Many minoritized students participate in graduation ceremonies that are not reflective of their cultural heritage or social experience. Though many institutions provide culturally responsive graduation ceremonies (CRGCs), their legitimacy and relevance have been challenged in recent years.
Harvard students were criticized in 2017 when they announced their inaugural Black Commencement for Black graduate students. Detractors depicted it as an act of segregation. This, in turn, prompted a fact-checking review from Snopes, which rated the claim as mostly false. In 2018 the University of Florida made national news when a marshal physically grabbed and removed several Black students from the stage during its main commencement. These students were turned away after dancing and celebrating in ways that were not considered traditional or standard.
Both events raise important questions about ceremonial diversity in the academy. Namely, to what extent do traditional graduation ceremonies incorporate the unique cultures, symbols, rituals, references and delivery modes of minoritized students and their communities? Whose traditions and standards are viewed as legitimate during university commencement ceremonies? Would being more inclusive of diverse ways of knowing and forms of meaning show greater esteem for minoritized students? And, in a possible attempt to ameliorate some of these issues, to what extent do universities offer CRGCs?
Unfortunately, little is known about the extent of CRGCs, particularly at predominantly White institutions (PWIs). When done effectively, they can help minoritized students feel included and affirmed, and they can be wholly engaging community events. CRGCs may allow students to dance to hip hop, R&B, salsa or merengue; present some or all of the ceremony in Spanish or another language; ask students and attendees to shout the names of their ancestors while an elder pours libation water; include diverse fraternities and sororities; deliver an untraditional keynote speech (e.g., spoken word poem, rap, church-styled sermon); play familiar music (e.g., gospel, rap, the Black national anthem) throughout the event; and formally include parents and extended family. Their existence might also implicate culturally responsive administrators, faculty, and staff. Together, they often fund, coordinate and facilitate CRGCs.
To get a sense of the extent to which PWIs are providing CRGCs, we selected a random sample of 100 universities and used content-analysis methods between the 2017-18 fall and winter. We were able to unobtrusively study university websites and online supporting documents.
To ensure proportionality, we randomly selected 25 PWIs in each of four geographic regions: the Western, Southern, Midwestern and Northeastern United States. These regions were combinations of those provided by the National Center for Educational Statistics’ IPEDS website. Our sample contains schools from more than 30 states – with enrollments ranging from under 1,000 to more than 50,000 – that serve a variety of communities (e.g., urban, suburban, large cities, midsized cities, small cities).
We focused on baccalaureate and graduate degree-granting institutions, and on schools where White students were the majority. We excluded historically Black colleges and universities, tribal colleges and schools with fewer than 100 students of color (e.g., fewer than 100 Black students). We also excluded Hispanic-serving institutions after hypothesizing they would be more apt to provide CRGCs. Online-only institutions were excluded, though a few for-profit institutions made our sample. We rationalized that they may not be any more or less likely to provide CRGCs than not-for-profit universities.
