Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This research contributes to the ongoing conversation regarding university diversity by examining the decision making at public universities. It calls for a greater theorizing of the state when it comes to issues of diversity governance. I argue that a principal agent model is the incorrect framework for understanding diversity governance. Instead regime theory more accurately characterizes the ways in which institutional actors mobilize to resist, manage or embrace diversity. Using 41 interviews with facuty, staff and administrators at four public universities, I I identify four regime types: assimilation regimes, accomodationist regimes, cosmopolitan regimes and cultural pluralist regimes. I argue that each type of regime works to institutionalize a given set of norms and values into its everyday practices and that, because cultural pluralist regimes emphasize diversity as process rather than diversity as concept, it provides the best opportunity to sustain an effective diversity coalition, although this coalition formation strategy is not without its problems.