National Resource Centers Survey Questionnaire
Introductory Script: KEN Consulting, Inc. has been contracted by the Department of Education to evaluate the National Resource Centers (NRC) program application process, particularly as it relates to understanding and addressing Absolute Priority 1: Promoting diverse perspectives and a wide range of views and generating debate on world regions and international affairs. We invite you to share your insights about this requirement and overall experiences with the program to improve the application process. The questions relate to your institution’s National Resource Center (NRC) activities Specifically, we are looking to better understand how you and peer institutions in this program are interpreting and addressing the requirement in section 601 of Title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. That section requires applicants desiring a grant to describe how their activities will promote diverse perspectives, and how they will assess the effectiveness of efforts to promote diverse perspectives and a wide range of views and generate debate on world regions and international affairs.
We have already reviewed all 100 successful applications in the current NRC funding cycle to see how grantees proposed to address this requirement in their applications, and we found that they interpreted and responded to the diverse perspectives requirement in many different ways. We then followed up with virtual site visits to five of the grantees to get a more in-depth understanding about their approach and to get their thoughts about this absolute priority and its impact on their programs. Our next step is to conduct an online survey of all NRCs on this topic. The goal of our study is to help provide clarity for future applicants so that they can better understand the purpose of the requirement and respond in their applications and proposed programs in ways that ensure they are meeting the intent of the legislative requirement.
Questions:
Which world region/theme is the NRC’s focus of study?
☐ Africa
☐ Canada
☐ East Asia
☐ International
☐ Latin America
☐ Middle East
☐ Russia, Eastern Europe, Eurasia
☐ South Asia
☐ Southeast Asia
☐ Western Europe
What type of NRC?
☐ Comprehensive
☐ Undergraduate
☐ Comprehensive Consortium
☐ Undergraduate Consortium
|
Used |
Planned to use, but didn’t |
Not used |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
If “other” was selected from above, please describe the other activities you had in mind for that selection.
|
Academic audiences, such as faculty, graduate students, leading scholars/ researchers (Select up to three) |
Non-specialist audiences, such as K-12 students and teachers, most undergraduate students, the general community (Select up to three) |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
What made these activities/programs most successful at promoting diverse perspectives and/or generating debate?
|
Academic audiences, such as faculty, graduate students, leading scholars/ researchers (Select only one) |
Non-specialist audiences, such as K-12 students and teachers, most undergraduate students, the general community (Select only one) |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
What made these activities/programs least effective for promoting diverse perspectives and/or generating debate?
Do you think the Absolute Priority as currently written asking applicants to describe how the activities funded by the grant will “reflect diverse perspectives and a wide range of views and generate debate on world regions and international affairs” is too vague, too specific, or appropriate?
☐ Too vague
☐ Too specific
☐ Appropriate
Specify
If “too specific”: What are your concerns about how specific it is?
If “appropriate”: Why is this degree of specificity acceptable to describe your NRC’s activities and programs?
|
Strongly Agree |
Agree |
Neither agree nor disagree |
Disagree |
Strongly Disagree |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
If “other” was selected from above, please describe the other considerations you had in mind for that selection.
To what extent do you agree that NRC-sponsored panels or debates about issues in your world region should include speakers representing the following? |
Strongly Agree |
Agree |
Neither agree nor disagree |
Disagree |
Strongly Disagree |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
|
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
☐ |
If “other” was selected from above, please describe the other types of speaker representation you had in mind for that selection.
Please rank these forms of diversity from the one that was given the most emphasis when completing the NRC’s application and planning related projects and activities to the one given the least emphasis. (Most Emphasis = 1)
____ Interdisciplinary diversity
____ Racial/ethnic diversity
____ Political/ideological diversity
____ Gender/sexuality diversity
____ National diversity within your NRC’s world region
____ Cultural/religious diversity within your NRC’s world region
____ Diversity of perspectives across world regions
____ Diversity of your NRC’s institutional partners
____ Other
If “other” was selected from above, please describe the other type of diversity that was focused on.
What influenced the “highest emphasis” rating for the diversity aspect you chose? (Select all that apply)
☐ Impression that was what the Department of Education and/or Congress wanted
☐ The NRC has a history of successfully addressing this type of diversity
☐ An awareness that the NRC needs to focus more on this type of diversity than previously
☐ Faculty generally agreed that this type of diversity was most important
☐ Consistent with the university-wide initiative to promote this type of diversity
☐ Other (Specify): ___________________
What influenced the decision to address the other types of diversity in the application, even though the emphasis was not as highly prioritized? (Select all that apply)
☐ Impression that was what the Department of Education and/or Congress wanted
☐ The NRC has a history of successfully addressing this type of diversity
☐ An awareness that the NRC needs to focus more on this type of diversity than previously
☐ Faculty generally agreed that this type of diversity was most important
☐ Consistent with the university-wide initiative to promote this type of diversity
☐ Other (Specify): ___________________
Which of the following procedures/structures are in place to ensure diverse perspectives are represented on the NRC’s board/committee/council?
☐ Regular elections for board/committee/council seats open to a wide range of academic departments across the university
☐ Ex-officio seats on the board/committee/council to ensure representation from key subject areas and partners (e.g., former department chairs, academic deans, emeritus faculty, library personnel)
☐ University student representation on board/committee/council
☐ Community member representation on board/committee/council
☐ Administrators for local school districts that serve as feeder institutions to the NRC institution representation on board/committee/council
☐ Rotation of board/committee/council chairmanship among various disciplines
☐ Other (Specify): ___________________
How does the NRC governing body receive input from outside to ensure diverse perspectives are considered when making decisions about your projects and activities? (Select all that apply)
☐ Faculty surveys/focus groups
☐ Student surveys/focus groups
☐ Community member surveys/focus groups
☐ Informal conversations among faculty
☐ Informal conversations between faculty and students
☐ Informal conversations with community members
☐ Administrative data (course enrollment data, student body demographics)
☐ Event feedback
☐ Media and the general public
☐ Other. Specify:____________________
☐ None of the above
Does the NRC have any formal decision-making procedures in place for considering/promoting diverse perspectives in your projects and activities?
☐ No
☐ Yes. Please explain below:
Did the NRC develop performance measures that directly assess the effectiveness of your activities in promoting diverse perspectives?
☐ Yes. Only used for grant reporting to the Department of Education through IRIS
☐ Yes. Only used internally for NRC evaluation and decision making
☐ Yes. Used both internally and for grant reporting
When the NRC has tried to expand the diversity of perspectives offered and generate wider debate on world issues, how often has there been pushback or negative reactions from faculty?
☐ Often
☐ Sometimes
☐ Rarely
☐ Never (Go to questions 25)
IF “Often” “Sometimes” or “Rarely”, What was the general nature of the concerns? (Select all that apply)
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too conservative or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too liberal or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being biased, bigoted, or discriminatory (not specifically related to partisan politics)
☐ Objection to partnerships or collaborations with groups or organizations they viewed as controversial
☐ Concern that a controversial topic or speaker would cause tension and disruption
☐ Questioned the academic rigor or evidence used to support certain viewpoints
☐ Other (Specify):
When the NRC has tried to expand the diversity of perspectives offered and generate wider debate on world issues, how often has there been pushback or negative reactions from students?
☐ Often
☐ Sometimes
☐ Rarely
☐ Never (Go to questions 27)
IF “Often” “Sometimes” or “Rarely”: What was the general nature of the concerns? (Select all that apply)
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too conservative or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too liberal or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being biased, bigoted, or discriminatory (not specifically related to partisan politics)
☐ Objection to partnerships or collaborations with groups or organizations they viewed as controversial
☐ Concern that a controversial topic or speaker would cause tension and disruption
☐ Questioned the academic rigor or evidence used to support certain viewpoints
☐ Other (Specify):
When the NRC has tried to expand the diversity of perspectives offered and generate wider debate on world issues, how often has there been pushback or negative reactions from the local community?
☐ Often
☐ Sometimes
☐ Rarely
☐ Never (Go to questions 29)
IF “Often” “Sometimes” or “Rarely”: What was the general nature of the concerns? (Select all that apply)
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too conservative or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being too liberal or extreme
☐ Viewpoints presented perceived as being biased, bigoted, or discriminatory (not specifically related to partisan politics)
☐ Objection to partnerships or collaborations with groups or organizations they viewed as controversial
☐ Concern that a controversial topic or speaker would cause tension and disruption
☐ Questioned the academic rigor or evidence used to support some viewpoints
☐ Other (Specify):
When the Title VI of Higher Education Act is reauthorized, what is your recommendation regarding this requirement?
☐ Retain as currently stated
☐ Revise current language
☐ Replace with another requirement
☐ Eliminate altogether
Public Burden Statement
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1840-xxxx. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30 minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is voluntary. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate, suggestions for improving this individual collection, or if you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual form, application or survey, please contact Sarah Beaton, National Resource Centers Program, 400 Maryland Ave.,SW, 2nd floor, Washington DC 20202, or at sarah.beaton@ed.gov.
File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
Author | Rhonda E. Celey |
File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
File Created | 2022-05-09 |