Exploring the Unstated: Using Critical Discourse Analysis to Examine Faculty Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Statements.
Saved in:
| Title: | Exploring the Unstated: Using Critical Discourse Analysis to Examine Faculty Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Statements. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Sherard, Max K.1 (AUTHOR) max.sherard@unt.edu, Russo-Tait, Tatiane2 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Research in Higher Education. Feb2025, Vol. 66 Issue 1, p1-39. 39p. |
| Abstract: | In higher education, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) statements are texts written by faculty members which explain their commitments to improving education for marginalized students. Requesting, reviewing, and acting upon DEI statements is just one practice, among others, which higher education institutions can use to transform individual and institutional practices, towards more just ends. However, DEI statements can become extensions of the curriculum vitae rather than opportunities for deeper critical reflection. In this study, we examine a large R1 university in the Southwestern US which required its faculty to submit written reflections about their contributions to diversity. We collected 22 statements from faculty in two disciplines: life sciences and quantitative sciences. Drawing on techniques from critical discourse analysis, we analyzed these statements to understand what meanings are expressed and what factors constrain or support faculty in writing more critical reflections. Results demonstrate that most faculty’s statements: (a) do not clearly explicate DEI problems or causes; (b) over represent remedies to problems; and (c) locate problems within or between individuals, rather than within systems. We hypothesize that this is due (in part) to influence of major funding sources and broader neoliberal discourses about knowing, learning, and success in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Research in Higher Education is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | In higher education, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) statements are texts written by faculty members which explain their commitments to improving education for marginalized students. Requesting, reviewing, and acting upon DEI statements is just one practice, among others, which higher education institutions can use to transform individual and institutional practices, towards more just ends. However, DEI statements can become extensions of the curriculum vitae rather than opportunities for deeper critical reflection. In this study, we examine a large R1 university in the Southwestern US which required its faculty to submit written reflections about their contributions to diversity. We collected 22 statements from faculty in two disciplines: life sciences and quantitative sciences. Drawing on techniques from critical discourse analysis, we analyzed these statements to understand what meanings are expressed and what factors constrain or support faculty in writing more critical reflections. Results demonstrate that most faculty’s statements: (a) do not clearly explicate DEI problems or causes; (b) over represent remedies to problems; and (c) locate problems within or between individuals, rather than within systems. We hypothesize that this is due (in part) to influence of major funding sources and broader neoliberal discourses about knowing, learning, and success in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 03610365 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s11162-024-09827-1 |
