ORONO – Despite targeted efforts to promote and improve diversity, many segments of the national population remain under-represented at public research universities across the country. An award-winning study from the University of Maine examines how well-intentioned groups charged with addressing the problem can undermine their own goals in discussions and resulting policy shaped by commonly held assumptions rather than the current reality of a particular campus.

Susan V. Iverson of Old Town, who recently earned a doctorate in higher educational leadership, was one of two recipients of the 2005 Outstanding Dissertation Award presented in April by the American Educational Research Association in San Francisco. The other scholar recognized in the postsecondary category was from Teachers College, Columbia University.

The American Educational Research Association is an international professional organization with the primary goal of advancing educational research and its practical application. Iverson’s presentation to the national audience highlighted her award-winning dissertation, “A Policy Discourse Analysis of U.S. Land-Grant University Diversity Action Plans.”

Diversity action plans are the primary vehicles postsecondary institutions use to advance their commitment to and strategies for achieving an inclusive and equitable climate for all members of the campus community.

In her research, Iverson collected and examined 21 plans generated by 20 land-grant universities across the country during a five-year period from 1999 to 2004. She analyzed the plans for problems and solutions related to diversity and then identified the broader discourses – language, images and messages – in the policy documents.

“Discourse circulates socially, and these dominant messages contribute to shaping our reality,” said Iverson. “The goal was to understand how these policy documents describe diversity and contribute to constructing a particular reality for members of the institution.”

Iverson’s analysis revealed calls for improved recruitment, retention and advancement practices to build and support a more diverse campus and climate. However, the dominant discourses evident in the study produced images of diverse persons as “outsiders” to the institution, as “victims” of discrimination and of being “at-risk” before and after entering the university.

By constructing these students and employees as “already” and “always” victims dependent on the institution for success and protection instead of highlighting the problems to be solved, resulting policy can further marginalize the people it aimed to empower, according to Iverson.