Abstract
Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives have positively and substantially impacted the lived experiences of racially minoritized and marginalized people seeking degrees in US colleges and universities by creating more welcoming environments that value their identities. Recent legislation and US Supreme Court rulings spawned anti-DEI legislation that is eroding those positive gains. This article draws on Patricia Williams' 1987 conceptualization of spirit murder to explain the deleterious effects of the anti-DEI movement and advances the conceptualization of “spirit of care” which prioritizes humanity. The spirit of care supports DEI initiatives and practices in higher education institutions, viewing them as necessary for respect, connection, and awareness of difference. Technology can play a unique and pivotal role in promoting a spirit of care in higher education.Article Preview
TopThe Background -The Collapse Of Dei
On June 29, 2023, in a ruling hailed as historic, the US Supreme Court struck down the constitutionality of race-conscious policy - affirmative action in college admission decisions (Supreme Court, n.d.). With a Court divided by ideology in a country divided by race, with a history of racial disparity, the decision was not unanimously supported nor entirely unexpected. In a society framed by white supremacy, DEI values and practices have been deemed countercultural (Leverage to Lead, 2022). DEI policies and practices include but are not limited to chief diversity officers (leadership with primary responsibility for designing and implementing policies and practices aimed at equity and inclusion efforts), operating budgets for DEI initiatives, DEI training (e.g., implicit bias in hiring, cross-cultural mentoring), DEI programming and curricular diversity (e.g., inclusion of course material of that represent diverse topics and author, programs increasing awareness and celebrating diverse identities), and faculty commitment to equity and justice. DEI practices and policies may also involve ensuring compliance and serving as advocates for marginalized community members. Despite all the benefits of diversity that are supported by DEI policies and practices (American Council on Education and American Association of University Professors [ACE] [AAUP], 2000, Harper & Associates, 2024, Miller, 2024), proponents of anti-DEI legislation have yet to accept that mandates are necessary to ensure equity amongst racial groups in higher education and subsequent careers requiring such degrees. In fact, while racial justice activists clamored for social justice and recognition of America’s Achilles heels: race and racism, many of a different ilk - advocates of anti-DEI - failed to accept that mandates were needed to slow racialized police brutality, Black women’s maternal mortality, voter redistricting, food deserts, inequitably resourced schools, among other societal ills (Leverage to Lead, 2022).