N = 24). This was done because the original categories were too small to produce valid results. Analyses revealed that across the pre- and post-tests, Students of Color (M = 4.26) scored significantly higher than did White (M = 3.69) students, F (1, 116) = 22.04, p <.001. Again, the interaction between race and pre-post test scores was not significant

18. Conclusion Overall, even with some small logistical challenges, VCCJ believes that the program for Washington and Lee University provided participants with an experience in which they developed strong connections with their peers, raised personal awareness, and learned about new topics. As Washington and Lee continues to work towards building a more inclusive campus community, VCCJ encourages the university to provide more extensive experiences for other student populations and to engage a broad cross-section of administrators, faculty, and staff. Creating an environment in which honest conversations and true dialogue can take place is an ongoing effort Overall, even with some small logistical challenges, VCCJ believes that the program for Washington and Lee University provided participants with an experience in which they developed strong connections with their peers, raised personal awareness, and learned about new topics. As Washington and Lee continues to work towards building a more inclusive campus community, VCCJ encourages the university to provide more extensive experiences for other student populations and to engage a broad cross-section of administrators, faculty, and staff. Creating an environment in which honest conversations and true dialogue can take place is an ongoing effort Smaller groups Smaller groups Too short of a time Too short of a time Logistics/Room Setup Logistics/Room Setup Popcorn Programming Popcorn Programming Panhellenic Action Results Panhellenic Action Results