What are we Doing?
Social Service or Social Change?
By: Stephanie Bondi
I wanted to write a piece for the Commission for Social Justice Educators newsletter because I hear student affairs professionals and students talking about social justice with energy and enthusiasm, but I wonder, when we talk about social justice what does that mean? And how do we do it? I’m still struggling to figure out some answers towards those ends, but I recently read a piece by Paul Kivel (2007) titled, “Social Service or Social Change?” that got me thinking about these questions in a new way. I wanted to put this out for others to ponder along with me.
When I think about student affairs and higher education, I think about my many caring friends and colleagues who commit long hours towards educational and co-curricular goals. I’m guessing many people reading this newsletter fit this description. In his article, Kivel (2007) challenges us to consider whether these long hours we work are indeed moving us toward social justice. If we are listening to minoritized students, helping them navigate the system, coaching and mentoring, and supporting them as they struggle to survive is that social justice?
Kivel argued that social change requires challenging those in power and often results in contentious relationships with those on our campuses who make decisions. Personally, I find it much easier to develop relationships with students and support them as they develop their personal and social identities than to ruffle the feathers of those who pay my salary. But, if I only engage in supporting students in this way is this enough for me to call myself a social justice advocate? What ends come from my being supportive but not challenging the status quo?
Some Examples from Student Affairs
I asked those questions as if there were simple answers, but of course there are not. Part of the complexity of wanting to be involved in social justice work is the relationship between social service and social change. Let me explain further. Some social services originated from more radical efforts to make change. Radical efforts often garner the attention of institutional officers, like a Dean of Students, who grants the protesting group(s) some attention. For example, protesters may indicate that persons are being minoritized based on their sexuality and that the campus needs to address this inequity. In response to enough pressure, the campus may allocate resources such as a meeting space and/or staff time to support these minoritized persons. When the institution grants these resources, they are sending a message that they have responded to the protests, which often give them some goodwill from the public, but they also have power to control these resources. Since the institution controls the resources, the institution controls the way that the resources are used. For example, the director of the multicultural center wants to continue to receive the same amount of funding from year to year, so in order to protect the resources granted by the institution, the director has to choose wisely about challenging the status quo, even if it is causing oppression to students.
What about another example—in the Student Disabilities Services office, much time is spent working with students to secure their documentation of disabilities so they qualify for accommodations. What if instead staff in Student Disability Services spent all of their time working with faculty to change the way they approach teaching and evaluation of learning? Staff could facilitate training on Universal Design principles and work one on one with faculty to improve the accessibility of their classrooms. In this way, little by little, classrooms would become more accessible and fewer and fewer accommodations would be necessary. In this effort towards social change, staff would be addressing some of the root causes of oppression and challenging the status quo. Although more and more Universal Design is being introduced on campuses, this type of approach is not common. Why is that the case?
Why is Change Difficult?
Kendall (2006) believed that we are focused on attending to individuals because we are taught to focus on them. But, also, let’s face it….it’s easier than challenging the dominant way of doing things. When I was reading Kivel’s piece, it made sense to me that social service is a good thing, in that it helps people who are hurting. But, we must remember people are hurting because our institutions and systems continue to hurt them. So, by helping them through the system, we’re doing a service, but the system will continue to go on hurting them and others who follow.
Kivel (2007) contends that it is often by design that social change is so difficult. The ruling class has a history of creating positions or services they can control. They create services that appear to address social issues but that are limited in effectiveness so that the people do not have enough power to rise up and challenge the ruling class. These services are often effective for a few people. This is intended to show that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can be successful; it keeps hope alive and keeps people off the backs of the ruling class.
Additionally, well-meaning individuals are often co-opted by the ruling class when they are hired into institutions. The institution may present a rosy picture of what it wants to achieve in the beginning, but ultimately, the individual may find there are so many rules and regulations restricting them that they cannot do social change work from within. They may find that “their work has to be developed….to meet the guidelines and approval of the ruling class and its representatives” (p. 139).
Throughout his piece, Kivel (2007) presented a number of questions designed for us to use to think more deeply about how we fit into this complicated puzzle.
What are the historical roots of the work that you do? What were your motivations when you began doing this work? Are there ways through your role(s) you have come to enforce the status quo or train young people for their role in it?
Is the primary goal of the work you do to help people get ahead or to help them get together? How do you connect people and nurture and develop leadership skills in the people you serve? How do you ensure that they represent themselves in the agency and other levels of decisionmaking that affect their lives? Do you provide them not only with information related to their own needs, but also with information on how the larger social/political/economic system works to their disadvantage? Does the work you do contribute to ending oppression?
Doing Change Work
How do we know if we are doing social change work? Kivel (2007) said we cannot know this alone or through people telling us we are doing a good job. We need to analyze how our work affects those at the bottom of the social and economic hierarchy and create systems of accountability for ourselves. We need to think about the possible impact of our work on communities we serve in five or ten years.
These concepts have generated more questions than answers for me. However, I welcome the opportunity to have a way to think more critically about my work and life. The questions provided have moved me along in this journey, and I hope that you will go on a fruitful journey as well.
References
Kendall, F. (2006). Understanding White privilege: Creating pathways to authentic relationships across race. New York: Routledge.
Kivel, P. (2007). Social service or social change. In INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence (Eds.), The revolution will not be funded: Beyond the non-profit industrial complex (pp. 129-149). Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
* * * * * * * * * *
Stephanie Bondi is a research assistant at Iowa State University where she is a PhD candidate in the Educational Leadership and Policy program. She currently serves as the Vice Chair for Member Services for CSJE. Contact Stephanie at: sbondi@iastate.edu
|
