May 12

Barack Obama and Affirmative Action

Even as Barack Obama became the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee last Tuesday, his continuing failure to win white working-class voters clouds his prospects for November. The inability to connect with noncollege educated whites also undercuts his claim to being a truly transformative candidate — a Robert F. Kennedy figure — who could significantly change the direction of the country. In the fall campaign, however, Obama’s suggestion that he may be ready to change the focus of affirmative action policies in higher education — away from race to economic class — could prove pivotal in his efforts to reach working-class whites, and revive the great hopes of Bobby Kennedy’s candidacy.

Looking for a job?

See all 193 new postings

Browse all job listings:

Faculty: 2,602
Administrative: 2,156
Executive: 157
FEATURED EMPLOYERS

Affirmative action is a highly charged issue, which most politicians stay away from. But nothing could carry more potent symbolic value with Reagan Democrats than for Obama to end the Democratic Party’s 40 years of support for racial preferences and to argue, instead, for preferences — in college admissions and elsewhere — based on economic status. Obama needs to do something dramatic. Right now, while people inside and outside the Obama campaign are making the RFK comparison, working-class whites aren’t buying it. The results in Tuesday’s Indiana primary are particularly poignant. Obama won handily among black Hoosiers, but lost the non-college educated white vote to Hillary Clinton by 66-34 percent. Forty years earlier, by contrast, Kennedy astonished observers by forging a coalition of blacks and working class whites, the likes of which we have rarely seen since then.

On May 6, 1968, the day before the Indiana primary, Kennedy participated in an iconic motorcade through industrial Lake County, with black mayor Richard Hatcher sitting on one side of Kennedy and boxer Tony Zale, the native son hero of Gary’s Slavic steelworkers on the other. On primary election day, running against Eugene McCarthy and a stand in for Hubert Humphrey, Kennedy
swept the black vote but also white working-class wards which four years earlier had supported Alabama Governor George Wallace’s presidential bid. Author Robert Coles told Kennedy, “There is something going on here that has to do with real class politics.”

Of course, Obama’s skin color may have made it more difficult for him to attract these voters than it had been for Kennedy. But in some ways RFK had it harder: The May 1968 primary came on the heels of widespread urban rioting spawned by Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination in April. Blue
collar whites and blacks were at each others throats, and Kennedy was the one national politician most closely associated with black America.

In Obama’s campaign to win over working-class whites, pundits have pointed to two key obstacles: his 20 year association with the angry and race-obsessed Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Obama’s condescending comments about the bitterness of small-town white working-class voters. Some working-class whites appear to believe that Obama is not on their side — worried that he may favor black interests over theirs, and at the same time that he looks down his nose on people like them. The image may be unfair, the result of a single comment he made, played up by his political opponents, but the notion could stick nonetheless.

Obama is right to talk about shared concerns of all working people, such as better health care and schools. But to catch the attention of working-class whites, he needs to do something striking, which further distances himself from the Rev. Wrights of the world, who view life through the lens of race, and also signals to working-class whites that he understands that they deserve a helping hand too. Switching the basis of affirmative action policies from race to class would do just that.

Thus far, Obama has hinted that he’s ready for the shift. While Obama has in the past been a strong supporter of race-based affirmative action, in his debate in Philadelphia with Hillary Clinton, he said in response to a question that his own privileged daughters do not deserve affirmative action preferences, and that working-class students of all colors do. He needs to make this explicit, to spell out the new policy, and explain why he is shifting away from his traditional reliance on race-based policies.

Supporting a shift to class-based affirmative action would be the logical policy manifestation of his well received speech on race in Philadelphia back in March. In the address, Obama made clear that this nation needs some form of affirmative action to address the legacy of discrimination in America. He noted that legalized discrimination in FHA loans, for example, prevented blacks from borrowing to purchase homes, leaving older blacks with little accumulated wealth to pass down to today’s generations. And he observed that many African Americans continue to attend to attended inferior segregated schools, to live in neighborhoods with concentrated poverty, and to grow up
in single parent households, all of which are connected to some degree to discrimination.

On the other hand, Obama acknowledged many of the arguments made by opponents of affirmative action, who say that while such policies might have once made sense, it is now time to move on. Obama faulted Rev. Wright for failing to recognize that significant racial progress has been made, and he urged the country to “move beyond our old racial wounds.” Then, amazingly for a Democratic politician, he observed: “Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel they have been particularly privileged by their race.... As far as they’re concerned, no one handed them anything.”

Resentment builds, Obama said, “when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed.” These resentments, he said are not “misguided or even racist,” but rather are “grounded in legitimate concerns.”

Class-based affirmative action reconciles both points of view. It avoids the explicit use of race that working-class whites resent, moving us beyond the “racial stalemate” Obama described. But a carefully conceived economic affirmative action program would also try to capture the full legacy of
discrimination of which Obama spoke. It would be colorblind but not blind to history. Discrimination has economic manifestations, and college admissions officers could give a leg up to smart students who overcome various obstacles which disproportionately affect African Americans: growing up in a low-income household, one headed by a single-parent, a family lacking in accumulated wealth, and residing in neighborhoods with concentrated of poverty, and attending low quality schools. Under such a program, low-income and working-class kids of all races would benefit — people like the young Barack Obama or John Edwards — but not students like Barack Obama’s own children.

Moving to class-based preferences would at once remove a terrible source of division and instead reinforce the common interests of working-class voters. And it would do more than just help Obama get elected. Reviving the old RFK coalition would give Obama a mandate to enact the type of far reaching change than hasn’t been fully entertained since Kennedy’s death.

Richard D. Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, is author of The Remedy: Class, Race, and Affirmative Action.

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

This is the most important commentary published at this site, but it could be improved by expanding the focus beyond white working-class voters. I am far from working-class but will never vote for a candidate who supports discrimination against my children and grandchildren because of their sex and/or race. There must be many non-working-class victims of affirmative action (males, whites, Asians etc.) who feel this way. Just as Nixon could go to China, Obama can be the one to help end legally-sanctioned discrimination once and for all while creating an avenue for support from voters such as myself. Justice O’Connor’s suspension of the 14th Amendment allows discrimination but does not require it. As President, Obama could lead a legislative end to affirmative action without waiting for O’Connor’s 25-year period of allowable discrimination to end. What a triumph that would be for him and for our country.

End It Now, at 9:05 am EDT on May 12, 2008

Huge Opportunity for Obama

Exactly right, Rick Kahlenberg. And Obama needs to act quickly. If McCain moves in that direction first, Obama will be seen as a “me-too” candidate. If Obama moves first, it will send a convincing signal that Obama is indeed the candidate of change and that he wants to end racial divisiveness. It will bury the Rev. Wright issue and free Obama for the fall campaign.

Political Scientist, at 10:00 am EDT on May 12, 2008

Obama and SES not SAT affirmative action

Yes, I agree that Obama should address this issue. It is long past time for SES “affirmative action.” But we should not forget just how many undergraduate admissions decision are affected by racial affirmative action, which is very, very few. And those institutions that are selective and concerned with selecting for diversity, they should look carefully at the 10% solution adopted by the University of Texas. There’s no conflict between academic merit and the goals of racial and SES affirmative action, if one drops the SAT (which is academically useless but positively favors high SES youths) and instead relies on high school grades and class rank. On the case for this, see my The Power of Privilege, and the article by Alon and Tienda in the American Sociological Review, 72, 4, 2007: 487-511.

Joseph A. Soares, Associate Professor at Wake Forest University, at 10:00 am EDT on May 12, 2008

O’Bama wouldn’t dare

Despite being routinely rejected for scholarships in the seventies that went to blacks with half my GPA and SATs but twice my income and for federal civil service positions afterward where PACE scores were discarded as “prejudicial” and group interviews revealed minority management candidates subsequently selected by all-minority hiring boards to be near-illiterate, I ardently support O’Bama. I fear, however, that if he publicly takes the anti-racial-preferences position suggested by this sloppy article, he will be savaged by the guilt-blinded liberal democratic establishment more viciously than staunch conservatives have pilloried McCain for perceived compromises of that granite credo. He should brave the firestorm and while demanding equal opportunity destroy affirmative action because it is the Right thing to do (in every sense of the word), will not cost him liberal votes in the end, and could attract that handful of disenchanted Republican voters which could tip the balance come November...if November ever comes.

Steve S. Rolling, at 10:15 am EDT on May 12, 2008

Class-based affirmative action would be a great thing to have in our higher education system, but it is not “the answer” to addressing the legacies of discrimination facing students of color. Rather, it should be coupled with existing affirmative action programs and with programs that have colleges and universities invest in improving the educational experience of majority-minority school systems in their local areas.

First of all, there are more poor whites than there are poor students of color—so a class-based affirmative action system would not increase the access of students of color to the educational system and would have the possibility of decreasing black representation in higher education.

Second, class-based affirmative action can address some of the inequities of pre-collegiate education (such as lack of ability to pay for SAT prep courses) but it can not address others (like the fact that at a given income level, black students are likely to live in school districts that are poorer and less well funded due to persistent residential and scholastic segregation, as well as due to the existence of stereotype threat).

Finally, the vast majority of colleges and universities simply do not have the financial wherewithal to support the increased numbers of very low-income students that class-based affirmative action would admit. Without a massive infusion of federal student aid dollars, these programs would result in admissions but not enrollments; even with a massive infusion of federal student aid dollars, the beneficial effects of these programs would be limited to the more inexpensive public institutions that already enroll a disproportionate number of low income students and to some of the wealthiest colleges and universities out there. Expensive publics and poorer private colleges and universities simply will not be able to participate and therefore will become the reserve of the white middle and upper classes—replicating segregation all over again.

Mikaila Arthur, Department of Sociology at Hamilton College, at 10:20 am EDT on May 12, 2008

Hey! Who let the facts out?

I’m reminded of my white male average PhD friend with an above-average dissertation who watched peers with only average dissertations in a “miracle” get Ivy posts, while he got Commuter U.

Why? How?

Justice O’Conner got it right. A deadline is approaching. Everyday people have had it with outrageous abuses of talent, merit, the public’s money, and public trust.

Enough. Time for real “change.”

Frank, at 10:50 am EDT on May 12, 2008

AA and Title IV interactions

Professor Arthur asks good questions (above) about how class-based affirmative action would affect black representation in higher education, and how more federal student aid may be required in a class-based system.

Unfortunately, the current race-based system has interacted with the current federal student aid system to advantage higher-income blacks against both lower-income blacks and whites. As federal need-based grant aid increased, many colleges shifted their own financial support toward the non-needy. The result has been much grant aid wasted on blacks and whites that were already headed for college, widening access gaps for the low-income of all races and ethnicities. Understandably, this has caused great resentment.

The solution is not to pit low-income blacks against low-income whites; they have both been victimized by the interaction of current policies. Moving toward class-based affirmative action and prohibiting federal HEA Title IV participating institutions from undermining federal need-based aid will both be required to close race and income gaps.

Political Scientist, at 1:35 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

You say your proposal would have helped the young Barack Obama and John Edwards. Edwards, whose father was a low-paid mill worker, perhaps, but Obama? He was raised by his two grandparents in a high-rise condo in Honolulu. His grandmother was a bank vice-president. Obama attended the most expensive private school on Oahu. Exactly how would he have been qualified as economically disadvantaged in those circumstances? You also don’t mention the fact that Obama’s father (the Kenyan man who abandoned Obama at age 2) attended graduate school at Harvard. Obama hardly comes from a “disadvantaged” background, unless you consider the father’s abandonment as a disadvantage. It may well have been, but it is hardly one that is attributable to systemic racial discrimination in the U.S.

Observer, at 2:10 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Why not abolish all affirmative action?

Why not abolish all “affirmative action?” Pitting class against class is no more moral or honorable than pitting race against race, or gender against gender. Why don’t we try doing something about lousy inner-city schools, for example? (Of course, that would require stepping on the toes of the teachers’ and other unions who profit from the government school monopoly, but one can dream...) How about urging the Rockefellers and Soroses of the world to send their millions to improving education for poor and black and female and disabled kids, rather than to ultra-rich (while tax exempt) Harvard, or to moveon.org? How about bringing back the nuclear family, the best, most proven anti-poverty program of them all? How about putting the emphasis on providing opportunity, rather than on taking away from others? Or is the politics of resentment just too much fun?

lawrence franko, at 2:15 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Affirmative Action

“Class-based affirmative action would be a great thing to have in our higher education system, but it is not “the answer” to addressing the legacies of discrimination facing students of color.”

Oddly enough, those legacies seem to be inherited mainly by black students of inner city schools and not those of urban schools. Furthermore, the inner city schools are taught primarily by black teachers, the schools are run by black administrators and boards, and the per capita funding is on par with that of the other school systems. If you want to eliminate the need for affirmative action find out what is not working in the inner city educational programs and fix it. So far the only suggestions are based on getting them out of the black taught/administered schools and into the white taught/administered schools (busing, vouchers, etc.).

Willis, at 3:05 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

If affirmative action generates this much heat at a site like this imagine what it is doing down at the corner bar. Affirmative action could turn out to be one of the sleeper issues that decide this election. If McCain comes out early, clearly and loudly against affirmative action he might cement white, male, and Asian victims of preferences to his candidacy. This could have been true for Clinton as well but it is too late. If Obama comes out early, clearly and loudly against affirmative action he changes the dynamic of the election. He becomes the champion of those to whom he previously seemed the embodiment of the forces using affirmative action against them. White and Asian men for Obama! Each candidates should rush to oppose affirmative action before his rival beats him to the punch.

End It Now, at 3:05 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Obama and Aff Action

Obama breaking from the traditional Democratic party views on affirmative action is not going to happen.

(1) Obama dreads most the flip-flopper label and he is already on record as opposing state efforts to eliminate race-based affirmative action, efforts specifically encouraged by O’Connor in her Grutter opinion. Obama went so far as to actively campaign against Michigan Proposal 2.http://www.weeklystandard.com/Con...ic/Articles/000/000/014/823xthib.asp

(2) Obama cannot tread into this minefield without exposing himself to the question: “How did you personally benefit from affirmative action in your transfer admission to Columbia as an undergrad and your admission into Harvard Law? Please provide your GPA’s (high school and college), ACT, SAT and LSAT’s so your answer can be objectively verified.

Bill, at 3:45 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Obama Democratic candidate?

It would be helpful and honest to note that Obama is only one of at least two Democratic candidates. He does not have the nomination of the Democratic Party. He has a viable opponent who is far more concerned with affirmative action for middle class and lower-middle-class Americans than he. The bias of the author or this article is blatant. Obama does not represent all Democrats any more than McCain represents all Republicans, and neither man represents or will ever represent all Americans. Obama’s problem, and the problem of the Democratic Party, is their shift to fascist tactics where they will disenfranchise voters who have not voted and states which have later primaries. If Obama and the Democratic Party’s “leaders” like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean force Obama’s opponent to fold and drop out a lot of us life-long Democrats will vote against Obama and the DNC. We do have the ability to think and act for ourselves and not all of us are willing to be puppets nor slaves to a machine such as the Obamacrats would have us become.

Dr Arthur Frederick Ide, at 4:30 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

” many African Americans continue to ... grow up in single parent households, all of which are connected to some degree to discrimination “

Mr. Kahlenberg lost credibility by making this inane comment. Discrimination causes single parent households?? Mr Kahlenberg seems to feel that discrimination is the root of all social problems. Give him a hammer, and suddenly everything needs pounding.

How about this novel idea — instead of finding a new rationalization for affirmative action, just end it. It has been a failure by any objective measure. If you put lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig. “Class Based Affirmative Action” is Discrimination with lipstick on.

Ernest, at 4:45 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Just end it

The trail that Obama could and should blaze is the end of affirmative action, not a new direction for affirmative action.

Higher education needs to look at inviting the most promising students to its programs. Those students should be selected on the basis of academic ability.

If you want to win over me, assure me that you only want to end affirmative action of any form. Everyone competes without government intervention.

Sid, at 4:45 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Scholarships, not affirmative action

The problem is that affirmative action by class or income will just have the same disastrous effect of mismatching students from colleges where they might succeed to colleges where they might fail. What is really needed to help people of whatever race at the lower rungs of the ladder is greatly improved K-12 education (which means standing up to the teacher’s unions, which Obama makes teasing references to, but seems unlikely to do) followed up with scholarships based on need and meaningful grades. Otherwise you’ll just be treating poor whites to the current system for blacks: the pretense that somehow one is better off saddled with the loans for flunking out of a first- or second-tier school after a few years when one might have graduated with a useful degree from a third- or fourth-tier school.

Bill Adams, at 6:25 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Raw Politics makes AA locked in

The Prof. makes a cardinal error. Obama cannot dump current Affirmative Action because his electoral coalition is based on it, and furthermore, Affirmative Action creates winners and losers out of a limited set of resources.

There are so many higher ed slots, and admission and financial aid to Harvard and other Ivies is limited. Harvard is worth more, lifetime earnings-wise, than Commuter U.

Affirmative Action is the result of the electoral coalition of wealthy whites (who like the status-mongering and blocking effect of upwardly mobile whites who present competitive threats) and Blacks. There is no compromise in it. Middle-Working class whites without wealth and connections are hurt (resources taken from them) and given to Blacks, Hispanics, and other interest groups (Asians are often exempt, and have sued the UC for informal quotas limiting them in favor of Blacks and Hispanics).

That’s what it is. How can any compromise work? Lessening resources given to Blacks/Hispanics threatens Obama’s (and really all Dem coalitions). That’s why Affirmative Action “works” in a political way. It does what it does. Benefits some, hurts others.

It’s a fight over limited resources. Those resources are not going to increase, there’s no magic.

Jim Rockford, at 7:10 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

I suspect that Obama will only make a few cosmetic changes to Affirmative Action. The “civil rights” lobby will tolerate no more than that.

David, Graduate Student — Mathematics at Texas A&M, at 7:10 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Really?

Do you really believe Sen. Obama (D-Hope, No, Really) is going to renounce race-based affirmative action for higher education?

Come on: really?

Denny, Alaska, at 7:55 pm EDT on May 12, 2008

Think about it

Wow, what a lot of Angry White Men. Listen, fellows, I have plenty of stories of my own, of out-publishing the men and bringing in more grant money and being shoved behind the door in the promotion stakes. And being told I didn’t need the raise because I didn’t have a wife and children. Give me a freakin’ break. Everyone has a story.

Affirmative action is not, need not be about raising unqualified kids above qualified kids.

But be real. At some point, the extra points on the SAT or GRE are meaningless. Once you have a suitable qualification and can do the work, doe s it matter? Sure, throw class and socio-economic status in there. PUt it all in the hopper and find bright kids who will make something of themselves regardless of color. Maybe Obama can do that and revisit the concept, away from entitlement or lower standards (Which is not what it is, or should be about) and more about setting a reasonable bar and going from there.

Anyone who teaches grad/professional school knows that lots of kids with 4.0 GPAs are lost in grad school, where lots of kids with 3.0 or 3.5s have great hands and a real knack for science. My best students have often been those without the Ivy degrees or prestige.

I look around my undergrad classroom at my R1 which is as diverse and colorful as you can imagine in every way, and I guarantee that the poor black kid from the ghetto is more than holding his own with the rich white girl from the hillsides. Maybe his scores were not as high as some kids who were turned down. But neither was the football team’s. This kid’s scores were more than enough to qualify him for the work, he’s doing great work, and he will turn his education into something. And what’s wrong with that?

Biosciprof, at 5:40 am EDT on May 13, 2008

Class-based privledge for the suffering masses? Sounds more Marxist than Black Power to me.

Richard of Oregon, at 5:40 am EDT on May 13, 2008

good post biosciprof.I’m surprised at some of the tired old B.S. posters are coming out with. even variations on the old obviously ridiculous “I’m a white male with a great ph.d. from a top 20 school and applied for 1000 tenure track jobs but didn’t get any because they’re only hiring blacks.” I remember a few weeks ago reading an article and some comments on affirmative action and feeling good that the conversation has gone beyond that kind of stuff. Apparently I was wrong.

John, at 2:10 pm EDT on May 13, 2008

Some Thoughtful Commentary from the Left

As a card-carrying Republican, but “swing voter” who will punch a ticket for a Democrat who makes sense, I find this article intriguing on many levels.

I will say that my general view over the years has been that affirmative action should be limited to Native Americans and black Americans, and also should be limited to educational opportunities (as opposed to jobs, appointments, tenure, etc.). The idea is that discrimination on account of race is inherently wrong, and two wrongs do not make a right, but if you limited “affirmative action” to education and to Native Americans and black Americans you could minimize the discrimination by growing programs to accomodate the affirmative action candidates who otherwise might not qualify on their merits. For example, your Ivy League college with a class of 1,000, could, resources permitting, expand to 1,100 with those additional 100 slots in essence becoming the affirmative action program. I understand the concept of “opportunity cost” and it is somewhat artificial to assert that the class would not otherwise have grown by 100 students, but theoretically, the 1,000 non-affirmative action students (of all backgrounds) would not be penalized on account of their race.

I never liked the idea of “diversity” replacing 70’s style affirmative-action because it does not address the justification for the discrimination against the “non-diverse” candidates (remedying the vestiges of slavery and other discrimination against African-Americans). Moreover, I find it troubling that there is no rhyme or reason as to means for identifying someone of who “adds diversity” and who does not. Is “diversity” on college campuses just a euphemism for discriminating against WASPS, Jews and perhaps Asian Americans?

You make a strong case for class-based affirmative action, at the college level. This already goes on, and has gone on for years, by the way, at the Ivy League level. I remain concerned, however, that class-based affirmative action strays from the ideal of evaluating persons based on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, or their parents. Are students from wealthy backgrounds inherently less desirable? They did not choose their parents. Why should two students who attend the same high school be treated differently -with the wealthy student in essence being penalized because his parents made a lot of money? And then we get into the fine distinctions. Should the son or daughter of a Ph.D. who works for a meager wage at a non-profit be held to a lower, or higher, standard than the son or daughter of a 9th grade dropout who made millions in business?

Perhaps this article raises more questions than it answers, but it advances the debate in a positive way and I commend the author.

Vox Clams, at 8:45 pm EDT on May 13, 2008

AA for Rich Whites?

I am always amused when some feel discriminated because minorities supposedly take their “place” in the admissions/ employment/preference arenas, but no one talks about the dim but rich white legacy student who received preferential treatment.

Affirmative action for the rich is the elephant in the room that everyone tries to ignore — or perhaps we’re too scared to discuss this issue?

Joropa, at 10:20 am EDT on May 15, 2008

Obama and affirmative action

There has been much talk about Obama’s road into higher education, but what about Mrs Obama? She seems to demonstrate the “you owe us” symptoms of the affirmative action “black rage” minority but perhaps she got into college on merit and not by keeping a better deserving candidate out. As she is figuring a lot in the presidental campaign, it would be worth knowing her SAT scores, etc.

Reggie von Zugbach, Prof at Emeritus, at 2:50 pm EDT on June 24, 2008

Jobs Related to Barack Obama and Affirmative Action

or search for jobs directly.

Equal Opportunity and Diversity Officer
San Diego Community College District

The San Diego Community College District is accepting applications to fill the position of Equal Opportunity and Diversity ... see job

Multicultural Programs Specialist
Angelo State University

Angelo State University’s work environment is often described as an employee community. This applies to the work culture ... see job

Coordinator for Diversity Recruitment — Admission Counselor
Loyola College in Maryland

TERRITORY MANAGEMENT/OFF-CAMPUS RECRUITING Duties include current or future initiatives with community based and talent ... see job

Assistant Equal Opportunity/Ada Officer
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Under the direction of the University Equal Opportunity/ADA Officer, the Assistant Equal Opportunity/ADA Officer will manage ... see job

Residence Director/Program Coordinator
Lake Forest College

The Residence Director/Program Coordinator is a full-time, 10 month position with a half-time appointment each in both the ... see job

Coordinator — Center for Intercultural Advancement
Wagner College

Wagner College values campus diversity (domestic and international) and in keeping with this initiative, it welcomes ... see job

Director of African American Student Programs
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Diversity, Outreach and Recruitment Counselor
Azusa Pacific University

DIVERSITY OUTREACH AND RECRUITMENT COUNSELOR Undergraduate Admissions This person reports to the Associate Director of ... see job

International Student Advisor
Western Carolina University

Western Carolina University is seeking qualified applicants for the position of International Student Advisor. This position ... see job

Assistant Director of Multicultural Affairs
Western Carolina University

Western Carolina University, a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina, announces its search for the new ... see job