Oct. 21, 2024
The New York Times’ recent coverage of the University of Michigan’s diversity, equity, and inclusion programs was not surprising in its tone or the ways in which it mischaracterized the work of diversity professionals and the responsibility of colleges and universities to fulfill their missions. When a publication shines such a narrow light on what it perceives as flaws, it diminishes all the important context and history that its beam of light does not touch.
But even though it was not surprising, that does not lessen the sting when a prominent outlet publishes such a story based on selective information, and when it declares the work to be a failure because the outcomes do not meet unrealistic, misguided expectations. This declaration by the Times is particularly dangerous when we know how this story will now be weaponized by those who have made their intentions clear: to disband diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts at institutions and organizations across the country.
Our society is increasingly diverse, and that diversity reflects a complexity of identities and needs among students, faculty, and staff. The work intended to support them is complex and messy. It has to be: When you are grappling with some of the most intractable issues entangling society, issues that have pervaded society for centuries, there are no easy solutions. You can only work toward incremental progress.
So, to declare that diversity programs “went wrong” is not only inaccurate, but it fundamentally misunderstands what the work entails and what its goals are. The pursuit of equity and inclusion for a pluralistic democracy that thrives and works for all is aspirational, and it is an ongoing process that requires constant reassessment, recalibration, and renewal. It requires adjusting to changing external conditions — conditions that diversity professionals do not have the power to control, but whose efforts influence and contribute to the success of all students. We assist institutions in building their capacity to ensure that barriers to success among students (at all levels), faculty, and staff are mitigated. It is work that has evolved over generations and is work that does not narrowly define the “merit” of students, faculty, and staff in ways that have been exclusionary.
Our understanding of the effects of racism, sexism, and other heinous forms of discrimination and bias, and their outcomes is constantly growing due to the hard work of students, faculty, and staff at colleges and universities to grapple with these issues. Take, for example, scholarly research on bias in law enforcement responses. Had scholars not raised awareness of bias, had scholars not decided to study bias in the first place, had students who themselves have experienced bias not been encouraged to become scholars, a fatal knee on the neck of George Floyd might have remained classified as “appropriate restraint.”
Diversity professionals understand all of the nuances of the conditions necessary for students, faculty, and staff to thrive. For example, to support students, faculty, and staff with disabilities, it takes more than a declaration that we will follow the law and provide access to our campuses. It is through innovations and evidence-based research that we understand the needs of people with disabilities, from simple “fixes” like curb cuts that benefit all to more complex responses like accessible technology and adjustments to the learning environment for neurodivergent students.
Higher education must continue to be a laboratory where we can interrogate complex issues and try innovative strategies to address new issues and issues that society has failed, time and time again, to adequately address. Higher education has a mission to generate knowledge and understanding in order to positively impact communities and to prepare all for leadership in a diverse society, and it has an obligation to expand strategies and interventions to support that mission. The role of diversity officers is to assist their institutions in serving that mission. But it is a collective responsibility.
There has never been a one-size-fits-all approach to our work as diversity professionals. It must be tailored to meet the individual needs of institutions and communities, which have adapted in different ways to meet different moments throughout history. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act banned racial discrimination in higher education, while Title IX banned sex discrimination in higher education in 1972. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 added new regulations for accommodations and accessibility requirements. Another major historical moment, the COVID-19 pandemic, furthered our understanding of the importance of mental health and well-being for student success.
The challenges The New York Times has reported on are not inconsistent with the messiness and complexity of the work of diversity professionals in higher education. Can the collective “we” do better? Yes. But to assert that the work of diversity offices, faculty, staff, as well as students should no longer be supported because they have not fixed issues that even today in our broader society are met with significant resistance illustrates how misunderstood this work is, and it is ignorant of the context that is so important to the mission of higher education and the role it plays in our democracy, a democracy that has not always worked for everyone.
These are not simple issues, and we know we have not failed. We understand the scope of the challenges we face, and we are fully committed to meeting them. The only way forward is through flexibility, innovation, and a willingness to reimagine how to meet current needs and anticipate future needs. It also requires courageous leadership within and outside of higher education.
To our colleagues at colleges and universities, across the country, including the University of Michigan, our colleagues in corporations, and allies facing resistance in their diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts: Know that you are not alone. Together, we will continue to fight for a more equitable and inclusive future for all.
Sincerely,
Paulette Granberry Russell, J.D.
President & CEO, NADOHE