Here’s what actually happened when my SC university asked job applicants for DEI statements | Opinion

A few South Carolina lawmakers have been complaining, on social media and on the state house floor, about diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts by public colleges and universities in our state.

DEI policies have become a target in several states, including ours, where House Bills 4289 and 4290 are pending. These bills would prohibit public colleges and universities from weighing DEI in hiring and admissions policies.

If you’re wondering what DEI efforts actually look like on the ground floor, here’s my experience on a hiring committee for a job in American history at the University of South Carolina Lancaster:

I wasn’t thrilled that we asked candidates to comment on their approaches to DEI. It’s already hard to apply for academic positions, what with the detailed curriculum vitae, long cover letter, buggy HR forms, and letters of recommendation from people nobody wants to bother yet again. It hardly seemed inclusive to make applicants jump through another hoop only to be rejected in the end, as most would be.

In the end, though, we asked for the DEI statements. The requirement I’d found annoying at first turned out surprisingly well.

Why? Because candidates for professorships have look-alike transcripts with strings of identical grades. Their references heap praise on them. Their CVs are perfectly polished, and their introductory letters sound like they’ve been work-shopped by a committee of PhDs, because they have been.

But that wasn’t true of the diversity statements. Maybe because they’re somewhat new, the DEI statements were one of the few places where we could see the individual human being behind the formulaic professional applicant.

So, what did the candidates say? All kinds of things. One said he made sure the textbook was free. Another mentioned online office hours for students who couldn’t be on campus. Some had widened the range of perspectives in their readings to include more primary texts by women. One mentioned making the attendance policy more flexible for students who were sick. Others noted the inseparability of African American and European American history.

Reading the statements, I realized I would have been a better new professor had I written one. Anybody who teaches in South Carolina needs to communicate with people from diverse backgrounds. And “equity” generally means “fairness” — a notion most of us care about even if we struggle with exactly how to put it into practice. “Inclusion” is what education is, after all. The point is for people to merge with the larger world as best they can.

Here’s what didn’t happen: Nobody swore fealty to Karl Marx. Nobody bemoaned white privilege or toxic masculinity. If there were apologies for church-going, I missed them. Nor do I remember anyone telling us their political party, gender, sexual orientation, or opinions of critical race theory or wokeness — though if they had, that would have been fine, as long as they did so in a way that was thoughtful and relevant.

What wouldn’t have come off well? If somebody had written that they focused their teaching efforts only on the best students. And, in the unlikely event of a candidate hinting that equity required the public shaming of people with traditional values, the hiring committee would have been unenthusiastic.

Instead, the DEI statements were what you’d want from good teachers, ones who know that students sometimes need encouragement more than they need a display of somebody else’s brilliance. They helped us hire a skilled, dedicated colleague.

Some of our state’s legislators are trying to stamp out diversity statements. From my experience, that’s not useful. I’m sure schools occasionally do things in the guise of diversity, equity and inclusion that are counterproductive, even unfair — what can’t be done badly? But if we defunded and outlawed everything that could go awry, our state legislature itself would soon be illegal.

South Carolina leaders do have some wonderful ideas for education. A recent bill would make school board meetings more accessible. Another proposal would cut what students pay at regional campuses. It’s not in either plan’s name, but you could call their larger goal DEI. It’s for everyone.

Suzanne Penuel is an associate professor of English at the University of South Carolina Lancaster.