Introduction
These three words, individually, are powerful nouns. When they are combined as a set, the meaning evokes an optimistic outlook and high expectations of how individuals should be welcomed into their respective and corporate role as a person within the institution or organization. Fostering an inclusive organization that values diversity and equity is an ongoing challenge. Unfortunately, in some instances, it has been interpreted as imposing quotas and simply following an affirmative action agenda rather than placing value on the individual’s assets that may result in positive steps for the organization. While some see this as social responsibility toward social justice, others see it as a process that solely caters to the marginalized and underprivileged, overlooking the merits of other candidates, thus claiming it is discriminatory.
A Personal Experience
As a professional educator, I am asked at times to explain DEI, Critical Race Theory, Dual Language, English as a Second Language and other initiatives. The latest request is about DEI, a topic in which I have incomplete knowledge of its origin, purpose and background. Nevertheless, I do have firsthand experiences where aspects of DEI were manifested in my life journey. I have sat in some eating establishments where the attention was not as welcoming in comparison to others around me. I have also been ignored in men’s clothing places while others received an energetic welcome even though I had arrived first. And in education, I was informed my writing skills were not sufficiently polished to attain my Master’s Degree much less my PhD.
The views about DEI in this essay are my own. The interest and passion embedded in my words and descriptions are undeniable, giving me a profound interest to exploring and sharing these thoughts.
Purpose of DEI
DEI was championed as a vehicle to look at the human assets an individual brings to the table regardless of their varied or diverse background with hopes of serving as a mirror to the diverse face of our country. It was designed to cast a wider net in attracting highly talented individuals to join organizations and institutions. By focusing on diversity, the message was to discourage implicit biases that served as barriers with emphasis on creating a more respectful and cohesive workplace or institutional environment. The expectation is to promote a more equitable and inclusive climate. The interpretation of the meaning or semantics surrounding DEI has disrupted that effort.
Meaning/Semantics
Semantics can turn a compliment into an insult or drive a wedge between a friendship and in some instances, mislead the true intent of a program, activity, or initiative. The inaccurate representation of a particular point of view can be inadvertently misread and misinterpreted or it can be deliberately manipulated to strike a different chord that deciphers the message in a totally different manner. When critics speak out against DEI, ask them to consider the individual words—diversity, equity, inclusion—and not the acronym, and specify exactly which one or more of the three concepts they feel is untenable.
The full understanding and intent of DEI has been mischaracterized and repurposed with the deliberate intent to condemn it as a faulty approach to deny some folks access to employment, housing, and other services based on a diverse set of circumstances that include gender, physical disabilities, skin color, age, language, ethnicity, religion, party affiliation, and more.
Diversity has been characterized as being discriminatory and in some cases as deliberately trying to radicalize the minds of the younger generation most notably in the area of gender, sexual orientation, race, and employment. These distinctive and varied sets of individuals have not altogether been seen as an asset.
Diversity in the U.S.
The U.S. Census Bureau has identified over 350 different languages spoken within the United States, with English, Spanish, and Mandarin (Chinese) among the top three. Although the Census Bureau only recognizes six ethnic categories (White, Black, Asian, Amerindian/Alaskan native, native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and mixed ethnicity), it did request write-in information within each of those categories and identified almost 1500 different ethnic groups living in the United States. The U.S. population is approaching 350 million with the female population representing over 50%. All this reflects a substantially diverse set of individuals living in the United States.
And with respect to religion, there is a wide range of religions and denominations within the major religions in addition to the sects that practice their unique style of religion. We have five main religions (Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism) with 372 different faith groups, and 380,000 churches, with more than 200 Christian denominations.
Diversity with regard to surface level criteria such as food preference, music, art, and clothing, is readily accepted and in many instances praised. Guacamole, hummus, Tecate beer, and other ethnic cuisine and beverages are a favorite for many Americans. The deep level attributes such as religion, culture, language, customs, traditions, and values, are not as easily adopted or appreciated by all. DEI appears to have struck a chord in the values and cultural category that has led to misunderstandings and resentments. This negative tone has been characterized as bringing harm to a population group.
The United States is now a diverse representation of distinct groups that manifest and celebrate their culture and heritage throughout the year in a variety of ways, highlighting the group’s customs, language, values, background, religion, and beliefs. The cross-cultural dynamics of these multiple points of views and practices is the make-up of our country. We are all seeking a piece of the “American Pie” that will lift our spirits and underscore our contribution as a group to the overall make-up of our nation.
Equity
Equity is viewed as providing different levels of support to meet the individual’s tailored needs. Providing access for those with limited mobility is one example as is sharing information in multiple languages. In public education, the mandate to provide individualized assistance to students was signed into law as the Individuals with disabilities Act (IDEA) in 1975. It focused on providing the least restrictive environments to help a student succeed. Equity recognizes that different individuals bring a separate level of expertise or background that can be of benefit to the organization or institution.
Inclusion
A critical factor for individual success is for that person to feel valued and thereby invited to the decision-making table. The individual identities and background experiences of each person creates an environment that understands and accepts the input and contributions of diverse thinkers, students, and employers/employees. We expect individuals to learn and adapt to their new American lifestyle, to include businesses, educational systems, and daily living. DEI facilitates that by helping individuals transition and expand their styles to more common ways of learning and working with others in the U.S. DEI is not meant to separate but to expand and integrate learning and communication styles for the common good of a group or organization.
Social Justice Mandate
The mandate for anti-discriminatory views was adopted in July of 1964 via the Civil Rights Act (Title VII), the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. This was a precursor for DEI. Despite the passage of this landmark law, discrimination continued in the area of housing, education, medical support, jobs, voting rights and programs that would benefit those less fortunate. In education, students with limited English required strong leadership advocacy from within the community and the schools and universities to layout more progressive and successful teaching and learning avenues for these students. In the voting rights arena, gerrymandering or the geographical reshaping of boundaries for streets and households to benefit a particular party or group, has disenfranchised many voters.
DEI recognized the diversity within our country and realized that some students and individuals were not invited or recruited to participate in programs to make them feel they were included, welcomed, and treated equitably. This expectation of equity is supported by the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence that states all people are created equally and have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
DEI is more than a program or a mindset and should not be a political tool. Rather, it should be viewed as a vehicle that values the diverse set of individuals who live in our country and are searching for an entry or a pathway into a more successful life and the ability to contribute to the greater society. Their language, background, religion, and other factors that make up who they are should not be an obstacle to their moving forward to attain the essential “ticket” to get onboard. Since that period of time, in the 1960’s, progress toward equity, acceptance of diversity, and willingness to be a more inclusive society, has been an intense struggle for so many and particularly for the marginalized communities and citizens.
The Opposing Views of DEI
In seeking input from non-DEI supporters, the overall consensus is one of the general rejection of the entire concept. A misconception included the use of suffixes (He, She, and They) after a person’s names, not fully understanding the rationale for that use and feeling they are being disrespectful in not accepting this preference. Also, they claim that DEI has opened the doors to less conventional expressions related to sexual orientation. The message to children and the access of bathrooms for all sexes is another troubling issue that they connect to DEI. Further, they cite the 1964 Civil Rights Act claiming it applies to one and all and that DEI is setting aside the rights of some members of the US population with regards to employment.
DEI Setbacks and Challenges
Funding for DEI and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) may be eliminated and directives from the federal government may possibly prohibit the use of language and programs that mention DEI with the penalty of withdrawing all federal monies to the respective institution. Censuring of books has been ongoing for several years and is now an accepted process.
The mischaracterization of DEI has taken root in the minds of many Americans who do not fully understand its full impact, similar to the reaction toward Critical Race Theory. Some of the proponents of DEI did not fully lay out the foundational basics for DEI perhaps thinking that logical and reasonable people would accept it unconditionally. The limitation with this outlook is that many voters do not vote based on logic or reasonable assumptions.
The Pendulum for serving a wide range of students and employees from diverse backgrounds has swung in the opposite direction, primarily due to redefining DEI as a negative tool and highlighting it to drive changes. The power shift in governance controlling funds and program and policy initiatives does not favor DEI and similar programs.
Notable DEI Outcomes
A prominent outcome of DEI has been the increase of Latino students entering the workforce and enrolling in institutions of higher education. This has been aided by the appointments of more Latino leaders in key leadership positions. The role modeling and intent to seek more diversity and inclusion has seen a positive impact.
In the visual and performing arts, the Latino published authors and poets and in other art related fields, the increase has been moderate but increased nevertheless, as more individuals seek to share their talents in a variety of ways that shares their experiences as Americans.
Some of the DEI associated attributes include ramps and sidewalk curb cutouts, subtitles and closed captions on television programs, infant changing accommodations for infants for family restrooms, paid family leave for both mother and father, belt extenders on airplanes, large print materials, use of different languages in messaging, and more.
DEI has awaken the spirit and soul of many citizens. It will be difficult to shut that down!
Suggestions for Organizations and Institutions
As organizations and institutions struggle to sustain the inroads they have made related to DEI, it would be beneficial to think of how they can still proactively invite a diverse set of students and employees within a climate that welcomes fresh and illuminating ideas that advocates abundant success for all. The expectations have always been to invite the best and brightest with the added intent of casting the net in new and unchartered waters to attract and recruit a more diverse set of students and clients that have been overlooked given the traditional recruitment avenues.
The laws and policies may be changed, discarded and defunded, however, the collective mind and heart of those in charge of DEI programs is still intact. The thinking and passion to do the best work is still within full grasp when the mind and heart are still engaged. The strategy to rethink, retool, and reimagine can be a powerful one.
The following are suggested practices that may add credence and sustainability to the DEI work:
· Cultivate a conscious, discerning, and reflective mindset to identify the root causes that impede the work of DEI.
· Raise the most salient questions that will lead toward more clarity and alternative solutions highlighting both assets and liabilities in promoting DEI practices.
· Continue to reassess and redefine the work of DEI with more clarity.
· Adopt an apolitical approach. An overly aggressive approach will invite a reaction; seek logic and offer success stories and examples.
· Seek to inform students, clients, employees and others through thoughtful and informative conversations and discussions.
· Identify the distractions, skepticism, funding sources, and other barriers to DEI and respond accordingly.
Summary
Cataclysmic changes that touch our core values and beliefs usually invites a reaction from both advocates and those who are on the opposite camp. That is a normal occurrence. What is striking is when a particular initiative or program is transformed into a disruptive tool seeking to divide the population by asking that it be rejected wholeheartedly, and remove any vestiges of the program. This approach simply invites a counter measure from those supporting it.
What has been set aside in its entirety is a deliberate and open discussion to review the issues surrounding the initiative, DEI. The essential essence of seeking or providing clarity and discussing the foundational purpose of DEI has been disregarded. The prevailing views that mock and strike down any initiative by overlooking its various components is a myopic approach.
All programs need to be frequently reviewed to determine their value, relevance, and outcome. To categorically dismantle initiatives without objectively reviewing their impact is shortsighted and imprudent.
“A person who won’t read has no advantage of one who can’t read.” - Mark Twain
Frank S. Davila, PhD Feb 2025
Comments