„Diversity politics in higher education. An expert exchange“

The event consisted of a Keynote speech by Prof. Dr. Lorenz Narku Laing (Professor of Social Science and Racism) with the title “Diversity creates future . Impulses for a modern university”. The keynote was held in German and was concluded with a lively discussion (1 hour). On the second day on the event, three panel sessions took place. This day, too, was concluded with an extensive final discussion session.

Panel 1: Challenges of university diversity policy (Isolde Karle and Michalina Trompeta) Diversity policy is increasingly anchored in German university management with prorectorates and anti-discrimination officers. At the same time, it still faces major challenges in achieving its intended goals, in implementing successful strategies and changing structures. The speaker proposed several reasons: Communication from university management to faculties does not work effectively despite many efforts. Many offers with regard to coaching, mentoring, further education (unconscious bias etc.), the support of first generation students and of early career researchers (career counseling, care support etc.) are not or only insufficiently known. In principle, faculties regard specifications from university management as an imposition rather than as a service/support/help with a view to their own goals. Some university members have not yet understood that diversity policy is closely intertwined with talent development. Diversity policy is inclusive in a comprehensive sense –it aims to encourage students, staff and researchers to develop their hidden talents regardless of origin and gender. Excellence is therefore not to be understood in an elitist but in an inclusive way ("inclusive excellence").

The speakers addressed the paths taken to deal with the mentioned challenges at Ruhr University. Above all, the session provided opportunities to exchange ideas with the experts present.

Panel 2: Between too-woke and not woke enough: Communicating about Diversity and Inclusion(Constance Sommerey) The session was opened with the presentation of two quotes the speaker had received on the same day, addressing her communication in the wake of a controversy surrounding gender inclusive language at her university. “Your public support of students who push through their gender ideology by any means is an attack on academic freedom.”

“Your silence is complicity. As Reverend Desmond Tutu stated: "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” The speaker proceeded to explain how, as professional staff developing and implementing D&I strategy in the higher education sector, the communication aspect of our brief is of great improtance. Ideally, professionals want to reach all the groups and communities within their institutions. This includes marginalized voices AND those who use their voice to oppose the D&I agenda; not welcoming ideas relating to social justice, equity and inclusivity and what has been labelled the ‘woke’-movement. Next to these polarized groups, there are many community members who are not yet fully aware of the goals and implications of becoming a more inclusive institution. The following questions were raised and discussed during the panel: How do we find a way to communicate our institutions’ D&I agendas in a way that does it justice while also achieving more than “preaching to the converted”? How do we negotiate taking a stance with remaining in conversation with less engaged community members and those with a more critical voice? How to negotiate external and internal pressures while staying close to the respective D&I vision of our institution?

Panel 3: Data and diversity: On the limits and possibilities of data in advancing D&I policy (Aya Ezawa and Karin Gilland Lutz) Data and monitoring are a central element of D&I policy. There are many monitoring instruments which, for example examine annual progress in the representation of women in order to be able to assess progress in the area of diversity and inclusion. For an academic institution, evidence in form of data, is obviously an important foundation for effective policy. Yet, there are also questions. While anti-discrimination legislation and policies are concerned with discrimination based on a range of protected characteristics, which vary somewhat between countries but oftentimes include sex, race and ethnicity, disability, parental and marital status, sexual identity and orientation, age and faith, available data and monitoring are largely limited to registered sex, citizenship, age and marital status. This means that diversity officers and senior leaders in higher education institutions, are often faced with a gap between the formal obligations that our institutions are meant to fulfil on the one hand, and on the other hand the knowledge we have about where our institutions stand in this respect. In addition, policy makers and senior administrators recognise that having data on a problem does not automatically solve the problem.

What data do university leaders need in order to advance “their” D&I policy agenda? 
How do data help in making policy decisions? 
What do professional staff such as diversity officers do with data, how do data enable them to advance their work? 
What do higher education institutions need to do in relation to data that they are currently not doing, in order for data to move the EDI policy agenda forward? 

In this session, Aya Ezawa and Karin Gilland Lutz briefly reflected on these questions by focusing on the relationship between data, monitoring and effective policy-making and implementation in their contexts at the University of Leiden (NL) and the University of Zurich (CH), respectively.