Diversity, Inclusion and Equity - The paradox of many experts in higher education.
Universities and colleges probably have highest per capita employment of Doctor and Masters-level educated individuals.
Shouldn't they be shining examples of equity, rights, and diversity?
Through many years connected to post-secondary, I puzzle regularly at how poorly most fare on diversity, inclusivity, equity, etc.
Many post-secondary organizations muddle and stumble, yet most have In-house 'experts' (e.g. profs, instructors). Plus, grads as newly minted 'experts' in disciplines in which institutions are stumbling- but should shine.
How does this happen?
For example, universities have experts in HR, women's studies, human services, business, human rights, Indigenous studies, political science, policy analysis, IT, and so on.
Is it silly logic to assume institutions that sell programs (for thousands of $ per year), that teach these things, have in-house PhD experts, and educate future leaders- would have nation-leading diversity and equity initiatives?
Many universities in this country pride themselves on their "nation-leading" programs in Women's studies, or Indigenous leadership, or Human Rights- but...
... look under the hood, and they don't operate with similar principles as taught in their classrooms.
Why does this happen?
Not only do they miss the mark; there are generally few initiatives to track data (e.g. evidence) to demonstrate one way or another. Yet, many teach 'data' programs, and have internal departments specialized in data analysis.
The 2017 book, "The Equity Myth: Racialization and Indigeneity at Canadian Universities" reflects similarly as the CAUT 2018 paper: "Underrepresented & Underpaid: Diversity & Equity Among Canada’s Post-Secondary Education Teachers".
Researchers have dug deep to gather data related to purported 'diversity', 'inclusion' and 'equity' programs. The current quilt is not pretty.
The "Equity Myth" crew identified three main frameworks and mandates for addressing equity in universities:
1/ Human-rights or anti-discrimination law and approaches (36 of 49 universities researched - just under half of all Canadian universities);
2/ Equity frameworks (12 universities), &
3/ Diversity frameworks (1 university).
Within these were many disparate patchy approaches, and frustrated practitioners.
Frustrated by institutions and other leadership lethargic on these initiatives. Along with convoluted policies and pathways through HR, independent offices, poorly resourced Sr. leaders, etc.
How workforces are organized around these 'values', is a shoddy patchwork quilt.
Some universities have neither frameworks nor offices to address equity and other concerns. Not sure what's worse: non-performative initiatives, or, none at all...?
Those researching these issues (& mounting legal challenges and Human rights complaints) reveal slippery contradictions in institutions educating the next generations of leaders and workers.
Is the DIE initiative at your institution a shiny quilt on the wall? Doing what it says it 'values'?
Or, is it fraying threads and in a crumpled heap?