University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Paved with good intentions: auditing higher education’s commitment to race and gender inclusion

(USC Thesis Other)

Paved with good intentions: auditing higher education’s commitment to race and gender inclusion

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 1
Paved With Good Intentions: Auditing Higher Education’s
Commitment to Race and Gender Inclusion
Emily Tillotson
Doctor of Social Work
Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work
University of Southern California
August 2020
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 2
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………....… 4
II. Conceptual Framework
The Problem and Grand Challenge …………………………………………………... 6
The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Higher Education Landscape …………………. 8
Social Significance ……………………………………………………………....…... 9
Theory of Change ......................................................................................................... 15
III. Problems of Practice and Solutions/Innovations
Proposed Innovation and Context ............................................................................... 16
Comparative Assessment and Potential for Success .................................................... 20
IV. Project Structure, Methodology, and Action Components
Prototype Description ................................................................................................... 21
Market Analysis and Implementation Plan .................................................................. 22
Impact Assessment and Evaluation ............................................................................... 24
Communication Plan ...................................................................................................... 25
Ethical Implications and Negative Consequences .......................................................... 30
V. Conclusions, Actions, and Implications
Summary of Innovation Plans ........................................................................................ 30
Project Context and Implications ................................................................................... 31
Limitations and Risks ..................................................................................................... 31
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 32
References .................................................................................................................................. 33

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 3
Appendices
Appendix A: Logic Model .............................................................................................. 41
Appendix B: Gantt Chart................................................................................................. 42
Appendix C: Semi-Structured Diversity Audit Interview Guide……………….............. 43
Appendix D: Infographic ................................................................................................ 44
Appendix E: Prototype .................................................................................................... 45

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 4
I. Executive Summary
The American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare provides the profession with
overarching guidance in the form of 13 grand challenges. This paper addresses the twelfth
challenge, "Achieve Equal Opportunity and Justice" (Calvo et al., 2018). The focus on equity
and justice intensified around the nation after the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police
officers. It has elevated anti-racism and equity work to new levels and awakened many to the
systemic equity issues built into every institution. Higher education is no exception. Making
diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) elements in higher education visible and measurable are
the goals of this capstone project.
Consumers now expect higher learning institutions to display DEI objectives and
initiatives, and most do—or at least have talking points. Work environments now require a
diversity skillset making students more motivated to seek out educational experiences that will
adequately prepare them for the marketplace. While this narrative of inclusion and diversity is
not hard to locate at most schools, there is evidence of a gap between institutional talk and
institutional behavior. The lived experience for students of color and women belies this rhetoric
and threatens institutional credibility (Shapiro et al., 2017). These disparities undermine the basic
values of education as a place where high ideals are uplifted and prized—not only in
performative narrative, but also in daily practice.
This capstone paper introduces an assessment tool and auditing process to facilitate the
assessment of the institutional implicit curriculum elements that often go unexamined. The
implicit curriculum plays a significant part in the campus experiences and outcomes for students.
This assessment innovation and data collection process add to the existing diversity scorecard
and climate change toolset by focusing on measuring real time levels of representation—
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 5
including over and underrepresentation. The process engages decision-makers through a pre and
post-test model that incorporates qualitative interviews and data collection. This innovative
assessment tool provides higher education a way to make visible what is often invisible, engage
in meaningful dialogue, and analyze the hidden curriculum that is so challenging to identify and
measure. Closing the gaps between institutional narratives and outcomes for marginalized
students is a challenging goal. This capstone innovation aims to contribute to this important body
of work with a tool to identify the gaps that need the most attention by making them easier to see
and address.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 6
II. Conceptual Framework
The Problem and Grand Challenge
The best elements of Social Work's legacy are the values of social justice and human
rights (Murdach, 2011). Today these values are still found in the profession's foundational
documents. However, this history of strong activist leadership is not enough; higher education,
and social work specifically, is not spearheading the vanguard of contemporary social justice
movements (Healy, 2008). Many raise concerns that higher education is losing the battle to fend
off the pressures of privatization, neoliberalism, and the "corporate university" (Bonilla-Silva,
2006; Seal, 2018; Spolander et al., 2014; Warikoo, 2016). The economic and philosophical
concept known as neoliberalism is the idea that the free market is the preferred and most efficient
system for fostering competition and that markets do the best job identifying the most
meritorious ideas and people and helps them thrive (Harvey, 2010). And indeed, the emphasis on
higher education as a high-stakes consumer market focused on merit and competition is stronger
now than during any previous era (Jack, 2018; Warikoo, 2016). Colleges and universities are
responding to these market drivers. Schools emphasize their ability to prepare students for the
competitive job market where diversity skills are expected (Holtgraves, 2004). Prospective
students often echo this mindset asserting that the value of diversity centers around choice and
the personal incentives of wishing to be competitive in the marketplace by building skills and
experience working with difference (Mor-Barak, 2017). This approach to DEI work aligns with
neoliberalism's goals and the importance placed on merit and being competitive in the job
market. This emphasis on personal competitiveness and choice fails to meet the values of DEI
work—values that focus on equity, inclusion, and disrupting power disparities. It is likely true
that learning to work with a wide variety of peers may position a graduate favorably for the
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 7
workplace. For social work students it is unclear if these self-serving aspects will support their
future clients well. Merely providing students personal opportunities for skill-building or diverse
experiences falls short of meeting the commitments to diversity that institutional rhetoric often
proclaims and highlights the shortfalls of the neoliberal approach. Social work and higher
education often fail to confront inequality because neoliberal ideas are becoming dominant as
higher education gives way to the claims of individualism, and the corporate university,
supplanting the values of social justice and equity. Nevertheless, higher education touts a lot of
rhetoric about commitment to diversity, but the literature suggests there is a gap between the
rhetoric and outcomes (Shapiro et al., 2017). This gap harms marginalized students, creates
tension between values and behaviors. These gaps are causing educators, including social work
educators, to lose relevance and credibility. If schools want to close the divide between rhetoric
and the disparities in outcomes for students, additional tools and approaches are needed.
Within social work and higher education scholarship, there are calls to realign education
with social justice principles and human rights (Beddoe & Keddell, 2016; Harper, 2009; Healy,
2008; Olson, 2008, Pippert, Essenburg, & Matchett, 2013; Thornhill, 2019). Leading social work
organizations like the American Academy of Social Work and Social Welfare (AASWSW)
released an agenda in 2016 in an ambitious attempt to set priorities for the profession and the
future through the creation of 12 Grand Challenges (Calvo et al., 2018). The grand challenges
outline large-scale goals for the profession and encourage collaboration with many adjacent
disciplines. This capstone outlines a path to move past the neoliberal approach to diversity by
introducing an assessment tool for greater diversity, equity, and inclusion measurement and
assessment and furthering the AASWSW grand challenge of achieving equal opportunity and
justice (Mehrotra, Hudson, & Self, 2017).
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 8
The Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Higher Education Landscape
Many prospective college students engage in careful consumer research throughout high
school, if not before, comparing school amenities and programs. Diversity has emerged as a
critical element for students to weigh during their shopping process (Moody, 2020; Warikoo,
2016). In response, colleges and universities have launched intercultural offices, hired Chief
Diversity Officers, and updated course offerings. Consultants have also played a role by assisting
with drafting diversity statements and overseeing campus climate surveys. Schools of all stripes
are heavily engaged in this work, but significant efforts are being made by predominantly White
institutions (Brown, 2016). However, these diversity initiatives are missing the mark. The value
of DEI work cannot be decoupled from social justice and twisted into marketing campaigns and
diversity trappings. But without additional measurements and tools, DEI campus initiatives can
read as performative and without substance. Additionally, there is evidence that marginalized
students are struggling and that the college experience is falling short of their expectations
(Ashkenas, Park, & Pearce, 2017; Shapiro et al., 2017; Woodworth, 2016). This challenges the
accepted wisdom that schools are making the needed changes and suggests more analysis and
interrogation is necessary.
Addressing the challenge of achieving equal opportunity and justice is difficult to
imagine without addressing the landscape of higher education. Most campus norms currently
support elective opportunities for those seeking DEI coursework. Yet, few places require DEI
oriented classes or co-curricular programs (Hart Research Associates, 2015). Underneath the
commitment to diversity rhetoric seems to be an even greater commitment to guarding tradition
and the status quo. Some professions, like social work, mandate DEI curriculum to maintain
accreditation, although they fall shy of requiring a discrete class. However, the AASWSW, the
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 9
literature, social workers, students, and critics are vocally calling for reform and a more
significant commitment to DEI work. The literature echoes similar concerns (Carnevale, Van
Der Werf, Quinn, Strohl, & Repnikov, 2018). Despite these calls for change and reform from
various sectors, the landscape is full of legacy institutions with over a hundred years of
experience and comfort with business as usual. The history of inequality, discrimination,
marginalization, and oppression within higher education institutions is substantial. While this
present moment is encouraging, systemic inequality in higher education outcomes is not hard to
locate (Ashkenas et al., 2017).
Social Significance
After the civil rights movement opened up higher education opportunities for people of
color and women following the 1972 passage of Title IX, college campuses became the center of
various social intersections. Education was where many people were told to place their hopes for
improved life chances and social class. It is also the place many in the middle class see as a
mandatory stop on the path of life success—one that is curated for them by their anxious parents.
Many of these parents have seen their own class status shift from stable to precarious with the
givens of pension and healthcare now a thing of the past (Quart, 2018). And for the upper class,
college is like a finishing school that provides the desired elite polish and network needed to join
America's ruling class (Khan, 2011). Just a few decades ago, a college education was
unimaginable for many because access was controlled not only by tradition but codified in
discriminatory law and policy. In light of what amounts to relatively recent changes, students
from historically excluded groups are newcomers to this world of assumed meritocracy and not
necessarily interested in providing majority White students with their desired "diversity"
experience (Khan, 2011; Warikoo, 2016).
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 10
Despite this well-known history, there has not been much active discussion about how
this legacy of exclusion has impacted students or how truly new to higher education students
from marginalized groups are. Programs and policies that address their issues are often
afterthoughts or simply do not exist at all (Jack, 2019; Neal, 2017). University administrators do
not seem to see the need to discuss the long history of exclusion these groups have experienced
and the complicity of many schools. This history is swept under the proverbial carpet along with
other inconvenient links to eugenics, slavery, and pseudoscience the academy provided to prop
up bigotry and inequality. The contemporary rhetoric of inclusivity belies and erases the
historical truth that many students’ parents and grandparents would not have been welcome on
the campus their child and grandchild now attend.
While this recent history haunts higher education waiting to be adequately reconciled, the
value of higher education remains robust. It is viewed by many in the United States as a reliable
mechanism for attaining middle-class membership (Gonzales, 2011). Scholars highlight that
post-secondary education has never faced the scrutiny experienced by primary and secondary
education and is unprepared for the growing criticism and calls for improved assessment and
analysis of student outcomes (Neal, 2017). Campuses are beginning to evaluate their climates in
earnest and accreditors are asking questions about diversity and student satisfaction (Shim &
Perez, 2018). Examples of some of the elements not commonly reviewed include mascots, public
art, building names, statues, and monuments. The new savvy college shopper is eager to see a
diverse, representational, and inclusive environment, and campus leaders are eager to provide it
(Byrd, 2017). Or, at least they are keen to provide the façade. The reality for students, especially
marginalized students, may be more difficult to ascertain.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 11
Anticipating problems that diverse students may face once they arrive on campus appears
to receive less attention. There is little evidence that most campuses audit or assess themselves
carefully in preparation for these students—admitting them is the goal (Jack, 2019; Warikoo,
2016). Ironically, this lack of care has opened these same schools up to criticism from these very
students the admissions offices prize (Shim & Perez, 2018). A recent incident at Princeton
University exemplifies this problem. Until finally reversing its decision in June of 2020, the
board of trustees steadfastly clung to the title of its public and international affairs school named
for the former U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson. He was also president of Princeton University
and a well-documented segregationist and racist (Wright, 2016). There were many protests,
surveys, and town hall meetings to discuss the issue. Each time the board of trustees elected to
keep the name with the promise of additional programs and offerings to mitigate the unpopular
decision (Wright, 2016). Only recently, when the landscape of police brutality and nation-wide
anti-racism efforts began to reach a critical mass, did the university relent. These symbolic and
structural changes are crucial to addressing the hidden curriculum barriers on campus and
achieving truly inclusive campus environments (Jayakumar, 2015; Nakaoka & Ortiz, 2017). A
cultivated and supportive campus climate, with strong representational diversity, is needed to
motivate all students and members of a campus community to address issues like self-
segregation and begin seeking what is called, "openness to diversity and challenge" (Shim &
Perez, 2018). This will be new work for many institutions that do not have a multi-generational
history of robust diversity and inclusion practices (Patel, 2015).
The post-colonial lens used by some scholars to analyze higher education provides an
alternative reading and a correction to the prevailing notion that higher education, while not
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 12
perfect, is doing a good job in terms of diversity. To some, the importance of higher education is
nearly unimpeachable:
The reproduction and repetition of the American success narrative creates a self-
controlling mechanism that requires not external force to maintain itself, because this
narrative abides by the commonsense notion that a college degree is required to be seen
as worthy in society (Squire, Williams, & Tuitt, 2018, p. 13).
It is not hard to see how this concept of worthiness carries tremendous social weight and works
to support higher education—easily overriding other misgivings. The power of education is
highly resistant to criticism. Researchers demonstrating poorer economic outcomes for students
of color and low-income students does little to devalue or challenge the status of higher
education (Oliver & Shapiro, 2006).
Sociologist Natasha Warikoo explores the durability and power of higher education in her
book, The Diversity Bargain published in 2016. She studied these concepts by looking closely at
three of the most selective campuses in the English-speaking world, Brown University, Oxbridge
University, and Harvard University. She found unwavering support from students for these
institutions, especially the institution's admission practices. Students in her study voiced many of
the values of neoliberalism as support for their favorable views. The students focused on the
fairness of the application process and the values of competition and individual merit. Any
student believing the process to be fair on a personal level has little reason to challenge the status
quo (Bhopal, 2017). However, some scholars are less accepting of this version of fairness than
the students in Warikoo's study. The long history of leveraging a college degree for higher wages
and social class continues to provide a salient argument for many. Still, others point to the
pressure capitalism has placed on the ideals of education and the business approach now
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 13
common among college administrators (Seal, 2018). These priorities override and outrank
diversity initiatives on many campuses and stymie change (Bhopal, 2017; Welton, Owens, &
Zamani-Gallaher, 2018). Evidence supports these concerns. For example, the American Center
for Progress released a report in 2018 showing that students of color complete fewer degrees
than their White counterparts, especially in STEM fields like engineering (Libassi, 2018; McGill,
2015).
Diversity issues also impact faculty. Schools across the nation are engaged in campaigns
to improve the diversity of the faculty. Although there are various approaches for setting faculty
diversity goals, many schools work to match their student demographics. However, some
scholars are skeptical of these efforts. Education professor, Leigh Patel, discusses institutional
motivators suggesting that the "desire is not so much racial diversity as not being seen as racist."
(2015, p. 667). Other scholars concur that there are still substantial institutional barriers for
faculty members of color. Social work professors, Susan Nakaoka and Larry Ortiz, echo these
concerns and add their testimonios about the many micro and macro aggressions women and
faculty of color face regularly within the academy (2017).
Overt forms of educational discrimination are now illegal, but the literature is mixed
about how effective the academy is at truly delivering for marginalized students (Yee, 2016).
Campus culture around the issues of class, gender, and race remains a critical component that is
difficult to measure and even more difficult to change (Jack, 2019). Some of the scholarship
focusing on White students is troubling and suggests that White students attending
predominantly White schools may experience college as supportive of the problematic ideology
of color blindness as a useful approach for addressing diversity (Byrd, 2017). Other studies are
more encouraging. On campuses where diversity rates are high, students may adopt less
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 14
individualistic understandings of inequality (Jayakumar, 2015). Also, there is evidence that
students planning to join the helping professions view cultural competence and DEI skills as
desirable and worth cultivating (Larson & Bradshaw, 2017).
While higher education struggles with a great many inequality challenges, it also holds
the potential for accomplishing diversity, equity, and inclusion work and at a significant scale.
The landscape of higher education has changed dramatically in recent years and even more
intensely in the past year in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. There are many
preexisting stressors impacting schools, including a decrease in traditionally college-aged young
people. Also, new competitors are joining the marketplace at a rapid rate, often with a for-profit
model (Horn, 2018). College costs continue to rise, and students have become more price-
sensitive as household incomes have not kept pace with rising tuition rates (Quart, 2018). Yet
higher education has demonstrated remarkable tolerance for stressors and a capacity for
change—even rapid change. The most recent example of these change skills can be found in the
pandemic response when nearly all schools made the difficult leap into distance learning—many
for the first time. This evidence, along with the history of student-led reform during the civil
rights era, demonstrates that efforts to effect change in higher education can yield results.
Researcher Kathleen Wong outlines examples of these results. Her recommendations
include resource development for historically marginalized students, chief diversity officers, and
special recruiters (2016). She also identified opportunities to build on existing DEI work
reporting that in a survey by Association of American Colleges and Universities of provosts,
only about a third of schools had some kind of mandatory curricular or co-curricular diversity
element on their campuses (2016). These findings suggest that while there are substantial
interests and needs, many students receive very little diversity preparation while enrolled in
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 15
college. The well-established gap between the narrative of the campus and the outcomes
achieved for students, and many faculty, remains a challenge.
Theory of Change
The theory of change for this project is General Systems Theory (Von Bertalanffy, 1968).
Systems theory is the idea that all parts of a system are interconnected and that changing one part
of a system will impact the whole and this includes the environment around the system (Von
Bertalanffy, 1968). This capstone project follows systems theory’s iterative approach to
change—that systems are capable of adaptation and change and that there is rarely only one
approach to solving a problem. This innovation aligns with the systems theory idea that every
part of the system affects the whole system which is always greater than the sum of its parts.
Legacy institutions, like colleges and universities are complex systems which have strong norms
built on years of practice and socialization. This means that existing patterns are well-established
and well-defended from efforts to initiate change—especially radical change. However, systems
theory suggests that attempts to change the whole institution at once are not necessary to achieve
results. Effectively changing even one part of the system will lead to change for the entire system
(Von Bertalanffy, 1968). However, the system will remain in homeostasis if no elements are
altered. A more linear way of explaining systems theory change is that if the inputs to a system
are changed, the outputs will also change. Thus, if universities and colleges are able to see and
use new information—information previously hidden—about diversity representation trends
controlled by institutional decisions—information that is currently difficult to see—then decision
makers choices will change and outcomes will be impacted. Systems theory also suggests that
systems are capable of adaptation as the environment around the system changes (Von
Bertalanffy, 1968). Recent social events have shifted the environment schools operate within.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 16
System theory suggests the need to adapt to the changes in the environment is creating a prime
opportunity to propose an innovation to higher education. The current wave of national protests
calling for racial justice is felt on many college campuses which creates pressure on
administrators to adopt interventions to successfully adapt and meet the demands of their
consumers—students.
Schools have made superficial strides at change by integrating the language of DEI into
their online and printed materials, but this shift in language is not enough of a change to the
inputs to alter the outputs and outcomes and address larger problems like achievement gaps.
Within systems theory the idea of homeostasis, which is a system’s tendency to resist change,
explains why many current efforts are failing (Von Bertalanffy, 1968). While there are some
tools for assessing college diversity work, more tools are needed that measure different elements
more thoroughly. Many current measurements look at specific diversity offerings and talk about
campus climate, but more normative aspects are less scrutinized. By changing how colleges
assess and measure these seemingly regular parts of college life the inputs that inform decisions
will change to include an understanding of where representational race and gender gaps are
located. Changing the information used to make decisions will impact the decisions themselves
leading to a change in the outputs and the system as a whole. (see Appendix A for logic model).
III. Problems of Practice and Solutions/Innovations
Proposed Innovation and Context
Answering the grand challenge of achieving equal opportunity and justice in the context
of higher education means creating innovations for college campuses that can overcome the
significant barriers posed by legacy organizations with deep roots in structural inequality. There
are robust efforts from think tanks, consultants, and researchers to assist colleges in this work.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 17
The tools of campus climate surveys, focus groups, town halls, listening sessions, and others are
each useful. However, measuring some elements of campus life remains challenging (Bogo &
Wayne, 2013). The problem of making visible the institution's hidden curriculum and the gaps
created by campus rhetoric and marketing initiatives can be addressed by closely examining
elements of campus life.
This paper proposes building on the concept of implicit bias auditing to gather
information specifically about the organization (Milkman, Akinola, & Chough, 2012). Implicit
bias auditing is the process of examining the social and media choices at the personal level to
reveal patterns of self-segregation in a variety of categories. The proposed innovation relocates
and expands this idea for use at the organization level. However, the basic premise remains the
same which is gathering key elements of daily life together and looking for patterns that were
previously hidden or difficult to see. Auditing has long been a useful tool for assessment in many
disciplines. This capstone applies these strengths to solve the problem of how to reveal and
measure the implicit curriculum in higher education. The proposed innovation audits five key
areas of campus life, specifically involved in what has been called the hidden or implicit
curriculum (Bogo & Wayne, 2013). While there are several definitions of the implicit
curriculum, long-time education scholar, Eric Eisner, provides a succinct description, "The
implicit curriculum of the school is what it teaches because of the kind of place it is" (Bogo &
Wayne, 2013, p. 5). The hidden or implicit curriculum is a challenging area of campus
assessment, yet accreditors, including the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), are
beginning to direct programs to address it (Bogo & Wayne, 2013; Peterson, Farmer, Donnelly, &
Forenza, 2014). The auditing process can help schools and programs look beyond the explicit
curriculum and examine and measure their learning environments from various vantage points.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 18
For marginalized people in education and social work, scrutinizing how to achieve better
outcomes for students is regular work and many of the trends revealed through the auditing
process and will likely be unsurprising. It is hoped that raising DEI standards and measurement
techniques will align with and affirm the life experiences of many marginalized students, faculty,
and the social work profession's earliest values (Murdach, 2011). It is also hoped that the
auditing process will effectively identify disparities and offer some relief to marginalized groups
from the burden and risks this work brings. This innovation aims to raise the level of DEI
assessment and measurement within higher education and like-minded disciplines, such as social
work. Professions with predictable accreditation cycles are uniquely well-positioned to respond
to the current calls for anti-racist and anti-oppressive work to take place in all sectors and to
adopt DEI innovations that will help reveal and measure these hidden and harmful patterns.
The process begins with an initial audit looking at campus community demographics,
curriculum, marketing materials, glamour work, governance, and leadership for one completed
academic year. These areas have been identified in the literature as significant to understanding
an organization. In the attempt to appear diverse, some schools have misrepresented the actual
levels of diversity by overrepresenting students of color in their marketing materials (Pippert et
al., 2013). Other research shows that admissions staff and faculty are more likely to respond
quickly and affirmatively to White students and those not squarely interested in addressing anti-
racism (Milkman et al., 2012; Thornhill, 2019). Still, other research outlines how organizations
direct the best work opportunities—glamour work like public speaking and publishing—away
from women and people of color (Berdahl et al., 2018). Reviewing and auditing the curriculum
is an adaptation of this scholarship and research that shows that even using specific words like
"racism" is often avoided by academics in their scholarship (Harper, 2012). Following these
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 19
scholars' lead, the proposed auditing process aggregates data in these areas to create a telling and
descriptive assessment of the campus.
Following this aggregation process, the audit report is presented to campus decision-
makers and stakeholders before the start of an academic year. Next, semi-structured interviews
are conducted with key campus decision-makers (see Appendix C for interview guide). Records
are collected throughout the year. A second audit is conducted and presented at the close of the
academic year, allowing the faculty, decision-makers, and stakeholders to see two recent years of
data side by side. The second presentation includes findings of the qualitative interviews in
addition to the descriptive statistics from the audits.
In tests of the audit process so far, decision-makers responded to the data with changes,
and this could be seen in the subsequent audits as gaps started to close. Although the innovation
is designed to measure the academic year, it is possible to imagine other useful applications.
Large campus programs could elect to audit a limited number of programs for internal review or
accreditation. As schools use the internet as both an archival repository and a marketing venue
more and more each year, auditing from a distance becomes more feasible. An assessment tool
that can be used remotely is attractive in the present moment when most campuses are closed in
response to the global pandemic.
The current landscape for DEI work on campuses includes a variety of tools and vendors.
There are consultants, climate surveys, trainings, and workshops, among other options for
schools to choose from. Auditing does exist in this context in a limited way. However, audits are
still not regularly used and included as mainstream tools, and accreditors have yet to embrace the
practice as part of the diversity assessment in cyclical reports. The proposed auditing process is
more robust and directs the campus to review specific areas that are supported in the literature as
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 20
particularly important. The existing DEI tools are helpful and should continue to be used. Still,
they do not provide the baseline information of an auditing process or the potential to continually
measure progress and adjust to the school's changing demographics. A targeted audit collects
demographic and representational information in categories that are not likely to change from
year to year and provides the leadership and those working on the school's DEI plan with critical
representation information to know where to direct the school's DEI efforts most effectively.
Comparative Assessment and Potential for Success
This innovation offers schools and programs a way to see into often opaque implicit
curriculums and understand student experience in a new way. In the current national
environment of protests for racial justice occurring in thousands of American cities, the timing is
excellent for this innovation and a strong contributor to the likelihood of success. The concept
has been presented at two national conferences to good reviews, attendance, and follow-up
interest. An abstract of the idea has also been accepted for manuscript development.
Still, there are also barriers to overcome. An early version of the audit was tested in a
CSWE accreditation report, and the commissioners did not agree that it reviewed the implicit
curriculum instead, claiming it reviewed the explicit curriculum. While this is discouraging, it is
possible that more definitional agreement could resolve the implicit/explicit issue. The implicit
curriculum concept is used in a variety of ways by different groups. The term diversity itself—
while still widely used—also carries a variety of meanings, connotations, and critiques (Bell &
Hartmann, 2007). In many ways, this demonstrates how much work remains to be completed in
this field.
Lastly, some schools may engage in a diversity audit and then ignore or bury the results if
they are viewed as too damaging or too challenging to address. In this case, the audit would be
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 21
successful because it was used, but unsuccessful in its mission. This is a concern, but one shared
by any innovator. All products have some potential for misuse. The implementation piloting will
be crucial in identifying potential contributors to this risk.
IV. Project Structure, Methodology, and Action Components
Prototype Description
The innovation prototype is called The Higher Education Race and Gender Auditing Tool
(HERGAT) (see Appendix E for prototype). Using this tool begins with gathering basic
information about the school and a reference group of the school’s choosing, like the school's
geographic region. Next, users gather artifacts and documents from five key areas of campus life,
including marketing materials, curriculum/texts, glamour work, governance, and leadership, and
use them to complete the audit. The completed tool provides an overview of the institution itself
and highlights areas of over and underrepresentation.
The HERGAT uses harvested institutional information to give campus decision-makers a
richer understanding of the institution itself. The five areas of the audit each tell a story about
whose voices matter. Those represented broadcast to students and the campus community who is
worthy of an audience and who gets to be a creator of knowledge. The audit takes educators
through a process of interrogating their own course materials and educational decisions. While
many decisions are made one at a time over the course of a year, the audit aggregates these
decisions to make representational patterns clearer and easier to see. Often privileged voices are
accepted without question or seen as neutral (Phillips & Lowery, 2018). The very process of
looking at these choices is disruptive since they are considered largely normative. The practice of
auditing for race and gender will help decision-makers confront choices and see who is getting
too much time at the proverbial mic and whose voices are missing.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 22
For the purposes of assessment and accreditation, additional areas can be included, such
as author discipline. In an interdisciplinary field like social work this can be very helpful in
understanding what views the program may be intentionally or unintentionally emphasizing.
Faculty members are often completely unaware of their peers' course material selection or the
overall leanings of their department until an audit is completed.
Market Analysis and Implementation Plan
The current context for developing and launching the proposed capstone is strategic and
timely. Higher education is moving quickly to address the call for anti-racist and anti-oppressive
initiatives—at least in rhetorical terms. In particular, social work has been called out as a
discipline well-positioned to train others and lead reform with our institutions. The MSW has
been called the new MBA by journalists and social commentators (Bader, 2014). While this
underlines the leadership and skills the profession offers a wide range of sectors, there are signs
that social work enthusiasm and identity may be lagging. This is both a concern and an
opportunity. For example, professional membership in the National Association of Social
Workers (NASW) is dropping (McClain, 2018). Yet, the profession is growing along with the
need for professionals with strong diversity skills. Higher education is tasked with providing the
next workforce. This capstone innovation is implemented in higher education to provide a more
effective mechanism to hold these institutions, upon which so much depends, accountable to
their DEI goals.
Using the public health model known as Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and
Sustainment (EPIS), this capstone project engages with the issue of DEI in schools of social
work and higher education by exploring the system and evaluating the needs of clients and
communities (Palinkas & Soydan, 2012). Research suggests higher education has failed to
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 23
adequately address racism and inequality with scholarship providing only slight research
attention (Bonilla-Silva & Baiocchi, 2001; Corley & Young, 2018; Harper, 2012). This
exploration of the literature and the involved actors and outcomes supports the progression to the
next EPIS phase.
The preparation phase is used to locate potential barriers and facilitators to
implementation of the proposed intervention. As discussed above, the evidence points toward
essential areas of concern and the relative recent arrival of any DEI assessment and
measurement. During this preparation phase, the outer context which is the national discourse on
inequality is a key element supporting the implementation of new tools. However, the inner
context, the accreditation bodies, present both barriers and facilitators for this proposal.
Educators and students may be substantial inner facilitators as support for DEI standards and
measures is a popular topic at conferences and meetings. The role of students as consumers who
create market pressure is also a facilitator.
The implementation phase involves the development and dissemination of the diversity
auditing process and measurement tool. Currently, there is substantial innovation occurring for
DEI training and programming in response to changes coming from consumers and stakeholders.
The proposed auditing tool is a part of this innovation wave and measures factors linked to
inequality issues giving programs an additional way to measure program change over time.
These outer contexts continue to be supportive and, likely a facilitator, to a new intervention.
However, the inner contexts remain mixed with established accreditors and institutions being
much slower to adopt new standards and to acknowledge system deficits. The final phase of
sustainment is addressed by the primary goal of the proposal. The goal of the innovation is to
implement a useful new measurement tool that will generate DEI data and chart program and
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 24
curriculum change. See the Gantt chart for highlights of some of the larger tasks ahead and a
proposed time horizon for implementation (see Appendix B for Gantt chart).
Impact Assessment and Evaluation
A pilot project evaluating the efficacy of this innovation using mixed methods is
proposed. Feedback from stakeholders including instructors, administrators, and students on the
audit and HERGAT process will be valuable for evaluating the tool and making improvements.
The assessment will use a pre- and post-test evaluation model, combined with qualitative
interviews. HERGAT's pre- and post-test assessment comparisons will be performed in
accredited social work programs over 12 months at the close of an academic year. The pre-test
will use the HERGAT to develop a report on the implicit curriculum. At the end of the next
sequential academic year, the post-test application of the auditing tool will be conducted, and the
two audits will then be compared.
Previous research has demonstrated that qualitative interviews are useful in providing
insight into discourse and rhetoric about diversity (Bell & Hartmann, 2007). Participants in the
interviews will be asked a variety of campus-related questions, including questions about the
diversity and inclusion strategies currently used. If applicable, diversity statements and
accreditation records related to diversity will be integrated into the qualitative component of the
evaluation. Interviewees will include stakeholders, including students and leadership—especially
those with decision-making roles. Intermediate interviews will be conducted immediately after
the first HERGAT report is released. These interviews will assess the reaction to the tool's
findings and any possible proposals for the coming year to modify or alter decisions. After the
results of the second application of the auditing tool are released, the third and final round of
interviews will be held. Participants will again be asked for their perspectives on diversity,
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 25
beliefs, and their reactions to the audit reports. Additionally, participants will also be asked to
describe any changes that they made after hearing the findings from the first HERGAT test. The
interviews will be evaluated for significant material and themes. The combination of using a
mixed approach of pre- and post-test assessment design to assess this capstone project has the
benefit of gathering data that tracks improvements in the current implicit curriculum of schools
and also offers important stakeholder feedback from the three interview rounds.
The evaluation process achieves several tasks. The nature of pre- and post-test
measurement helps provide descriptive statistics that can be collected and compared over time.
Although this evaluation only applies the HERGAT twice, follow-up evaluations may provide
insight into the process of affecting the implicit curriculum and the time frames involved in
making improvements to courses and the campus climate. Carefully timed interviews can help to
explain how rhetoric and debate are linked to action and how myths are formed, preserved, or
challenged (Harper, 2012). The evaluation plan provides insight into the efficacy of this method
and whether it can bring about improvement. This HERGAT’s effectiveness is evaluated by
tracking changes to the representational holes and disparities revealed by the audit. However,
change could also be affected by a variety of other factors. The qualitative interviews will
provide the link connecting the audit to behavior changes or connecting changes to other factors.
Communication Plan
The HERGAT is a methodology for assessing race and gender representation in five main
fields on campuses. With a two-pronged campaign, the HERGAT and an anti-oppression
initiative will launch the project. The first arm of this effort is to raise awareness with
prospective students about the concept of organizational race and gender auditing, using a
combination of marketing and social media resources. The second arm of this initiative is to
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 26
market the tool to practitioners in higher education, including managers, consultants, and
professors. The aim of marketing both to the customer in higher education and the organizations
themselves is to build awareness, excitement, and traction to embrace the evaluation tool broadly
and quickly. The campaign will disseminate information about the resource and what it does for
higher education. The campaign also plans to draw on this unprecedented moment as social
movements for racial justice raise continue to awareness and apply pressure within the higher
education landscape. Colleges and universities are eager to demonstrate their commitment to
diversity and they are more open to new and better ways of measuring DEI work. This is an
opportunity to ultimately achieving greater equity outcomes for students—particularly students
of color.
Consumers are raising the value of diversity and inclusion of a campus. The current
atmosphere shows schools are both serious and willing to begin new initiatives. However, this
has also raised challenges in finding common concepts and objectives and quantifying this work
(Bell & Hartmann, 2007). At the same time, accreditors are increasingly demanding
documentation. The HERGAT offers a new and useful tool for assessment writers to respond to
those demands. These higher education practitioners will be targeted by the marketing plan. The
campaign will begin with using the established channels for academic ideas: conferencing and
publishing scholarly articles. The notion of growing DEI evaluation and assessment in higher
education settings will be circulated in workshops, panel discussions, and paper presentations.
Networking will also build the professional relationships critical for finding piloting sites for the
auditing tool.
Next, the campaign will concentrate on future college shoppers. This shopping cycle is
now taking place in much the same way as other people shop for every consumer product —
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 27
watching friends, online research, mailings, and visiting campuses. There is a body of literature
about diversity campaigns suggesting that some of the usual campaign strategies, such as
soliciting endorsements from public figures and celebrities, could be troublesome for initiatives
on diversity (Rankine, 2014). Celebrities may not be as comfortable or versed in diversity issues.
There are several examples of errors made by a well-meaning spokesperson derailing a
movement for diversity and inclusion instead of launching it. Therefore, the proposed campaign
will use "ordinary" people's voices that sound familiar and linked to prospective students' target
audiences.
Many campaigns for diversity are not well-researched or accurately assessed (Rankine,
2014). The proposed campaign will perform pre-campaign focus groups and surveys to assess
high school students' attitudes and behaviors and their commitment to college shopping. The
focus groups will also be used to test the new slogans, photos, and hashtags. After the
prospective student awareness-building campaign, follow-up interviews, surveys, and focus
groups will be held again to assess the campaign's effectiveness. The literature indicates that
most campaigns linked to diversity are too short and that their success or failure is largely
unstudied and uncertain (Rankine, 2014).
Students, especially White students, who know they need to learn diversity skills, expect
to improve their diversity skills while in college (Warikoo, 2016). Some campuses have even
experienced protests from students demanding better programs and diversity offerings (Williams
& Reidel, 2018). Yet, the student self-reporting process raises a range of problems for assessing
a marketing campaign's effectiveness. The literature indicates that self-reporting can be
inaccurate and that many consumers mistakenly believe their peers share their views (Rankine,
2014). The risk of reinforcing prejudiced thoughts and actions is another risk for diversity
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 28
campaigns, which is why research and focus groups can be crucial to campaign success
(Rankine, 2014).
The student-oriented campaign concentrates on making an individual decision to evaluate
an institution and institutional behavior, not other individuals. The campaign asks the audience
not to scrutinize personal actions but the conduct and willingness of the school they are
considering to show dedication to DEI work. The proposed capstone campaign to launch the
HERGAT will educate consumers and support universities and colleges in their DEI activities.
The program for prospective students will appeal to their sense of fairness and, to some degree,
the importance of becoming an informed customer with high expectations for their higher
education dollars. A short-form film, social media channels, press releases, and posters will be
used to influence students as they engage in the college shopping experience. The slogan "Make
It Match" will be a catchphrase used to motivate students to ask schools tough questions about
anti-oppression work at any school they visit. The idea of making it match is driven by the
campaign's focus on asking schools to match their performance to their rhetoric and marketing
materials. Perspective students are in a unique and influential position (often underestimated) to
ask questions about on-campus diversity work and whether the school believes it is achieving its
objectives. The slogan “Make It Match” is intended to empower and motivate students through
their college search experience.
The campaign will also use social media hashtags like #youmightwanttolookatthat to
showcase their results as they complete their college tours and to help students engage with each
other during their college campus tours. In the end, students want to take pride in their selected
college, but often feel overwhelmed and intimidated. By encouraging them to choose a school
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 29
they will be proud of, this initiative helps them to incorporate diversity and inclusion into their
college search requirements.
Finally, the campaign will market the ads, posters, and short-form films on social media
and YouTube. These films and commercials will use the three-part ad structure by presenting a
highly relatable protagonist's problem, then proposing a solution, and finally, fixing their
dilemma. The film will begin with a student feeling uncertain about choosing a college. Then,
the student sees a social media ad called "Make It Match". Next the student is shown touring
campuses and asking confident questions. The ad ends with the student posting on social media.
The campaign launching the HERGAT auditing process targets students and education
professionals. The first is a DEI awareness campaign that encourages students to participate in a
more in-depth appraisal process while they pursue their best college experience. The student
campaign seeks to move DEI ideas deeper into consumers' minds by appealing to the basic ideals
of justice and inclusion. In this campaign arm, the HERGAT is not specifically mentioned. The
campaign's second arm, to be launched simultaneously, focuses on spreading the news about the
HERGAT to potential users—professors, administrators, and college campus workers. Gaining
legitimacy with this group through conference presentations and the peer-reviewed publishing
process builds confidence that the tool is suitable for the setting of higher education. Together
these components of the marketing campaign target both customers and higher education
professionals. The campaign introduces the HERGAT to its intended audience while influencing
students to ask questions that urge universities and colleges to adopt this innovative tool for
assessing campus DEI efforts and programs.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 30
Ethical Implications and Negative Consequences
Audits have a proven history of highlighting patterns and trends that were there all along,
but so normative, they went unnoticed (Smith, Choueiti, Pieper, Case, & Choi, 2018). While this
is useful to disrupting norms, there are a few potential negative effects to consider. First, using
auditing to achieve better representation is a goal of this innovation. However, improved
representation may not achieve deeper goals like adopting an anti-racist perspective or an
awareness of toxic masculinity. Some may view simply getting the numbers right as the whole
picture, instead of a part of the picture. This kind of approach could lead to another negative
consequence, manipulating the numbers to appear to be achieving representation improvements
while preserving the status quo. Social workers are ethically driven by the NASW Code of Ethics
(NASW, 2017) to empower and advocate for oppressed groups, but not all in higher education
have a code of ethics requiring this commitment.
V. Conclusions, Actions, and Implications
Summary of Innovation Plans
Future steps for the HERGAT are to build on the testing that has been completed
successfully thus far and continue with the marketing plans to network, conference, and publish
the tool. The HERGAT will also be copyrighted and trademarked. Portions of the tool were
presented at two conferences in 2019 and 2020 and an abstract was accepted in June of 2020 for
publication. The article is due in September 2020. Sabbatical has been granted to complete the
manuscript and complete the pilot. Two institutions with accredited social work programs are
being considered as pilot sites. Piloting will require one academic year. Following the pilot
project in 2020-2021, revisions will be made to the HERGAT, lessons learned incorporated to
the audit process, and the benefit corporation formed and launched in the fall of 2021.
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 31
Project Context and Implications
The world of higher education was already facing substantial pressures, including higher
costs and smaller pools of potential applicants before COVID-19 forced institutions to send their
students home and complete the school year entirely online. At the same time, the nation has
finally awoken to the truth of structural racism across the country. In particular, the murders of
Breonna Taylor, Ahmed Arbery, and George Floyd have inspired protests, rallies, and national
soul-searching that has been compared to the civil rights era (Berry, 2020). This project began
well after the Black Lives Matter movement was launched in response to the death of Michael
Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014. Yet, early public opinion polls and reports indicated that
most Americans did not align themselves with the movement until recently. New polls suggest
that opinion has changed dramatically, especially among political progressives and liberals
(Yglesias, 2019). The conference presentation on auditing in October 2019 had fewer than 20
attendees (there was also a snow-storm). The presentation in June of 2020 was one of
presentations with the highest attendance. As the national conversation grows, the current
context appears supportive and eager for new tools with the potential to answer the harder and
more critical questions consumers, donors, and accreditors are sure to be asking soon.
Limitations and Risks
There are a few noteworthy risks and limitations for the proposed innovation and auditing
process. Organizations may prefer not to know what the performance of the institution is in terms
of representation. Some research suggests that the dominant group is often invested in ignorance
or maintaining "racial innocence" as a form of plausible deniability and to maintain existing
privileges (Phillips & Lowery, 2018). These norms are durable and resistant to change. As social
phenomena, forms of oppression are responsive to changing social standards and adapt quickly
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 32
(Berdahl et al., 2018; Bonilla-Silva, 2006). In addition, accreditors may decide to select other
mechanisms for measuring the implicit curriculum. Ideally, the proposed innovation will become
an accepted process of accreditation assessment. However, it is possible that other formats could
gain wider use and popularity with assessors. This risk can be addressed by networking,
marketing, and publishing efforts already underway.
Conclusion
Much more work is needed within higher education to break down the deeply entrenched
norms of power, privilege, and oppression that many of the newest arrivals to the academy
continue to face. Even forty years after the civil rights movement and the passage of critical
pieces of legislation, there is evidence that access to higher education—especially elite higher
education—has decreased in recent decades. While there are many initiatives to address poor
outcomes and underrepresentation, current approaches focus on voluntary student reports and
small sample sizes, and fails to engage in regular campus assessment that includes the hidden
curriculum. Within the social work education arena, we have made a start by developing a
discrete competency around diversity and requiring programs to specifically address diversity
training. Moreover, students are expecting and demanding more—DEI consciousness is rising
(Warikoo, 2016) worldwide, making it an excellent time to bring a new tool to the marketplace.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 33
References
Ashkenas, J., Park, H., & Pearce, A. (2017, August 24). Even with affirmative action,
Blacks and Hispanics are more underrepresented at top colleges than 35 years ago. The
New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/
2017/08/24/us/affirmativeaction.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSourc
e=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
Bader, C. (2014, September 11). Is the MSW the new MBA? Fast Company. Retrieved from
https://www.fastcompany.com/3035124/is-the-msw-the-new-mba
Beddoe, E., & Keddell, E. (2016). Informed outrage: Tackling shame and stigma in poverty
education in social work. Ethics and Social Welfare, 10(2), 1–14. doi.10.1080/174
96535.2016.1159775
Bell, J. M., & Hartmann, D. (2007). Diversity in everyday discourse: The cultural ambiguities
and consequences of “happy talk”. American Sociological Review, 72(6), 895-914.
Berdahl, J. L., Cooper, M., Glick, P., Livingston, R. W., & Williams, J. C. (2018). Work as a
masculinity contest. Journal of Social Issues, 74(3), 422-448.
Berry, D. B. (2020, July 3). They overcame police dogs and beatings: Civil rights activists from
1960s cheer on Black Lives Matter protesters leading new fight. USA Today. Retrieved
from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/07/03/civil-rights-black-lives-matter-
protesters-build-1960-s-movement/5356338002/
Bhopal, K. (2017). Addressing racial inequalities in higher education: Equity, inclusion and
social justice. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(13), 2293–2299. doi: 10.1080/01419870.
2017.1344267

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 34
Bogo, M., & Wayne, J. (2013) The implicit curriculum in social work education: The culture of
human interchange. Journal of Teaching in Social Work 33(1), 2-14. doi:
10.1080/08841233.2012.746951
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of
racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Bonilla-Silva, E., & Baiocchi, G. (2001). Anything but racism: How sociologists limit the
significance of racism. Race and society, 4(2), 117-131.
Brown, S. (2016). Auditing diversity: an interest in assessments is rising as officials strive to
show they are committed. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 62(36).
Byrd, W. (2017). Poison in the ivy: race relations and the reproduction of inequality on elite
college campuses. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Calvo, R., Teasley, M., Goldbach, J., McRoy, R., & Padilla, Y.C. (2018). Achieve equal
opportunity and justice. In Fong, R., Lubben, J.E., & Barth, R.P. (Eds.) Grand challenges
for social work and society. (pp. 248-264). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Carnevale, A. P., Van Der Werf, M., Quinn, M. C., Strohl, J., & Repnikov, D. (2018). Our
separate & unequal public colleges: How public colleges reinforce White racial privilege
and marginalize Black and Latino students. Georgetown University Center on Education
and the Workforce.
Corley, N. A., & Young, S. M. (2018). Is social work still racist? A content analysis of recent
literature. Social work, 63(4), 317-326.
Council on Social Work Education. (2017). Statistics on social work education in the United
States: Summary of the CSWE annual survey of social work programs. Council of Social
Work Education. Retrieved from https://www.cswe.org/Research-Statistics/
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 35
Research-Briefs-and-Publications
Gonzales, J. (2011, November 14). Bachelor’s degree is still best path to middle class jobs and
earnings report says. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
https://www.chronicle.com/article/ Bachelors-Degree-Is-Still/129784
Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist
institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9-29.
Hart Research Associates. (2015). Bringing equity and quality learning together:
Institutional priorities for tracking and advancing underserved students’ success.
Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Harvey, D. (2010). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Healy, L. M. (2008). Exploring the history of social work as a human rights profession.
International Social Work, 51, 735–748. doi: 1177/0020872808095247
Holtgraves, T. (2004). Social desirability and self-reports: testing models of socially desirable
responding. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(2), 161–172.
Horn, (2018, December 13). Will half of all colleges really close in the next decade? Forbes
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelhorn/
2018/12/13/will-half-of-all-colleges-really-close-in-the-next-decade/#5d7c9e8a52e5
Jack, A. (2019). The privileged poor: How elite colleges are failing disadvantaged students.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Jayakumar, U. M. (2015). The shaping of post-college colorblind orientation among Whites:
Residential segregation and campus diversity experiences. Harvard Educational
Review, 85(4), 609-645, 684. Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https
://search-proquest com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1752172157?accountid=14749
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 36
Khan, S. (2011). Privilege: the making of an adolescent elite at St. Paul’s School. Princeton,
N.J: Princeton University Press.
Larson, K. E., & Bradshaw, C.P. (2017). Cultural competence and social desirability among
practitioners: A systematic review of the literature. Children and Youth Services
Review, 76, 100–111. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.02.034
Libassi, C. J. (2018, May 23). The neglected college race gap: Racial disparities among college
completers. The Center for American Progress. Retrieved from
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-
postsecondary/reports/2018/05/23/451186/neglected-college-race-gap-racial-disparities-
among-college-completers/
McClain, A. (2018, August). Annual leadership meeting (ALM). National Association of Social
Workers. Washington, D.C.
McGill, A. (2015). The missing black students at elite American universities. The Atlantic.
Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/black-college-
student-body/417189/
Mehrotra, G., Hudson, K., & Self, J. (2017). What are we teaching in diversity and social
justice courses? A qualitative content analysis of MSW syllabi. Journal of Teaching in
Social Work, 37(3), 218–233. doi: 10.1080/08841233.2017.1316342
Milkman, K., Akinola, M., & Chugh, D. (2012). Temporal distance and discrimination: An
audit study in academia. Psychological Science, 23(7), 710–717.
doi: 10.1177/0956797611434539

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 37
Moody, J. (2020, March 31). Diversity in college and why it matters. Newsweek. Retrieved from
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/diversity-in-college-and-why-
it-matters
Mor-Barak, M. (2017). Managing diversity: toward a globally inclusive workplace.
Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Murdach, A. D. (2011). Is social work a human rights pr of e s s i on? Social Work , 56(3), 281–283.
Nakaoka, S., & Ortiz, L. (2017). Examining racial microaggressions as a tool for transforming
social work education: the case for critical race pedagogy. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural
Diversity in Social Work, 27(1), 72–85. doi: 10.1080/15313204.2017.1417947
National Association of Social Workers. (2017). National Association of Social Workers Code of
Ethics. Retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics
Neal, S. (2017). On the tensions of universities as a social institution–developing a comparative
sociology of higher education. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(13), 2285–2292. doi:
10.1080/01419870.2017.1344269
Oliver, M.L., & Shapiro, T.M. (2006). Black wealth/white wealth: A new perspective of racial
inequality. New York: Routledge.
Olson, J. J. (2008). Social work’s professional and social justice projects: Discourses in
conflict. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 18(1), 45–69.
doi: 10.1300/J059v18n01_04
Palinkas, L. & Soydan, H. (2012). Translation and Implementation of Evidence Based Practice.
Oxford University Press
Patel, L. (2015). Desiring diversity and backlash: White property rights in higher
education. The Urban Review, 47(4), 657–675. doi: 10.1007 /s11256-015-0328-7
AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 38
Peterson, N. A., Farmer, A. Y., Donnelly, L., & Forenza, B. (2014). Assessing the implicit
curriculum in social work education: Heterogeneity of student’s experiences and impact
on professional empowerment. Journal of Teaching in Social Work 34(5), 460-479.
doi: 10.1080/08841233.2014.955943
Phillips, L. T., & Lowery, B. S. (2018). Herd invisibility: The psychology of racial
privilege. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(3), 156-162.
Pippert, T., Essenburg, L., & Matchett, E. (2013). We’ve got minorities, yes we do: Visual
representations of racial and ethnic diversity in college recruitment materials. Journal of
Marketing for Higher Education. 23(2), 258-282. doi: 10.1080/08841241.2013.86720
Quart, A. (2018). Squeezed: Why our families can't afford America. Harper Collins.
Rankine, Jenny. (2014). Creating effective anti-racism campaigns. Report to the Race Relations
Commissioner. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.2587.0807.
Seal, A. (2018). How the university became neoliberal. The Chronicle of Higher Education,
64(39).
Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A. & Hwang, Y., A. (2017,
April). Completing College: A National View of Student Attainment Rates by Race and
Ethnicity – Fall 2010 Cohort (Signature Report No. 12b). Herndon, VA: National
Student Clearinghouse Research Center.
Shim, W., & Perez, R. (2018). A multi-level examination of first-year students’ openness to
diversity and challenge. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(4), 453–477. doi:
10.1080/00221546.2018.143427

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 39
Smith, S. L., Choueiti, M., Pieper, K., Case, A., & Choi, A. (2018). Inequality in 1,100 popular
films: Examining portrayals of gender, race/ethnicity, LGBT & disability from 2007 to
2017. USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.
Spolander, G., Engelbrecht, L., Martin, L., Strydom, M., Pervova, I., Marjanen, P., …
Adaikalam, F. (2014). The implications of neoliberalism for social work: Reflections
from a six-country international research collaboration. International Social Work, 57(4),
301–312. doi: 10.1177/0020872814524964
Squire, D., Williams, B., & Tuitt, F. (2018). Plantation politics and neoliberal racism in higher
education: A framework for reconstructing anti-racist institutions. Teachers College
Record, 120(14).
Thornhill, T. (2019). We want Black students, just not you: How White admissions
counselors screen Black prospective students. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 5(4) 456-
470. doi: 10.1177/2332649218792579
Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General systems theory. New York: George Braziller.
Warikoo, N. K. (2016). The diversity bargain: And other dilemmas of race, admissions, and
meritocracy at elite universities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Welton, A., Owens, D., & Zamani-Gallaher, E. (2018). Anti-racist change: A conceptual
framework for educational institutions to take systemic action. Teachers College
Record, 120(14).
Williams, O. & Reidel, M. (2018, November). Power, race, oppression, and privilege: Teaching
practice skills for interprofessional settings. Paper presented at the meeting of the Council
on Social Work Education, Orlando, FL.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 40
Wong (Lau), K. (2016). Building capacity for inclusion by working across differences: An
institutional and societal imperative. Diversity & Democracy, 19(2). Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org/diversitydemocracy/2016/spring/wonglau
Woodworth, M. (2016, January 13). New partnership to support mental health of
students of color. The JED Fund. Retrieved from https://www.jedfoundation.org/
Steve-Fund-JED-Announcement/
Wright, D. (2016, April 4). Princeton keeps Woodrow Wilson’s name on the school despite
protests. Cable News Network. Retrieved from cnn.com/2016/04/04/politics/princeton-
university-woodrow-wilson-name-debate/index.html
Yee, J.L. (2016). A paradox of social change: how the quest for liberation reproduces dominance
in higher education and the field of social work. Social Work Education, 35(5), 495-505,
doi: 10.1080/02615479.2016.1170113
Yglesias, M. (2019, April 1). The great awokening: A hidden shift is revolutionizing American
racial politics—and could transform the future of the Democratic Party. Vox. Retrieved
from https://www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18259865/great-awokening-white-liberals-race-
polling-trump-2020

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 41

Appendix A: Logic Model

Program: Higher Education Race and Gender Audit
Goal: To raise the level of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion assessment in higher education
INPUTS ACTIVITIES OUTCOMES
What we
invest
What we do Who we reach
Why this project:
short-term results
Why this project:
intermediate
results
Why this project:
long-term results
• Staff
• Time
• Money
• Research
findings
• Equipment
• Technology
• Partners
• Conduct
trainings and
develop
diversity
measurement
products.
• Measure
campus implicit
curriculum
• Train, consult,
and advocate
• Deliver services
• Develop
products,
curricula,
resources
• Work with
media
• Students
• Educators
• Accreditors
• Academic
Decision
Makers
• Future
Clients

Learning
• Auditing Tool
• Piloting of new
proposed
accreditation
standards
• Scholarly
presentations
and publishing
• Consensus
Building
-Students
-Educators

Action
• Auditing data
generated
• Report
presentation to
decision
makers
• Interviews with
decision
makers
• Follow-up
audit to
measure
change

Conditions
• DEI material
available for 50%
of all students
where social
work program
exist
• Effective tools in
used to measure
implicit
curriculum.

Assumptions
• Higher education and social work is committed to
social justice as a central value.
• Students and social workers will continue to
received their training at programs accredited by
Higher education accreditors and CSWE.
External Factors
• Diversity concepts have become mainstream, students and
employer want these skills.
• Some believe status quo operations are sufficient.
• Higher education is under considerable pressure as student
cohorts shrink and inequality grows.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 42
Appendix B: Gantt Chart

Task Oct/Dec
19
Jan/Mar
20
Apr/Jun
20
Jul/Aug
20
Sept/Oct
20
Nov/Dec
20
Jan/Feb
21
Mar/Apr
21
Explore DEI
Education and
Assessment

Develop
Comprehensive
Plan

Engaging
CSWE and
Academia
(Inner Context)

Conferencing
Marketing
(Inner Context)

Finding and
Building
Coalition (Inner
Context)

CSWE &
Assessment
Collaboration
(Inner Context)

Tool
Development

Securing
Funding (Outer
Context)

Staff
Recruitment &
Selection

Creating &
Piloting
Prototype
2021
Consultancy
Launch
2022+

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 43
Appendix C: Semi-Structured Diversity Audit Interview Guide
Goals of the Interview
1. Learn about the ‘common sense’ norms for the campus.
2. Learn about how much or how little diversity, equity, and inclusion issues play a role for
interviewee on campus.
3. Learn about how the audit report interacted with existing ideas about the campus.
4. Learn about any changes in decisions interviewee made or considered making.
5. Learn about interviewees reactions or insights about implicit auditing as a process.
Interview Preparation
1. Select small, quiet room with comfortable chairs.
2. Arrive 15-20 minutes early.
3. Gather questions, recorder, clock or timer, notebook and pens.
Question Guide
1. Introduce interviewer, discuss recording device, reiterate 45-60-minute time frame.
2. Ask the interviewee to introduce themselves.
3. Ask, “Tell me about your relationship with the campus.”
4. Ask, “What are your favorite and least favorite things about the campus?”
5. Ask, “If you could change anything on campus, what would you change.”
6. Ask, “If you could protect anything from change on campus what would you protect.”
7. Ask, “When you consider assigning/or reading an assignment what factors do you
consider?” (e.g. length, costs, etc.)
8. Ask, “When considering attending/planning a campus event, what factors do you
consider?” (e.g. time, topic, etc.)
9. Ask, “Have you been asked to join a committee on campus? If so, what did you think of
this invitation?”
10. Ask, “Have you been asked to speak/publish on campus? If so, what did you think of this
invitation?”
11. Ask, “What role does diversity, equity, and inclusion play on campus?”
12. Ask, “What kinds of responses did those around you have to the race and gender diversity
audit report?”
13. Ask, “What kinds of responses did you have to the race and gender diversity audit
report?”
14. Ask, “Are you considering any changes? Is, so, in what ways?”
15. Ask, “Are they any other points/comments about the campus you would like to make?”
Interview Follow-Up
1. Thank the interviewee.
2. Save recording.
3. Immediately following interviews allow ten minutes to note initial impressions.

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 44

Appendix D: Infographic

AUDITING HIGHER EDUCATION 45
Appendix E: Prototype

WORDS
ACTIONS
vs.
RECRUITMENT
Type something
Type
something
University
Higher education marketing
materials misrepresent racial
diversity on college campuses—
regularly over-representing their
Black students by more than double.
Students
Rates of college admission for Black
and Latinx students at top schools
are worse now than in the 1980s.
University
80% of admissions ofcers state
meeting diversity goals is a top
priority.
Students
White admissions counselors are
less likely to respond to emails from
Black seniors with anti-racist
interests.
University
68% of universities and colleges
have mission statements that
directly encourage ethnic and racial
diversity on campus.
Students
57% of Black students report that
college is not living up to their
expectations and 75% say they keep
their feelings about college to
themselves.
6,000
4 000
ADMISSIONS
CUL TURE
Comparing University Marketing to Student Experience
What does commitment to diversity mean?
Diversity, equity, and inclusion goals and initiatives have joined the pillars of
the higher education experience and are expected by savvy consumers.
Does this mean that schools have truly become more diverse?
Or, is diversity just a marketing tool?
MARKETING RACE
MISSION
Type something
Type
something
University
74% of 451 colleges surveyed have
a commitment to diversity
statement.
Students
Only 34% of students have DEI
content built into their college
experience.

HIGHER EDUCTION RACE
AND GENDER EQUITY
AUDITING TOOL
2020
Version Date 7/7/2020
For more information contact: emily.tillotson@wallawalla.edu
Abstract
The higher education race and gender equity auditing tool measures and
reveals the dominant demographic patterns and narratives on a college campus
or department. It locates significant variances—critical gaps or absences in
gender or racial representation and identifies whose voices may be
overrepresented. Areas of congruence are also identified.
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Prototype: The Higher Education Race and Gender Equity Auditing Tool
The Higher Education Race and Gender Equity Auditing Tool (HERGAT) is an
instrument that measures key areas of the institution. The tool focuses on five elements of
campus and academic life: marketing materials, curriculum, "glamour work," governance
structure, and student leadership. Marketing materials are visual depictions of gender and
diversity used to attract students. Assigned textbooks and articles make up the audited
curriculum items. Glamour work and leadership representation audit the gender and race of key
influencers and decision-makers. These areas are selected for their overt and hidden influential
roles in the overall organizational culture and their critical impact in broadcasting the school's
priorities. They are also crucial systems for decision making and maintaining the status quo and
existing power structures over time. The completed audit reveals what is regularly hidden in
higher education and gives a measured portrait of the campus through the lens of race and
gender.
The audit makes visible whose voices are centered and given the most space on campus
and whether these voices are overrepresented compared to the overall population. It also reveals
more elusive messages like who is involved in creating information and regarded as sources of
knowledge. Simultaneously, the contrasting messages are also revealed—which voices are
underrepresented or completely absent. For some, this may seem entirely intuitive, and for some
groups, the audit may serve primarily as validation for their lived experience. However, without
an audit, these intuitions often remain unconfirmed and are easily dismissed. The audit provides
an efficient path toward more data-involved assessment.
The methodology of the prototype is straightforward. The process begins with gathering
documents. These will include regularly submitted demographic reports to organizations like the
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Next, a comparable institution is
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

selected. The comparison choice may be a sibling school or a region of the United States. For
others, it may be the entire nation, hence providing a comparison group. Next, the demographic
data is harvested (e.g., auditors are directed to audit the viewbook for images and, out of the
number of individuals shown in the material, identify and record the race and gender of who is
represented) and compiled. The curriculum audit involves reviewing each course's syllabus and
then recording the race and gender of each assigned article and book author. Some balancing
may be needed to account for the length of the text. For the curriculum review, schools will
likely wish to sample rather than conduct a complete audit. Next, the glamour work—or high-
profile events—are reviewed. The source for this information is likely the campus website events
page. The speakers for these events are recorded by race and gender. The final two sections audit
the governance structures. This information is also likely available online but may require the
assistance of institutional staff. The individuals' race and gender in these structures are recorded
and is the final section of the audit.
Following the data collection process, percentages in each area will show which groups
are overrepresented, which groups are underrepresented, and which groups mirror the school's
population and the reference population. Variances of 5% or more are considered significant
areas of over or underrepresentation. Performing the audit process subsequent academic years
will measure and document change, assisting the organization in identifying elements of both the
overt and hidden curriculum and related campus climate concerns such as measuring DEI work
for race and gender.
The tool can be used in various ways to meet campus needs, such as strategic planning,
assessment, and accreditation. It can be used as a one-time measurement that enhances a campus
climate assessment process by highlighting current areas of over and underrepresentation. It can
also be used annually or in a pre and post-test model to measure ongoing efforts to document and
understand diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Directions:

1. School Demographics: Gather the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data
System (IPEDS) data and input into section 1. School-Program Demographics.
2. Reference Group: Collect benchmarking data (regional/national/other) from the US
Census or other source and input information into section 2. Reference Group
Demographics.
3. Target Percentage: For future comparison, the gender and race percentages found
in section 1. School-Program Demographics are added into the "Target %[Percentage]"
column present in each section.
4. Website: All student images on the institution's website will be counted and
evaluated for race and gender. Raw numbers and race and gender percentages are
then transferred to the sub-section "Website Representation."
Viewbook: Acquire the viewbook (online or hard copy) for the year being audited.
Review and record the race and gender identity of each student image. Total the
images reviewed and generate percentages. Transfer raw numbers and percentages
to the sub-section titled "Viewbook."
Social Media: Since many organizations upload the same post to various social
media platforms, the selected platform and review dates should be listed on the audit
tool. The gender and race of each student depicted in the posts are then collected,
recorded in raw form and in percentage form in sub-section "Social Media."
Alumni: One significant alumni publication released within the academic year
being audited is included. Count all images in the publication and record the gender
and race of each image. The raw totals and percentages are then entered into sub-
section "Alumni Publication."
5. Curriculum/Texts: Select which courses are to be audited and enter the total number
of courses reviewed into the auditing tool. Gather syllabi and define the assigned
content (textbooks and articles) within said courses. If auditing an entire campus, a
random selection of 20% of all classes (with >5 students) taught during an academic
year. For departments, it may be feasible to audit every course, including sections. To
address the variance in book-length, books should be weighted per 100 pages of
assigned reading. Thus, assigned books of 500 pages are five times "stronger" than
books of 100 pages. The race, gender, and discipline of each author will then be
recorded. The final totals are then recorded in section 4. Curriculum Materials/Text
Authors.
6. Large-Scale Events: This data can be found on the website. However, campus staff
personnel may be needed to help identify key events and source data, including
attendance numbers and speaker names. A goal of ten events or more is preferred
(E.g., Commencement, endowed lectures, speaker series, etc.). After collection, data is
inputted into section 5. Glamour Work/Large Events.
7. Institutional Leadership: [who is part of this group?] This information is usually
available online. Searching for members online may be required to ascertain gender
and racial identity. The total number of members, raw data, and percentages should
be collected during the auditing window and recorded in section 6. Institutional
Structures/Governance.
8. Student leadership. This information is usually available online. However, if not online,
the office of student life can generally provide this data. Searching for student leaders
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

online may be required to ascertain gender and racial identity. The total number of
students, raw data, and percentages should be collected during the auditing window
and recorded and transferred into section 7. Student Leadership/ Programming.
9. The completed audit will show any variances. Variances of 5% or more are significant
and demonstrate areas of significant over and underrepresented.

PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Higher Education Race and Gender Equity Auditing Tool
School Name _____________ Auditing
Window
______________
Contact Person _____________ Audit Finished ______________

1. School-Program Demographics* (*See notes section)
Total % Target %
Student Population
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Veteran
Pell Grant Recipient
International Student
2. Reference Group Demographics*
Region: _________________
Population Size
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

3. Marketing Materials*
Total % Target %
Website Representation
Total People Depicted
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Viewbook
Total People Depicted
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Social Media
Dates/Platforms Reviewed
Total Posts
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Total % Target %
Unknown
Alumni Publication
Title/Date of Publication
Total People Depicted
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
4. Curriculum Materials/Text Authors*
Total Classes Reviewed
Total Books Reviewed
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Total Articles Reviewed
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Total % Target %
Disciplines Found
Total DEI Classes Taught
5. Glamour Work/Large Events*
Total Events
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

6. Institutional Structures/Governance*
Board
Total Seats
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

Cabinet
Total Executives
Gender-Man

PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Total % Target %
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Faculty Senate
Total Senators
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

Department Chairs
Total Departments
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Staff Department Heads
Total Departments
PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Total % Target %
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown
Committee Chairs
Total Committees
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic

7. Student Leadership & Programming*
Student Association Cabinet
Total Officers
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

PROTOTYPE: AUDITING TOOL

Total % Target %
Student Association Senate
Total Senators
Gender-Man
Gender-Woman
Gender-Non-binary
Asian American
Black/African American
Indigenous/Native
LatinX
Multi-Racial
White Non-Hispanic
Unknown

*Notes
1. School Program Demographics
School demographics should mirror the school's existing IPEDS report.
2. Regional/National Reference Group
This can be taken from census material for the US as a whole or the region
depending on the school's goals and regular benchmarking practices.
3. Marketing Materials
Existing literature has examined both school websites and viewbook (online
and/or paper versions).
4. Curriculum/Texts
The primary source for this data is class syllabi. All required readings should be
included in the audit for each course.
5. Glamour Work/Large Events
The idea of glamour work comes from the legal scholar Joan C. Williams. It
defines the idea as work that advances one's career. For the audit, events that
seat 100 people or more should be included or events the campus considers
high-status. Only the main speakers should be included in the audit. Welcomes or
those providing the introduction should not be included. Examples of glamour
events include endowed lectures, commencement addresses, and keynote
addresses.
6. Institutional Structures
This section may require a review of internal documents for the year reviewed in
addition to the information available on the main website.
7. Student Leadership/Programs
Student leadership is a good way to review the process for the reproduction and
maintenance of existing power structures. Student documents may be needed
to complete this section in addition to publicly posted information.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Though seldom discussed, the system of higher education has only recently opened its doors broadly to include diverse students. Indeed, the world of advanced learning often appears to be lurching from one embarrassing diversity-related incident to the next. Although institutions have made substantial strides to address the legacy of inequality in higher education, outcomes for students from historically marginalized groups continue to lag and fail to match the rhetoric of optimism and inclusion prevalent in higher education. Social work has a legacy of social justice and human rights engagement—and is one of the few disciplines with stated diversity expectations. Yet, there are signs the profession needs to make the case that social work remains relevant and can lead on social justice issues, including diversity, equity, and inclusion. Yet tools and best practices to effectively measure this work are sparse. More resource development is needed to close this gap between the rhetoric of diversity and the tangible outcomes for students. This capstone project proposes an auditing tool designed to assess the implicit or hidden curriculum, measure race and gender representation levels, and identify disparities on college and university campuses.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

We are our neighbors' keeper: an innovative field kit of outreach and assessment tools to help end homelessness

PDF

Stopping the school to prison pipeline: a restorative intervention for educators

PDF

Warrior tribe: veteran utilization of aquaponics to fight loneliness

PDF

Helping parents cultivate social capital in educational settings to achieve equal opportunities and justice for African American students

PDF

Climate work is social work: addressing environmental justice to facilitate achievement of the Grand Challenges for social work

PDF

LGBT+Aging Immersion Experience: an innovative LGBT cultural competency course for healthcare professionals and students

PDF

Empowering and building resilience with youth in congregate care

PDF

Building a trauma-informed community to address adverse childhood experiences

PDF

Promoting emotional intelligence and resiliency in youth: S.U.P.E.R. peer counseling program ©

PDF

Mi Casa VR ©

PDF

The Arukah Project: collaborating with the Church to improve African American mental health

PDF

Preventing exploitation of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) healthy and unhealthy relationships educational workshops sustaining innovation: healthy relationships matter

PDF

The Senior Social Isolation Project (SSIP): a comprehensive response to a growing aging population

PDF

Capstone proposal: utilizing trained medical interpreters: a workshop for medical providers

PDF

Operation hope

PDF

WISER women’s program: well-being innovation with support and education for resilience—a homelessness prevention intervention

PDF

Collective impact addressing social isolation for older adults living independently in the community; a capstone innovation project

PDF

Increasing access to mental health counseling for homeless youth: Peer2Peer Counseling Supports

PDF

Routine testing for all (RTFA): U.S. HIV prevention innovation proposal

PDF

Capstone project: Project prepare, plan, and provide

Asset Metadata

Creator Tillotson, Emily (author)

Core Title Paved with good intentions: auditing higher education’s commitment to race and gender inclusion

School Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work

Degree Doctor of Social Work

Degree Program Social Work

Publication Date 12/22/2020

Defense Date 07/24/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag anti-oppression,assessment,audit,diversity,gender,Higher education,OAI-PMH Harvest,Race

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Rank, Michael (committee chair), Maiden, R. Paul (committee member), Orras, George (committee member)

Creator Email emily.tillotson@wallawalla.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-415066

Unique identifier UC11668668

Identifier etd-TillotsonE-9232.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-415066 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-TillotsonE-9232.pdf

Dmrecord 415066

Document Type Capstone project

Rights Tillotson, Emily

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA