While the dropout rate for black students compared to white students is significantly lower for the United States as whole, this is not true of every university.

As of 2005, the graduation rate at Harvard University for black students is 95 percent and eleven other top universities graduation rates for black students are above 85 percent (JBHE, 89).

It is clear that these students are entirely capable of completing their education at universities with high standards. One factor contributing to this, is the efforts these schools make to ensure all students feel welcome. Many of these universities, “ have set in place orientation and retention programs to help black students adapt to the culture of predominantly white campuses,” (JBHE, 90). While there are other contributing factors, this information shows how feeling welcomed by the university had a positive impact on the graduation rates of these black students. Low socioeconomic standing is a large factor leading to a student dropping out, yet minority students also face feeling unwelcome and being constantly aware of their minority status, if the university they attend does not strive to change this.

Is Clemson’s curriculum inclusive enough for minority students?

Are minority students able to relate to teachings on a personal level?

These are difficult questions to answer.

Unfortunately, Clemson’s faculty also suffers from a diversity problem, less than four percent of the full-time staff are African-American, and so far, nothing is being done to change this (Shain, 1). Not only are minority students coming into classrooms where they could be the only minority student, but they are likely being taught by mostly white professors. Many may think, while this is unfortunate, they are still learning and it does not matter who teaches them. However, positive and strong student-teacher relationships have been found to make teaching strategies more effective (Marzano, 1). If a teacher is not a minority, or has not been taught how to be inclusive, it would be rather difficult for them to connect to minority students and therefore more difficult to effectively teach them. A stronger effort needs to be made to diversify Clemson as a whole. With a more diverse staff, more of Clemson’s students will be able to connect to their teacher and to what they are teaching.

This also brings up the point of curriculum, and whether it is properly shaped for all students. Clemson has a dark past, the land the school sits on once held a plantation and had slaves. Rhondda Thomas, an African-American literature professor, noticed that the tours of Fort Hill did not mention slaves (Shain, 1).

People think that hiding Clemson’s shameful past is less harmful, when in fact it is from history that humanity learns its biggest mistakes and strives to avoid them in the future.

It is as A.D. Carson said in his video starting See The Stripes, “And if that is an uncomfortable truth for the institution, so be it. These are the stripes we bear, so see them. Slavery, sharecropping and convict labor paved the streets and sidewalks of this ‘high seminary of learning’...” (“See The Stripes”, 1).

Students cannot truly be prepared for the world if they are only taught to see the good; it is the duty of their education to show them the truth.

Clemson has made some efforts to listen to their students. Rhondda Thomas’ research into the convict laborers who constructed the original campus led to a series discussing race on campus, and Fort Hill has added an exhibit about the slaves who lived there (Shain, 1). The Diversity Office regularly holds events educating students about different cultures. The Gantt Multicultural Center was opened in August 2015, the Center advises: the Black Student Union, Council on Diversity Affairs, Gay Straight Alliance, Latinos Unidos, International Student Association, and the National Pan-Hellenic Council (Gouch, 1). Five Clemson students also started the Minority Student Success Initiative in 2011, which puts on events, features programs, and provides other services all dedicated to the success of Clemson’s minority students (“Clemson MSSI”, 1). While these are all positive occurrences, had people not brought the public’s attention to these issues, or sought to solve them, it is unlikely the administration of Clemson would have felt compelled to implement these actions.

Even though Clemson has made some progress, it is not enough. The curriculums need to be made more inclusive, so that students can relate to what they are being taught. American curriculums are often accused of “master scripting”, when “...classroom practices, pedagogy, and instructional materials... are grounded in Eurocentric and White supremacist ideologies,” (Swartz, 341). Not only could this create misinformation, but also alienates minority students from their learning. It is the duty of the university to be considering what it is teaching its students. If indeed any “master scripting” is occurring, the administration should be taking steps to prevent this. Staff should themselves be taking courses on the importance of inclusive teaching and how to incorporate this into their curriculums. Course wide syllabi should be constructed with care to prevent such biases from occurring. Textbooks should be evaluated to ensure that they are not biased against minorities or have “master scripting”. These ideas would take a large effort, and likely budget, to accomplish, so the key is to gradually implement them. Clemson’s administration may not consider these a high priority, yet steps need to be taken to solve the underlying issues of Clemson’s diversity.

Clemson must stop simply creating band-aid solutions when the public notices wrongdoing, and fix the issues at our core.