Effects of Institutional Factors on the Retention of Graduate Students of Color in Schools of Library and Information Science

The intent of the study was to understand the changes that have occurred over the last 25 years in library programs as far as enrollment and diversity of students, number and ethnicity of the faculty, program income and expenses, cost of attendance, and scholarship and fellowship aid, in an effort to better understand library programs granting the MLIS degree. The study also endeavored to identify institutional factors associated with the retention and productivity rates of White students and students of color in schools of library and information science. During the period studied, the proportional representation of White students decreased. For students of color, proportional representation was stable during the same time period. Results revealed a medium effect size of time with productivity rates for both groups declining over time. Retention rate differed significantly by time, with a small effect size with retention rate that initially increased over time, but is now decreasing. The final analyses were meta-regressions to determine if retention and productivity rates can be predicted by cost of attendance, scholarship and fellow aid, and program size. Results indicated that for students of color, program size in 2000 was significantly predictive of retention, cost of attendance was predictive in 2002, and scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of retention in 2004. No variables were significantly predictive for retention of White students. The last analysis was to determine if productivity rate can be predicted by cost of attendance, scholarship and fellow aid, and program size. Results indicate that for White students in 2002, the cost of attendance was predictive of productivity rating. In 2003, scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of productivity rate and in 2004, scholarship and fellowship aid was predictive of productivity rating. For students of color, results indicate that only scholarship and fellowship aid in 2005 was predictive of productivity rate. No other variables in any of the years studied showed any significant prediction of productivity rating for students of color.

The Keyes to Reclaiming the Racial History Of the Roberts Court

This article advocates for a fundamental re-understanding about the way that the history of race is understood by the current Supreme Court. Represented by the racial rights opinions of Justice John Roberts that celebrate racial progress, the Supreme Court has equivocated and rendered obsolete the historical experiences of people of color in the United States. This jurisprudence has in turn reified the notion of color-blindness, consigning racial discrimination to a distant and discredited past that has little bearing to how race and inequality is experienced today. The racial history of the Roberts Court is centrally informed by the context and circumstances surrounding Brown v. Board of Education. For the Court, Brown symbolizes all that is wrong with the history of race in the United States - legal segregation, explicit racial discord, and vicious and random acts of violence. Though Roberts Court opinions suggest that some of those vestiges still exits, the bulk of its jurisprudence indicate the opposite. With Brown’s basic factual premises as its point of reference, the Court has consistently argued that the nation has made tremendous strides away from the condition of racial bigotry, intolerance, and inequity. The article accordingly argues that the Roberts Court reliance on Brown to understand racial progress is anachronistic. Especially as the nation’s focus for racial inequality turned national in scope, the same binaries in Brown that had long served to explain the history of race relations in the United States (such as Black-White, North-South, and Urban-Rural) were giving way to massive multicultural demographic and geographic transformations in the United States in the years and decades after World War II. All of the familiar tropes so clear in Brown and its progeny could no longer fully describe the current reality of shifting and transforming patterns of race relations in the United States. In order to reclaim the history of race from the Roberts Court, the article assesses a case that more accurately symbolizes the recent history and current status of race relations today: Keyes v. School District No. 1. This was the first Supreme Court case to confront how the binaries of cases like Brown proved of little probative value in addressing how and in what ways race and racial discrimination was changing in the United States. Thus, understanding Keyesand the history it reflects reveals much about how and in what ways the Roberts Court should rethink its conclusions regarding the history of race relations in the United States for the last 60 years.