Situation
The university in which this department operates offers graduate fellowships to students who are “disadvantaged” under the state-sponsored Graduate Opportunities Program. In practice these funds are awarded by the university at the recommendation of the graduate programs predominantly to students of color although they are also available to white students who can demonstrate sustained economic hardship, e.g., welfare recipients. The graduate program actively solicits students of color using via these funds. It allows them not only to pursue their own and the university’s diversity goals, but also to stretch the meager funds they have available for graduate students support, all of which is in the form of graduate teaching assistantships. The result is that white students are awarded teaching assistantships and students of color are awarded university fellowships out of the pot that is set aside for disadvantaged students. No one has complained about this arrangement, but it is clear that white students have to work as teaching assistants to get support and that students of color have no work requirements and, on the other hand, that white students also get the teacher training and teaching experience offered by the department and students of color do not.
Questions
- Is the departmental practice of awarding GOP fellowships to graduate students of color with the result that it deprives them of teaching experience unethical?
- Is the departmental practice of awarding white students teaching assistantships for which they must work and students of color GOP fellowships for which they do not unethical?
- Does the fact that this practice arises from the department’s effort to offer financial support to as many graduate students as possible overshadow any ethical concerns?
- Does the fact that it is a state/university program that constrains the department to act in the way it does when it attempts to maximize graduate student funding obviate any ethical concerns?
Discussion
The department is in a difficult position here and one that might leave them open to accusations of discriminatory practice. It would certainly be reasonable for the department to bring the dysfunctional consequences of departmental attempts to deal with both the shortage of graduate student support, on the one hand, and the existence of the GOP monies, on the other to the attention of the university administration to see if anything can be done to augment the financial support available to departmental graduate students. The fact that the problem results from a well-intentioned effort to fund as many students possible and the structural constraints of the available pool of additional money does not obviate any ethical concerns. The fact is that the department is engaging in a discriminatory pattern and practice.
The department might see whether or not there was a way to offer GOP recipients teacher training and, perhaps, at least occasional opportunities to teach. Since the department awards support, contingent on satisfactory progress toward the degree, for more than one year, the department might also try to assess the impact of seeking GOP funding for students for only part of their careers as graduate students and paying them out of teaching assistantship funds for the remaining portion of what would have been the GOP fellowship period. That would reduce the amount of aid available overall, but might be more equitable.
