The authors examine definitions of culture and philosophical and political assumptions that underlie multicultural approaches that facilitate or discourage multicultural competence. The authors discover that campus culture—determined mostly by the dominant coalition or power elite—is critical to success or failure of effective multi-cultural policies and procedures. In the literature, power is not generally acknowledged when considering multicultural competence. Thus, this preliminary work relating systems theory to institutional culture is unique in determining excellence in multiculturalism.

Our work with the Journal of Hispanic Higher Education takes us many places, as far away as China, as close as Houston. We have opportunities to meet many individuals, most of them academics, some who are monolingual and others who are polyglots. We interact both virtually and face-to-face with scholars with diverse values, personalities, and goals. Thus, we have come to learn many things about others and in turn about ourselves. Naturally, all of the manuscripts we receive are written within a particular perspective, with authors taking positions (some quite personal, some based on extensive original research) with their arguments and elucidating for readers precisely where they stand. To this end, there are several implicit steps authors usually take. They identify for the reader who they are and who the participants are in their study. This identification process helps the reader generalize, or apply to a particular population, the results reported in the study. It also determines how to replicate the study and how therefore to advance the discipline. The descriptive process generally requires naming or listing specific attributes or demographic characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, race, religion, socioeconomic class, educational level, and other defining elements. However, authors often reduce this list of characteristics to only one label. For example, we often find generalizations describing the population of a particular study as White, Hispanic, Latino, or Black. The publication manual for the American Psychological Association (2001) notes, "Part of writing without bias is recognizing that differences should be mentioned only when relevant" (p. 63). It also states, "Avoid labeling people when possible. A common occurrence in scientific writing is that participants in a study tend to lose their individuality; they are broadly categorized as objects" (pp. 63-64). This internal identification process authors undergo as they identify both themselves and their population of study follows a continuum that begins with narrow definitions and ends with a broader acknowledgement of attributes (gender, socioeconomic class, etc.). Thus the perception of oneself and others might be from narrow to broad. This initial narrow definition helps authors identify with a particular group of people, often conferring pride, providing unity of thought and action, giving a feeling of comfort and recognition, and reinforcing the desire to belong to that group. Yet, because

No abstract

No abstract

It is the middle of summer. We are back in Croatia, as we were last summer, completing research on sculptor, humanitarian, and political activist Ivan Mestrovic for a three-act play Michael is submitting to the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb. I am in the process of designing five classes for the department of education at the University of Monterrey in northern Mexico. I struggled with technology when teaching a class online during our travel in Eastern Europe last year. This year, I am struggling yet again with Internet access and resources. Is it not interesting how our research evolves over the years, how we allocate our time, and how we are thereby transformed in the process?Our academic journey as Hispanic or Latino scholars-or as researchers and writers interested in Hispanic issues-is at times plagued with uphill battles, where the attempts to climb are recognized only by ourselves as we painfully discover time and again that we are at the bottom of the hill yet again. But in spite of setbacks, we persevere-writing, researching, and teaching what it is we ultimately discover. That is what we find most satisfying as editors of this journal: giving writers and researchers interested in Hispanic or Latino issues an opportunity to publish their thoughts. We look for quality manuscripts that convey an idea in an articulate manner, no matter how controversial or largely untested the material might be.In the middle of summer, it is appropriate to begin pondering about the upcoming academic year, to begin thinking about the seeds we planted last year and what it is the harvest soon will bring. For many of us, our summers are spent fulfilling tasks we often postpone throughout the academic year. These tasks often seem undoable or unattainable during the fall and spring semesters as we teach our classes, develop new curricula, attend seemingly endless committee meetings, mentor our students, and so much more. And now, halfway through summer, we anticipate (hopefully!) finishing our data collection for that exciting research project, writing that manuscript on a well-polished idea, or designing a new curriculum.If all went according to plan, summer allowed us, as professors, time to contemplate new ways to enrich ourselves so that we can approach the new semester with inspiration. However, many of us contemplated our "time off" with trepidation, knowing, perhaps, that our portfolios are somewhat lacking, if not in quality, then in quantity. Many of us struggle with the publish-or-perish