It has been more than 70 years since the Civil Rights Act was passed, and the pendulum is swinging back hard and fast. The recent Executive Order banning DEI in federal government programs sent a shockwave throughout the nation, followed just recently by the closing of offices within several federal agencies that focus on antidiscrimination and civil rights. Just yesterday, the University of Michigan, recognized for its efforts in diversity, announced that it is closing its Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and its Office for Health Equity and Inclusion. Every day, there is a cacophony of shouting from both sides in a never-ending contest in which whoever yells the loudest gets a leg up… for about five minutes. It is time to approach DEI entirely differently by using the concept of universal design, which calls for designing programs, processes and policies that are usable by everyone.
Universal design is a concept related to accessibility, particularly linked to the internet and other technologies. It is also an emerging framework for course design in education, where it is known as universal design for learning. The concept is to design processes and policies that accommodate individuals with different abilities. Rather than providing accommodations for those who need them, the product, service or program is designed to meet a wide variety of needs. In the case of DEI, universal design would result in creating environments, programs, procedures and more that are flexible enough to meet the needs of different groups of people, resulting in equal outcomes for everyone.
I have worked in higher education for 20 years and have been a consistent strong supporter of women in leadership. As a white woman, I thought that we had figured out civil rights in the U.S. and felt that things were going pretty well until I attended a conference that forced me to reevaluate my perspective. Since then, I have taken advantage of several opportunities to develop my diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging (DEIB) skills, including a semester course on inclusive pedagogy and a week-long intensive program that focused on culture change in support of DEIB.
First, let’s be honest. DEIB was not exactly working effectively even before January – there was already a lot of pushback. Several states have passed legislation impacting what can be taught in K-12 and college classrooms. In some states, such as Indiana, professors who fail to teach “intellectual diversity” may be prohibited from earning tenure. These examples are chillingly similar to the circumstances that resulted in the creation of tenure and academic freedom several decades ago. The current government’s charge against DEIB has just exacerbated – and possibly accelerated – what was already occurring in some parts of the country.
Consider some of the criticisms of DEIB. One of the claims the current administration has repeatedly made is that DEIB programs and policies are a form of discrimination and beneficiaries are undeserving or would not achieve the same outcomes otherwise. Research has demonstrated this is not the case. Yet allegations like these cause some members of underrepresented groups to doubt their qualifications. In college admissions, underrepresented students often enroll in institutions that are less competitive than they are qualified for, and one study found that undermatched students did not even apply to colleges they were qualified for and were less likely to graduate on time. However, another study concluded that underrepresented students are actually more likely to graduate from a selective institution.
But that is not the only issue. In a recent survey, more than 50% of eligible individuals reported not feeling comfortable asking for benefits they are entitled to due to fear of stigma or concern that the process is too difficult. If the beneficiaries of many of these programs do not request accommodations that they are entitled to, we need to change the programs to eliminate the need to ask. Imagine a world where we no longer need to raise awareness around accommodations, implement processes to provide them or fight the stigma around using them. Universal design makes that possible.
Finally, there is the perception problem. In a recent Pew survey, 50% of respondents were unsupportive of using affirmative action in college admissions and 74% did not feel that race or ethnicity should be taken into account in hiring decisions. Let’s stop fighting a losing battle and focus on how we can create environments that foster success for everyone.
In the current environment, it may feel like yelling is the only solution to be heard above the melee. Others may react by hunkering down and laying low to attract as little attention as possible. But what if those who have fought for DEIB issues took action by fundamentally rethinking the whole system? The government is already encouraging the use of universal design to address accessibility, but the concept could be used much more pervasively. Universal design does not focus on any one group and seeks to provide the same outcomes for everyone, which aligns with both DEIB supporters and critics.
Universal design is an opportunity to overcome the battlefield of shouting and sparring, leading to the outcomes that both sides claim they want, and eliminating the need for anyone to ask. Sometimes a whisper or a subtle and consistent act of defiance is much more powerful than the jarring discordance we are surrounded by today.
