Interviewer: Let's get going with the recording. Okay, so I'm here with Undergraduate #2 on April 12. And I have to ask, do you consent to this being recorded and also to this information and everything being posted online?
Undergraduate #2: Yes, yes.
Interviewer: Awesome. So, first question is what organizations are you involved with or in on campus?
Undergraduate #2: So, I currently serve as the president of the Black Student Alliance. I also serve as a community engagement co-chair for African American Affairs, which was an agency under the Multicultural Engagement Center. I am a part of the Friars Honor Society, I was inducted last semester. And I serve as the PR chair for the Black Health Professions Organization.
Interviewer: Awesome. Um, so this wasn't on the list, but Malik Crowder had directed me to you so you could talk about the MEC, would you be able to elaborate a little bit on what your work looked like with the MEC while it was still open?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, basically with AAA and then all of the other agencies under the MEC, we were kind of each based on a different identity. So, we had one for Latino students we had with for Asian students, Native American students, and then we had QTBIPOCA, for the LGBTQ community, but people of color. And so, each of us were just kind of trying to put on events that were for those certain identities. And then we would also try to do, some of us did welcome ceremonies. So, for AAA, we would do New Black Student Weekend. And then I believe, also, our Asian and then Latino agency also had welcome programs. And then agencies would also have graduation ceremonies at the end of the year. So we had Black Grad, there's also GraduAsian, and then there's Lavender Graduation for QTBIPOCA. So it's kind of those kinds of things.
Interviewer: The graduations were run through the MEC?
Undergraduate #2: Yes.
Interviewer: Okay, and funded and all that kind of stuff.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah.
Interviewer: Okay. So this is pretty much going to be the main thing, what has changed about like these organizations, or your role within these organizations since the implementation of SB-17, in January.
Undergraduate #2: So, when we found out that the MEC was no longer going to be a thing, the agencies could basically no longer be under MEC, because the MEC would no longer exist. So, they all had to register as student organizations. But with that, they're no longer affiliated with UT, so they have no more funding through UT. So, as much as we all want to continue things like Black Grad, and our welcome ceremonies and stuff, you know, those are very expensive, and UT would usually just provide that funding through the MEC. But, because we don't have that funding anymore it's a little more hard for us to try to handle those different programs.
Interviewer: This is kind of similar question. But are there any new, like specific challenges that you encounter with this? I guess funding is going to be the main one. But is there anything else? That's like, I don't know, providing a lot of challenge with, with what you do?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, we're still trying to sort it out. We're trying to figure out if this is a correlation with SB-17, but at least for certain black organizations, we feel like we've noticed it to be a little bit harder for us to get certain room reservations approved. Which is a little weird, because we feel like we've never had these issues before. And, you know, sometimes we are given responses back that do make sense. But it's also like, well, are these responses happening because that's the reason? Or is this like, you're just placing a little more pressure on us because of SB-17? To make it harder for us to throw events that are focused on things that would be DEI; considered DEI events.
Interviewer: And that's interesting considering student organizations are not supposed to be affected.
Undergraduate #2: Student organizations are not supposed to be affected at all. And they're not really covered in the bill at all. So I think it's interesting. I feel like there's a lot of things that are happening on campus that are not in the bill. So it's almost like an over-compliance.
Interviewer: I've definitely heard that phrase thrown around a lot. And it seems to be I don't know, the understanding that a lot of students have with especially the DDCE/DCCE now that it's closed. That's, that's not the next question it's the one after, so this is like a three parter. How do you understand SB-17 and its implementations on campus? That's kind of what we were just saying. What does it cover? So like, if you've read the bill, did you easily understand what it covers? Was it maybe vague? Was it specific? And what was going to be closed or involved with the anti-DEI stuff? Just, how easily did you understand it or anything like that.
Undergraduate #2: So, from my understanding of what I thought SB-17 was, I obviously assumed it was basically saying no more DEI programs through UT. And with that, what the departments tried to do, or they thought was okay, was to rename and repurpose. And so that's why DDCE became DCCE, because it was no longer about diversity. All of their diversity programs they had, they got rid of them. Same with the MEC; the MEC didn't even really get a choice to be renamed and repurposed, it just got closed down. And, you know, everybody was complying. They got rid of all of their different things, any wording they had it was no longer for specific identities or genders, or any of that it was simply just for everyone. And the bill, I don't think it was too hard to understand. I don't remember all of it, but I definitely read it when it first came out last summer. And, of course, like, it's bad, but it didn't seem like it would be this bad. And that's where that over-compliance comes in. Because from what I've read, you know, student organizations are not supposed to be affected at all. It doesn't say people need to be fired in there, from my understanding. It didn't say that repurposing and renaming was not allowed. So it's just all these things that UT has tried to do were somehow found to be not complying enough. And so now we've over-complied. But all of these things that we're doing are not in the bill, to my understanding, I will have to definitely go look back again, so don't hold that against me. But from my understanding of what I've read, and understood of the bill, I think a lot of the things going on right now are not in the bill.
Interviewer: Yeah. So, next, I think I had like a funding question with the faculty. But do you have anything additional to say about how funding has affected kind of your orgs? And just what you're able to do?
Undergraduate #2: Well, I would say, kind of like what I was saying earlier, how student organizations are not supposed to be affected. I'm specifically for, you know, I'm more aware of Black orgs. But I know, personally, for my Black Student Alliance, we were able to get around $25,000 a year from UT, so we could attend an annual conference. And this year, we didn't get any money. And it seems like it's in response to SB-17. But like I said, the bill is not supposed to affect student funding. Apparently, I guess the reasoning is that in response to SB-17, they're supposed to make a more inclusive way of funding. So usually, I would just send solicitation letters to the Deans or whomever. But apparently, there's supposed to be a funding application that's on every department's website that everybody's able to fill out. But the problem is, no department has really developed that. My other thing is I asked for all the money before SB-17 went into effect. So I asked in November, and still was not given any money. So I'm still not sure, I'm definitely going to push harder to figure that out. But it just, it didn't make any sense. Like the bill was not into effect. The bill also does not affect student organizations. So it doesn't make sense why we weren't given the money that we've been given for lots of years. And then I know as well, like, our Black Health Professions Organization, we usually get money through Dell Medical School, and I believe CNS (College of Natural Sciences), and they were not able to get any money this year for their conference; they usually go to this big medical conference. I went to the conference last year, it's a very, very nice conference that I really wish they were able to bring more people to. Usually, I think they wanted to bring 10 people, and they were only able to bring around four. Yeah, so hopefully, they're able to find a new way to get money but you know, usually they're just able to get it through Dell Med, UT and they were not given anything as well.
Interviewer: It's so disheartening. So the funding application through the department's is that something that's new?
Undergraduate #2: I think that's something they wanted to do in response to SB-17. But I have not seen any, I'm not even sure if every department is aware that that's something that's supposed to happen. So that's definitely something I want to try to bring up to somebody. I think something one of my fellow student leaders brought up is there needs to be some kind of SB-17 training, because a lot of these departments just- I don't think they understand what they're allowed to do and what they're not allowed to do. So they just don't do anything, because they don't want to get in trouble. But, we need a training to tell them what they can and can't do. Because you don't have to sit there and do nothing, there are things you can still do. But I just don't think they know what they can and can't do.
Interviewer: That seems to fit with a couple of things that I've kind of heard. At that emergency meeting that was held in Welch after the DCCE was announced to be closed, I remember there was somebody in there who expressed that now that the, I don't remember the acronym, but it was Services for Students with Disabilities is going to be under Student Affairs, they don't have the resources to be able to handle taking care of that. And so kind of, it seems like some of these programs are being spread thin across the university. And that kind of training that you're talking about, these people might not, I don't know, understand the extent to which- or what is required for these programs.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah and it's very concerning, because while I'm glad services like that are able to continue, we also have to make sure that these services still have the attention that they always got. Because I feel like a lot of students with disabilities have already been struggling on campus, and have already felt like some things on campus are not very accommodating to them. So the fact that their whole department is moved to a completely different department. And that department may not fully understand how to handle that. That's very concerning, because how are we going to ensure students of those types of groups and stuff are getting the help and care that they need?
Interviewer: The other thing, what was the other thing I was thinking? A couple of professors have said to me that there seems to be a chilling effect that comes across the campus, especially when it comes to faculty, where it's kind of similar to what you were saying. They kind of feel like they can't do anything at all, even though there's still a lot of things that they can act within. And it won't be in violation, like with providing that funding application. But there's such a chilling effect that everybody just feels kind of backed into a corner a little bit, even though maybe that's not the case.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, I think that also comes from, you know, politicians and all that. The way they make it sound is that, "If we catch you doing anything wrong, we catch you slipping, you will lose your funding, you will lose your job." And I definitely think there's faculty and people out there that care and want to help, but they're very concerned. Like, "If I help, what's going to happen to my job? Is my department going to lose funding?" And that's very concerning. And that really sucks, because like I said, I feel like there's a lot of people out there that want to help and they just feel helpless. Because they can't, they don't know what they can and can't do.
Interviewer: Yeah, yeah. So next question was the closure of the DCCE, formerly DDCE, was a major recent decision. What does it mean for our community? And why do you think this division was included in the university's compliance with SB-17?
Undergraduate #2: Well, originally, of course, they were like, rename, repurpose, and all that. But, I think I saw an article and Brandon Creighton was basically saying, he's in fear that people are just renaming programs, and then not complying. But it's like, you're obviously not really looking into what the universities are doing. Because while these places may have been renamed, they're completely changed. Even the Women's Center, it used to be like Gender and Sexuality Center. I'm not sure what the exact name was, but it was something along those lines. And I just remember a student was saying, like, even though the space still existed, it just it did not feel the same because they weren't allowed to put up, you know, anything related to gender or sexuality in the space anymore. And, you know, the whole point was for it to be women because, sex is technically not affected by the bill. It's just gender and sexuality. So it's like they were complying. Even though the spaces were still there, the name was different, the purpose was different. The programs that were DEI related, were all shut down. So it's like, y'all didn't even take the time to actually do real research to see what was going on.
Interviewer: So you say it's just kind of the fear that something is still happening under the guise of for everybody?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah.
Interviewer: So, this is before any of the changes were implemented or any closures or anything, how did you feel about the efforts to foster inclusivity on campus?
Undergraduate #2: I think, for the most part, a lot of things were pretty good. Obviously, the spaces were still there, I think all of them got decent funding. I think, like anything, there's always room for improvement. There's always things departments would struggle with. But even though like, we have our experiences on campus, and things might not always be the best, at least we had these departments that were trying their best to make a safe space for us. And so now that they're just completely gone, that leaves students in a very bad situation, because they now have no safe space.
Interviewer: And were any UT sponsored DEI resources, a part of your decision of coming to UT?
Undergraduate #2: I wouldn't say that they like, fully were the reason I chose UT. But I think they were definitely helpful. And definitely made me feel like once I decided on UT, I was going to be okay. The programs were just beyond me stepping foot on campus, they even came to me, in my senior year of high school. They used to do, I mean, I'm not sure if this is going to continue or not, but they would do this thing called a Black Pop Up, where in some of the larger cities like Dallas or Houston, black faculty would come out there. And all of the high school seniors that committed to UT, we would all go. So we would meet the faculty, but we would also meet the other incoming black freshmen. I know, some students have even said, they've been able to, tour UT through certain programs that would like fly them out or something like that, to bring them here, specifically, like marginalized communities. And with that, going to college is a very scary experience. It's a big change from high school, and seeing students and faculty that look like you and then being able to talk to them before you even get here is just really reassuring that you're gonna be okay, and that you can have a good experience here.
Interviewer: Yeah, that sounds just, I don't know, it is so disheartening to hear that all of this is being removed. I actually worked with, I guess, still technically, but I worked with that section of admissions, that was the Access and Inclusion team that would kind of set up probably not all of them, but some of those events where they traveled to certain cities and have hold events specifically for historically underrepresented students. And that was the whole point of that team was to have outreach to these students and help them with application processes, and just kind of encourage them to keep going through the application and going to college process, just so that we can kind of give a little boost, things like that. So this one's interesting, in your own opinion, why do you think SB-17 was enacted?
Undergraduate #2: Honestly, I think it's a fear of students of color and students of marginalized communities actually, like making it; evening out the score. I think all these programs were put in place to help us excel and I think people are fearful of people like us, succeeding way too much. I think historically, we have not been able to go to places like this and we finally have programs that are making it a little easier for us to to do well here and feel included here, and have good experiences. And I also think, truthfully, these people just do not know what DEI means. You could go ask them, they cannot tell you, and they're the ones that wrote these bills, signed off on these bills. And I think some people have the misinterpretation that DEI is letting people in that don't deserve to be here. But let's be real, all the students that are here, a lot of us are in the top 10% or 6% of our class, everybody that goes here did well in high school. A lot of these people do very well here. I and a lot of my fellow students are very good students. 3.5+ GPAs, part of lots of different organizations, all these types of things. And I just think there's a misinterpretation that these things are giving us an advantage over, let's just say it, like white people, white men specifically. And that's just not true at all. It's it's making it to where- we weren't supposed to be in these universities at all, and it's just trying to make sure that we're having an equal opportunity. But I think people interpret it as instead of making it equal, it's making us have an advantage. And I think some people just don't understand the difference between equality and equity. And that's unfortunate. It's just truthfully, these people just don't know what this is.
Interviewer: That kind of segues into the second part that I had written for this question is, Senator Creighton's reasoning for having written the bill is to allow merit to return to like admissions decisions and kind of how things function on the university. Do you think that, I guess that methodology will be successful in any way? Or just kind of what thoughts do you have?
Undergraduate #2: Truthfully, I think that statement is bullshit, honestly. Because, there's still so many different ways for people that, truthfully do not deserve to be here, to get here. If you have money, you have a way of getting here. If you are a legacy, there's an application question that says, "Are you a legacy?" And even though, I don't know if the university says that doesn't mean anything, but the fact that it's on the application, it's gotta count for something. Especially if you're somebody where you have a parent, or you have a great grandfather that has a building here named after them, like, there's no way you're getting denied from here, even if you don't have the grades that everybody else does here. Things like that. Like, I just think there's a lot of different ways for people to get here without merit. And I don't think, because kind of like what I already said, all the students I know, were in the top 6-10% of their class, so you can't question their merit. And then the fact that a lot of them excel here as well, it proves they deserve to be here. They're just really not looking into what kind of students we are.
Interviewer: I had another thought while I was listening, but I guess we'll just move on. This question is kind of just like, open-ended, but what does DEI mean to you? And do you think it's important?
Undergraduate #2: I think, kind of like what I said earlier, DEI is kind of leveling the playing field. For a long time marginalized communities, were not here. From my understanding, the first black student was not here until 1955, around that time. And even with the time that marginalized communities were able to be here, they had very, very hard experiences; being blocked from going into their own classrooms. I remember I talked to the former Black Student Alliance president from like, I think, the 80s. And he was dangled out of his window in his dorm. Yeah, like, you know, and that was in the 80s! So it's just a lot of these people had very bad experiences. And this was kind of just put in place for us to actually have good experiences here. And then also an issue is, you know, sometimes these kinds of universities are not really advertised to marginalized communities. I think, especially when you're in more low income areas, you don't have access to those kinds of things like college fairs and all those things to really educate you on how to get into or all the different higher education programs you can be a part of. So, there's kind of that recruitment factor of making sure that all these high school seniors are reached out to so they're aware that this school exists and they belong here and they can come here. So I just think overall DEI is just kind of set in place to make sure that students that are a part of these marginalized communities are able to excel here and then are aware of this university and that they can come here.
Interviewer: And then so the last question, I'm going to elaborate just a little bit on this project, this whole project is kind of centered in a historical aspect that you've talked about a whole lot. Basically, I see it as a moment in UT's history of integration and inclusion, and kind of as a continuation; it hasn't been like a straight line of upward progress. A professor used this term, and I think it applies really well here is that there's pendulum swings in favor of minority students. And there's pendulum swings away, kind of like the grandfather clock. And I think I see this moment as a swing away. Do you think that this event is important in UT's history?
Undergraduate #2: I definitely do. And a lot of people are really taking note of this. And it's, it's making some students not even want to come here, it's making alumni never want to throw the Hook 'Em sign anymore, ever again. I've heard that several times from alumni, "I do not want to put the Hook 'Em sign because I'm not proud of this university." And just in the world, in general, people look at us crazy. People at other schools, people in Oklahoma, in California everywhere are just like, "That's crazy your school is letting this happen." And it is crazy!
Interviewer: Um, that was all of the questions that I had for you. Do you have any other comments or anything that you can think of that you want to say about this?
Undergraduate #2: I just think that this kind of thing is a start. From my understanding, I don't think the bill fully impacts, like, admissions. I mean, because we already- affirmative action is already out the door. But I feel like the next steps are to try to find ways for it to affect admissions in some way. I feel like they're going to come for ethnic studies next, like Latin American Studies, Black Studies, Native American studies. I feel like all of that is going to be next. So that's very concerning.
Interviewer: Yeah. Yeah. I had noted that to that admissions was supposedly not supposed to be included within the bill. But the Access and Inclusion team, which I had talked about working for is completely disbanded now, and it's kind of just all under general admissions. So that whole team that originally was recruiting from underrepresented communities, it's been redirected. I think that now they're just kind of focusing on Title One schools in Central Texas. So that's it's kind of similar, but it definitely doesn't have the same the same purpose that it did before. So yeah, I found that interesting, considering that it's technically not supposed to be included. But yeah, so thank you very much. I'll go ahead and stop this.
Undergraduate #2: Yes, yes.
Interviewer: Awesome. So, first question is what organizations are you involved with or in on campus?
Undergraduate #2: So, I currently serve as the president of the Black Student Alliance. I also serve as a community engagement co-chair for African American Affairs, which was an agency under the Multicultural Engagement Center. I am a part of the Friars Honor Society, I was inducted last semester. And I serve as the PR chair for the Black Health Professions Organization.
Interviewer: Awesome. Um, so this wasn't on the list, but Malik Crowder had directed me to you so you could talk about the MEC, would you be able to elaborate a little bit on what your work looked like with the MEC while it was still open?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, basically with AAA and then all of the other agencies under the MEC, we were kind of each based on a different identity. So, we had one for Latino students we had with for Asian students, Native American students, and then we had QTBIPOCA, for the LGBTQ community, but people of color. And so, each of us were just kind of trying to put on events that were for those certain identities. And then we would also try to do, some of us did welcome ceremonies. So, for AAA, we would do New Black Student Weekend. And then I believe, also, our Asian and then Latino agency also had welcome programs. And then agencies would also have graduation ceremonies at the end of the year. So we had Black Grad, there's also GraduAsian, and then there's Lavender Graduation for QTBIPOCA. So it's kind of those kinds of things.
Interviewer: The graduations were run through the MEC?
Undergraduate #2: Yes.
Interviewer: Okay, and funded and all that kind of stuff.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah.
Interviewer: Okay. So this is pretty much going to be the main thing, what has changed about like these organizations, or your role within these organizations since the implementation of SB-17, in January.
Undergraduate #2: So, when we found out that the MEC was no longer going to be a thing, the agencies could basically no longer be under MEC, because the MEC would no longer exist. So, they all had to register as student organizations. But with that, they're no longer affiliated with UT, so they have no more funding through UT. So, as much as we all want to continue things like Black Grad, and our welcome ceremonies and stuff, you know, those are very expensive, and UT would usually just provide that funding through the MEC. But, because we don't have that funding anymore it's a little more hard for us to try to handle those different programs.
Interviewer: This is kind of similar question. But are there any new, like specific challenges that you encounter with this? I guess funding is going to be the main one. But is there anything else? That's like, I don't know, providing a lot of challenge with, with what you do?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, we're still trying to sort it out. We're trying to figure out if this is a correlation with SB-17, but at least for certain black organizations, we feel like we've noticed it to be a little bit harder for us to get certain room reservations approved. Which is a little weird, because we feel like we've never had these issues before. And, you know, sometimes we are given responses back that do make sense. But it's also like, well, are these responses happening because that's the reason? Or is this like, you're just placing a little more pressure on us because of SB-17? To make it harder for us to throw events that are focused on things that would be DEI; considered DEI events.
Interviewer: And that's interesting considering student organizations are not supposed to be affected.
Undergraduate #2: Student organizations are not supposed to be affected at all. And they're not really covered in the bill at all. So I think it's interesting. I feel like there's a lot of things that are happening on campus that are not in the bill. So it's almost like an over-compliance.
Interviewer: I've definitely heard that phrase thrown around a lot. And it seems to be I don't know, the understanding that a lot of students have with especially the DDCE/DCCE now that it's closed. That's, that's not the next question it's the one after, so this is like a three parter. How do you understand SB-17 and its implementations on campus? That's kind of what we were just saying. What does it cover? So like, if you've read the bill, did you easily understand what it covers? Was it maybe vague? Was it specific? And what was going to be closed or involved with the anti-DEI stuff? Just, how easily did you understand it or anything like that.
Undergraduate #2: So, from my understanding of what I thought SB-17 was, I obviously assumed it was basically saying no more DEI programs through UT. And with that, what the departments tried to do, or they thought was okay, was to rename and repurpose. And so that's why DDCE became DCCE, because it was no longer about diversity. All of their diversity programs they had, they got rid of them. Same with the MEC; the MEC didn't even really get a choice to be renamed and repurposed, it just got closed down. And, you know, everybody was complying. They got rid of all of their different things, any wording they had it was no longer for specific identities or genders, or any of that it was simply just for everyone. And the bill, I don't think it was too hard to understand. I don't remember all of it, but I definitely read it when it first came out last summer. And, of course, like, it's bad, but it didn't seem like it would be this bad. And that's where that over-compliance comes in. Because from what I've read, you know, student organizations are not supposed to be affected at all. It doesn't say people need to be fired in there, from my understanding. It didn't say that repurposing and renaming was not allowed. So it's just all these things that UT has tried to do were somehow found to be not complying enough. And so now we've over-complied. But all of these things that we're doing are not in the bill, to my understanding, I will have to definitely go look back again, so don't hold that against me. But from my understanding of what I've read, and understood of the bill, I think a lot of the things going on right now are not in the bill.
Interviewer: Yeah. So, next, I think I had like a funding question with the faculty. But do you have anything additional to say about how funding has affected kind of your orgs? And just what you're able to do?
Undergraduate #2: Well, I would say, kind of like what I was saying earlier, how student organizations are not supposed to be affected. I'm specifically for, you know, I'm more aware of Black orgs. But I know, personally, for my Black Student Alliance, we were able to get around $25,000 a year from UT, so we could attend an annual conference. And this year, we didn't get any money. And it seems like it's in response to SB-17. But like I said, the bill is not supposed to affect student funding. Apparently, I guess the reasoning is that in response to SB-17, they're supposed to make a more inclusive way of funding. So usually, I would just send solicitation letters to the Deans or whomever. But apparently, there's supposed to be a funding application that's on every department's website that everybody's able to fill out. But the problem is, no department has really developed that. My other thing is I asked for all the money before SB-17 went into effect. So I asked in November, and still was not given any money. So I'm still not sure, I'm definitely going to push harder to figure that out. But it just, it didn't make any sense. Like the bill was not into effect. The bill also does not affect student organizations. So it doesn't make sense why we weren't given the money that we've been given for lots of years. And then I know as well, like, our Black Health Professions Organization, we usually get money through Dell Medical School, and I believe CNS (College of Natural Sciences), and they were not able to get any money this year for their conference; they usually go to this big medical conference. I went to the conference last year, it's a very, very nice conference that I really wish they were able to bring more people to. Usually, I think they wanted to bring 10 people, and they were only able to bring around four. Yeah, so hopefully, they're able to find a new way to get money but you know, usually they're just able to get it through Dell Med, UT and they were not given anything as well.
Interviewer: It's so disheartening. So the funding application through the department's is that something that's new?
Undergraduate #2: I think that's something they wanted to do in response to SB-17. But I have not seen any, I'm not even sure if every department is aware that that's something that's supposed to happen. So that's definitely something I want to try to bring up to somebody. I think something one of my fellow student leaders brought up is there needs to be some kind of SB-17 training, because a lot of these departments just- I don't think they understand what they're allowed to do and what they're not allowed to do. So they just don't do anything, because they don't want to get in trouble. But, we need a training to tell them what they can and can't do. Because you don't have to sit there and do nothing, there are things you can still do. But I just don't think they know what they can and can't do.
Interviewer: That seems to fit with a couple of things that I've kind of heard. At that emergency meeting that was held in Welch after the DCCE was announced to be closed, I remember there was somebody in there who expressed that now that the, I don't remember the acronym, but it was Services for Students with Disabilities is going to be under Student Affairs, they don't have the resources to be able to handle taking care of that. And so kind of, it seems like some of these programs are being spread thin across the university. And that kind of training that you're talking about, these people might not, I don't know, understand the extent to which- or what is required for these programs.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah and it's very concerning, because while I'm glad services like that are able to continue, we also have to make sure that these services still have the attention that they always got. Because I feel like a lot of students with disabilities have already been struggling on campus, and have already felt like some things on campus are not very accommodating to them. So the fact that their whole department is moved to a completely different department. And that department may not fully understand how to handle that. That's very concerning, because how are we going to ensure students of those types of groups and stuff are getting the help and care that they need?
Interviewer: The other thing, what was the other thing I was thinking? A couple of professors have said to me that there seems to be a chilling effect that comes across the campus, especially when it comes to faculty, where it's kind of similar to what you were saying. They kind of feel like they can't do anything at all, even though there's still a lot of things that they can act within. And it won't be in violation, like with providing that funding application. But there's such a chilling effect that everybody just feels kind of backed into a corner a little bit, even though maybe that's not the case.
Undergraduate #2: Yeah, I think that also comes from, you know, politicians and all that. The way they make it sound is that, "If we catch you doing anything wrong, we catch you slipping, you will lose your funding, you will lose your job." And I definitely think there's faculty and people out there that care and want to help, but they're very concerned. Like, "If I help, what's going to happen to my job? Is my department going to lose funding?" And that's very concerning. And that really sucks, because like I said, I feel like there's a lot of people out there that want to help and they just feel helpless. Because they can't, they don't know what they can and can't do.
Interviewer: Yeah, yeah. So next question was the closure of the DCCE, formerly DDCE, was a major recent decision. What does it mean for our community? And why do you think this division was included in the university's compliance with SB-17?
Undergraduate #2: Well, originally, of course, they were like, rename, repurpose, and all that. But, I think I saw an article and Brandon Creighton was basically saying, he's in fear that people are just renaming programs, and then not complying. But it's like, you're obviously not really looking into what the universities are doing. Because while these places may have been renamed, they're completely changed. Even the Women's Center, it used to be like Gender and Sexuality Center. I'm not sure what the exact name was, but it was something along those lines. And I just remember a student was saying, like, even though the space still existed, it just it did not feel the same because they weren't allowed to put up, you know, anything related to gender or sexuality in the space anymore. And, you know, the whole point was for it to be women because, sex is technically not affected by the bill. It's just gender and sexuality. So it's like they were complying. Even though the spaces were still there, the name was different, the purpose was different. The programs that were DEI related, were all shut down. So it's like, y'all didn't even take the time to actually do real research to see what was going on.
Interviewer: So you say it's just kind of the fear that something is still happening under the guise of for everybody?
Undergraduate #2: Yeah.
Interviewer: So, this is before any of the changes were implemented or any closures or anything, how did you feel about the efforts to foster inclusivity on campus?
Undergraduate #2: I think, for the most part, a lot of things were pretty good. Obviously, the spaces were still there, I think all of them got decent funding. I think, like anything, there's always room for improvement. There's always things departments would struggle with. But even though like, we have our experiences on campus, and things might not always be the best, at least we had these departments that were trying their best to make a safe space for us. And so now that they're just completely gone, that leaves students in a very bad situation, because they now have no safe space.
Interviewer: And were any UT sponsored DEI resources, a part of your decision of coming to UT?
Undergraduate #2: I wouldn't say that they like, fully were the reason I chose UT. But I think they were definitely helpful. And definitely made me feel like once I decided on UT, I was going to be okay. The programs were just beyond me stepping foot on campus, they even came to me, in my senior year of high school. They used to do, I mean, I'm not sure if this is going to continue or not, but they would do this thing called a Black Pop Up, where in some of the larger cities like Dallas or Houston, black faculty would come out there. And all of the high school seniors that committed to UT, we would all go. So we would meet the faculty, but we would also meet the other incoming black freshmen. I know, some students have even said, they've been able to, tour UT through certain programs that would like fly them out or something like that, to bring them here, specifically, like marginalized communities. And with that, going to college is a very scary experience. It's a big change from high school, and seeing students and faculty that look like you and then being able to talk to them before you even get here is just really reassuring that you're gonna be okay, and that you can have a good experience here.
Interviewer: Yeah, that sounds just, I don't know, it is so disheartening to hear that all of this is being removed. I actually worked with, I guess, still technically, but I worked with that section of admissions, that was the Access and Inclusion team that would kind of set up probably not all of them, but some of those events where they traveled to certain cities and have hold events specifically for historically underrepresented students. And that was the whole point of that team was to have outreach to these students and help them with application processes, and just kind of encourage them to keep going through the application and going to college process, just so that we can kind of give a little boost, things like that. So this one's interesting, in your own opinion, why do you think SB-17 was enacted?
Undergraduate #2: Honestly, I think it's a fear of students of color and students of marginalized communities actually, like making it; evening out the score. I think all these programs were put in place to help us excel and I think people are fearful of people like us, succeeding way too much. I think historically, we have not been able to go to places like this and we finally have programs that are making it a little easier for us to to do well here and feel included here, and have good experiences. And I also think, truthfully, these people just do not know what DEI means. You could go ask them, they cannot tell you, and they're the ones that wrote these bills, signed off on these bills. And I think some people have the misinterpretation that DEI is letting people in that don't deserve to be here. But let's be real, all the students that are here, a lot of us are in the top 10% or 6% of our class, everybody that goes here did well in high school. A lot of these people do very well here. I and a lot of my fellow students are very good students. 3.5+ GPAs, part of lots of different organizations, all these types of things. And I just think there's a misinterpretation that these things are giving us an advantage over, let's just say it, like white people, white men specifically. And that's just not true at all. It's it's making it to where- we weren't supposed to be in these universities at all, and it's just trying to make sure that we're having an equal opportunity. But I think people interpret it as instead of making it equal, it's making us have an advantage. And I think some people just don't understand the difference between equality and equity. And that's unfortunate. It's just truthfully, these people just don't know what this is.
Interviewer: That kind of segues into the second part that I had written for this question is, Senator Creighton's reasoning for having written the bill is to allow merit to return to like admissions decisions and kind of how things function on the university. Do you think that, I guess that methodology will be successful in any way? Or just kind of what thoughts do you have?
Undergraduate #2: Truthfully, I think that statement is bullshit, honestly. Because, there's still so many different ways for people that, truthfully do not deserve to be here, to get here. If you have money, you have a way of getting here. If you are a legacy, there's an application question that says, "Are you a legacy?" And even though, I don't know if the university says that doesn't mean anything, but the fact that it's on the application, it's gotta count for something. Especially if you're somebody where you have a parent, or you have a great grandfather that has a building here named after them, like, there's no way you're getting denied from here, even if you don't have the grades that everybody else does here. Things like that. Like, I just think there's a lot of different ways for people to get here without merit. And I don't think, because kind of like what I already said, all the students I know, were in the top 6-10% of their class, so you can't question their merit. And then the fact that a lot of them excel here as well, it proves they deserve to be here. They're just really not looking into what kind of students we are.
Interviewer: I had another thought while I was listening, but I guess we'll just move on. This question is kind of just like, open-ended, but what does DEI mean to you? And do you think it's important?
Undergraduate #2: I think, kind of like what I said earlier, DEI is kind of leveling the playing field. For a long time marginalized communities, were not here. From my understanding, the first black student was not here until 1955, around that time. And even with the time that marginalized communities were able to be here, they had very, very hard experiences; being blocked from going into their own classrooms. I remember I talked to the former Black Student Alliance president from like, I think, the 80s. And he was dangled out of his window in his dorm. Yeah, like, you know, and that was in the 80s! So it's just a lot of these people had very bad experiences. And this was kind of just put in place for us to actually have good experiences here. And then also an issue is, you know, sometimes these kinds of universities are not really advertised to marginalized communities. I think, especially when you're in more low income areas, you don't have access to those kinds of things like college fairs and all those things to really educate you on how to get into or all the different higher education programs you can be a part of. So, there's kind of that recruitment factor of making sure that all these high school seniors are reached out to so they're aware that this school exists and they belong here and they can come here. So I just think overall DEI is just kind of set in place to make sure that students that are a part of these marginalized communities are able to excel here and then are aware of this university and that they can come here.
Interviewer: And then so the last question, I'm going to elaborate just a little bit on this project, this whole project is kind of centered in a historical aspect that you've talked about a whole lot. Basically, I see it as a moment in UT's history of integration and inclusion, and kind of as a continuation; it hasn't been like a straight line of upward progress. A professor used this term, and I think it applies really well here is that there's pendulum swings in favor of minority students. And there's pendulum swings away, kind of like the grandfather clock. And I think I see this moment as a swing away. Do you think that this event is important in UT's history?
Undergraduate #2: I definitely do. And a lot of people are really taking note of this. And it's, it's making some students not even want to come here, it's making alumni never want to throw the Hook 'Em sign anymore, ever again. I've heard that several times from alumni, "I do not want to put the Hook 'Em sign because I'm not proud of this university." And just in the world, in general, people look at us crazy. People at other schools, people in Oklahoma, in California everywhere are just like, "That's crazy your school is letting this happen." And it is crazy!
Interviewer: Um, that was all of the questions that I had for you. Do you have any other comments or anything that you can think of that you want to say about this?
Undergraduate #2: I just think that this kind of thing is a start. From my understanding, I don't think the bill fully impacts, like, admissions. I mean, because we already- affirmative action is already out the door. But I feel like the next steps are to try to find ways for it to affect admissions in some way. I feel like they're going to come for ethnic studies next, like Latin American Studies, Black Studies, Native American studies. I feel like all of that is going to be next. So that's very concerning.
Interviewer: Yeah. Yeah. I had noted that to that admissions was supposedly not supposed to be included within the bill. But the Access and Inclusion team, which I had talked about working for is completely disbanded now, and it's kind of just all under general admissions. So that whole team that originally was recruiting from underrepresented communities, it's been redirected. I think that now they're just kind of focusing on Title One schools in Central Texas. So that's it's kind of similar, but it definitely doesn't have the same the same purpose that it did before. So yeah, I found that interesting, considering that it's technically not supposed to be included. But yeah, so thank you very much. I'll go ahead and stop this.