University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The pursuit of anti-racism in university theater

(USC Thesis Other)

The pursuit of anti-racism in university theater

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

The Pursuit of Anti-Racism in University Theater
by
Ashley DeMoville

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2021

© Copyright by Ashley DeMoville 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Ashley DeMoville certifies the approval of this Dissertation.

Jennifer L. Phillips
Rena M. Heinrich
Patricia Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
Although systemic racism has always been a persistent problem in university theater training
(Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020a), heightened calls for action began in the late
spring and early summer of 2020. In July 2020, some 300 BIPOC theater-makers drafted and
signed an open letter to the theater industry at large (Community of BIPOC Theatremakers,
2020a). By February 2021, the letter had garnered over 104,600 signatures, and more than 100
theater organizations from all over the United States had responded to the call by publishing
equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) statements and action plans (Meyer, 2021). The letter,
titled “We See You White American Theatre,” listed grievances and called for change. It listed a
clear set of demands that the creators felt were necessary to create a more equitable and inclusive
theater industry. This field study examined the work being done in university theater departments
and schools in response to these heightened calls for increased EDI. Specifically, the study
examined whether theater leaders met the assumed stakeholder goal to have created and begun
implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year.
The study focused on knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences related to
achieving those goals. Theater leaders from 12 universities across the United States were
interviewed and recommendations were formulated for use by theater leaders in higher education
who wish to implement lasting change in their department or school.

v
Dedication
To my husband, Kemuel, who encouraged me to begin this journey and has been my pillar
throughout. To my sons, Tennyson, Barrett, and Finlay, who remind me how much joy there is in
the world. To my parents, Dana and Dave, who have always believed in me. To my mother-in-
law, Kathy, who has given me the gift of time. To Steve, Bob, Grandma & Grandpa D, and
Grandma & Grandpa E, who built the foundation. Thank you all for your unwavering support
and love.

vi
Acknowledgements
This work would not have been possible without the tireless support and guidance of my
dissertation committee, Dr. Patricia Tobey, Dr. Jennifer L. Phillips, and Dr. Rena M. Heinrich.
Each of these women has been instrumental in guiding me through the research and analysis
process and I am a more capable scholar and practitioner because of them. I consider myself
privileged to have worked with such talented academics during this process.
I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues in USC’s Organizational Change
and Leadership Cohort #13 who supported and inspired me. I am so grateful for your support
throughout this process. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the theater leaders who generously
shared their time with me as study participants and my own students who inspire me to be better
every day.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xii
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiii
Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice .................................................................... 1
Background .................................................................................................................................. 3
Organizational Context and Mission ........................................................................................... 4
Importance of Addressing the Problem ....................................................................................... 5
Field Performance Goal ............................................................................................................... 6
Description of Stakeholder Groups ............................................................................................. 6
Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal .................................................................... 7
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ............................................................................ 7
Methodological Framework ........................................................................................................ 8
Definition of Terms ..................................................................................................................... 8
Organization of the Study .......................................................................................................... 14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 15
Critical Race Theory .................................................................................................................. 15
Tenets of CRT ........................................................................................................... 18
CRT in Education ...................................................................................................... 23
Anti-Racism Initiatives in University Theater Training ............................................................ 24

viii
Inclusive Artistic Practices and Cultural Competency in Teaching .......................... 25
Increased Numbers of BIPOC Students, Faculty, and Staff ...................................... 29
Nicole Brewer’s Anti-Racist Theatre ........................................................................................ 30
Relevant Challenges in Higher Education ................................................................................. 32
EDI Initiatives in Higher Education .......................................................................... 32
COVID-19 Pandemic ................................................................................................ 34
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences ........................................................... 38
Knowledge Influences ............................................................................................... 39
Motivation Influences ................................................................................................ 41
Organizational Influences .......................................................................................... 44
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................. 47
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 49
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 51
Participating Stakeholders ......................................................................................................... 52
Primary Data Collection and Instrumentation ........................................................................... 52
Interview Instrument ................................................................................................. 53
Interview Protocol ..................................................................................................... 54
Interview Procedures ................................................................................................. 54
Interview Sampling Criterion .................................................................................... 55
Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale .............................................................. 56
Secondary Data Collection and Instrumentation ....................................................................... 57
Existing Document Selection Criterion and Rationale .............................................. 57
Existing Document Collection Procedures ................................................................ 58

ix
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 58
Credibility and Trustworthiness ................................................................................................ 59
Ethics ......................................................................................................................................... 59
Researcher Positionality ............................................................................................................ 61
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 62
Chapter Four: Findings .................................................................................................................. 63
Description of the Participants .................................................................................................. 64
Sample Group ............................................................................................................ 65
Participant Biographies ............................................................................................. 67
Findings Pertaining to Research Question One ......................................................................... 76
Attainment of Stakeholder Goal ................................................................................ 76
Anti-Racism Initiatives in University Theater Training ............................................ 77
Discussion of Previously Generated Materials .......................................................... 84
Findings Pertaining to Research Question Two ........................................................................ 87
Findings Validation ................................................................................................... 87
Knowledge Findings .................................................................................................. 88
Motivation Findings ................................................................................................ 109
Organizational Influence Findings .......................................................................... 120
Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................. 133
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations ....................................................................... 135
Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 135
Recommendations for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .................... 139
Knowledge Influence Recommendations ................................................................ 139

x
Motivation Influence Recommendations ................................................................ 141
Organizational Influence Recommendations .......................................................... 143
Implementation and Evaluation Plan ....................................................................................... 146
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................. 152
Recommendations for Future Research ................................................................................... 153
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 154
References ................................................................................................................................... 157
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix ............................................................ 170
Appendix B: Interview Protocol .................................................................................................. 171
Appendix C: A Priori Code Hierarchy ........................................................................................ 173
Appendix D: IRB Approved Information Sheet for Exempt Research ....................................... 174
Appendix E: Initial E-mail Invitation Sent to Participants .......................................................... 176
Appendix F: IRB Approval Notice .............................................................................................. 177

xi
List of Tables
Table 1: Knowledge Influence, Type, and Assessments for Analysis .......................................... 41
Table 2: Motivational Influences and Assessments for Analysis .................................................. 44
Table 3: Organizational Influences and Assessments for Analysis ............................................... 47
Table 4: University Demographics ................................................................................................ 65
Table 5: Participant Demographics ............................................................................................... 66
Table 6: Attainment of Stakeholder Goal ...................................................................................... 85
Table 7: Summary of Results of KMO Influences ........................................................................ 88
Table 8: Summary of Knowledge Influence and Recommendation ............................................ 140
Table 9: Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations ......................................... 142
Table 10: Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations ................................. 144

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 49
Figure 2: Inclusion Criteria ........................................................................................................... 56
Figure 3: Action Plan Word Cloud ................................................................................................ 86
Figure 4: Implementation of Recommendations ......................................................................... 148
Figure 5: A Priori Code Hierarchy .............................................................................................. 173

xiii
List of Abbreviations
ART Anti-Racist Theatre
BIPOC Black, Indigenous and People of Color
CRT Critical Race Theory
EDI Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
KMO Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational
PWI Predominantly White Institution
SCT Social Cognitive Theory

1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem of Practice
The problem of practice being studied is that traditional university theater training in the
United States is rooted in and continually reinforces systemic racism. The Eurocentric
curriculum and pedagogy focus on White, cisgender, straight, non-disabled male artists as the
norm and presents this work as the most valuable (Hartley, 2020). During the Association for
Theatre in Higher Education 30
th
anniversary conference plenaries in 2017, Howe et al. argued
that our current universities bear the legacy of early American institutions that were set up
explicitly to exclude individuals from Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC)
communities and women. They asserted that “the superior status afforded White people, men,
family lineage, Christianity, heterosexuality, and able-bodiedness remains a latent device for
guaranteeing that power resides within the hands of a select few” (p. 7). Ladson-Billings and
Tate (1995) noted that this legacy remains strong today, and in the American education system,
the absolute right to exclude continues to be used to deny Black Americans access. “So complete
is this exclusion that Black students often come to the university in the role of intruders – who
have been granted special permission to be there” (p. 23). She emphasizes the negative impact
this has on their sense of belonging and eventual success in the university.
This exclusion can be even more harmful in programs that explicitly teach culture and the
arts (Hartley, 2020). Traditional Bourdieuean cultural capital theory centers on White, middle-
class communities as being culturally wealthy and judges all other expressions of culture in
comparison to this established norm (Yosso, 2005). The standard Western approach in university
theater training blatantly assumes this norm and is explicitly steeped in parochialism and
progressivism that reinforces that belief (Tillis, 2007). This marginalizes and, at times,
completely erases non-Western theater. Based on Tillis’s (2007) review of American college and

2

university theater departments, theater history survey classes are concerned primarily with Euro-
American theater, regardless of whether they are explicitly labeled as Western theater courses.
He found that only 25% of the courses examined mention any non-Western content.
Furthermore, based on his review of American theater textbooks, only one out of 10 provided
what he would label as a sufficient background in Asian theater—in this case, 20% of the text,
with the other textbooks committing 3-12%. Tillis (2007) also found that recent theater
anthologies devote even less text to non-Western plays than textbooks. In particular, the most
significant percentage devoted to Asian theater in any of the anthologies was 11%, with many
leaving Asian theater out altogether.
This Eurocentric default is also evident in other areas of the curriculum and pedagogy.
Brewer (2018) highlighted an apparent lack of diversity in the actor training methodologies
being taught, with the most common methods being those of Adler, Chekhov, Hagen, Meisner,
Meyerhold, Stanislavski, and Strasberg. The work of Adler, Meisner, and Strasberg comprises
the popular methodology known as the American Method, which is one of the most common
actor training systems being taught. Brewer also asserted that universities require “the
suppression of cultural markers held in language by teaching a general American dialect as the
acceptable standard” (p. 55). She continued to emphasize that such “erasure privileges the
experience of white students over students from marginalized groups” (p. 55). This practice
downplays or ignores race as a factor in training for non-white students, thereby leaving them
underprepared for the types of jobs for which they will be competing in the industry after
graduation (Brewer, 2018).

3

Background
Although systemic racism has always been a persistent problem in university theater
training, heightened calls for action began in the late spring and early summer of 2020. On May
25, 2020, Derek Chauvin (a white Minneapolis police officer) murdered a Black man named
George Floyd (Associated Press, 2021). Bystander video showing Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s
neck for at least nine minutes quickly circulated online, and massive protests were organized
nationwide (Buchanan et al., 2020). These protests revitalized the Black Lives Matter movement
that had been ongoing since 2013. Buchanan et al. (2020) reported that the 2020 protests may
have been the largest social movement in United States history, with an estimated 15 million to
26 million people in the United States participating in protests within the first month following
Floyd’s murder. At the same time, the United States saw an increase in instances of
stigmatization, stereotyping, discrimination, and acts of physical violence toward people of
Asian descent (Harper, 2020). Harper attributed the increase to the COVID-19 pandemic and to
language used by then President Donald Trump saying, “the president of the United States
repeatedly characterizing COVID-19 as ‘Kung Flu’ and the ‘Chinese Virus’ likely accelerated
bias and hate crimes against these groups” (p. 155).
The shifting social climate in the nation led to discussions about institutional racism in
policing, education, and cultural institutions. The theater industry was not an exception. In July
2020, some 300 BIPOC theater-makers drafted and signed an open letter to the theater industry
at large (Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020a). This statement, titled “We See You
White American Theatre,” detailed the ways in which the American theater industry upholds
white supremacy and called for the adoption of an anti-racist code of conduct. They also released
a second open letter, BIPOC Demands for White American Theatre (2020b), which called for the

4

institution of specific anti-racist policies in theaters across the country. The changes described
included increasing cultural competency; improving working conditions and hiring practices;
improving artistic and curatorial practices; increasing transparency, compensation,
accountability, and boards; and increasing funding and resources for BIPOC theater
organizations. The letter also included sections specifically targeting change in commercial
theater and Broadway; unions; press; and academic and professional training programs. By
February 2021, the first letter had garnered over 104,600 signatures, and more than 100 theater
organizations from all over the United States had responded to the call by publishing equity,
diversity, and inclusion (EDI) statements and action plans (Meyer, 2021). Students at many
universities quickly followed suit by publishing similar open letters demanding change in their
theater departments (Cahill, 2020).
Organizational Context and Mission
Given the widespread nature of this national movement, the research design for this study
required a broad focus that included multiple institutions. By the end of June 2020, the presidents
and chancellors of all but one of the institutions studied had made some sort of public
commitment to addressing racism on their campus. At the time, the practice of posting an anti-
racism statement was quite common among university leaders, so failing to release one was
unique (Bartlett, 2021; Belay, 2020). These statements were used to inform the creation of an
assumed field mission that acted as a benchmark for this study. This assumed mission was
designed to be general enough to align with the specific missions of each organization being
studied within the scope of this field study. The mission that guided this study was: University
theater departments and schools in the United States will provide equitable, inclusive, high-
quality educational opportunities for all students.

5

Importance of Addressing the Problem
This examination of the ongoing equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) work in university
theater departments and schools will contribute to the discussion of what changes need to be
made to provide equitable training to all students. The study identified the type of efforts that
have been made recently and offers recommendations for the field that could guide other faculty
leaders as they work to promote EDI initiatives in their own theater departments and schools.
Given the heightened number of ongoing EDI initiatives at universities across the country
(Belay, 2020; Wood, 2020), this study elucidates the importance of discipline-specific measures
(Belay, 2020; Brewer, 2019).
Solving this problem is central to university theater department and school missions to
provide equitable, inclusive, high-quality educational opportunities for all students.
Unfortunately, current data show that university theater departments and schools in the United
States are failing at this core mission. According to a report by the National Center for Education
Statistics (2019), the number of bachelor’s degrees conferred by postsecondary institutions in the
2017-2018 academic year in the Visual and Performing Arts field of study demonstrated an
achievement gap based on race and ethnicity. The report found that out of 88,582 students who
earned Visual and Performing Arts degrees that year, only 13.4% were Hispanic, 7.5% were
Black, 6.3% were Asian, and 0.4% identified as American Indians or Alaska Natives.
In addition, addressing this problem is part of a national goal to create a more just society
that offers equal opportunity to all people. In his Executive Order, Advancing Racial Equity and
Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government, President Biden
emphasized the importance of equal opportunity as the foundation of our democracy and noted
that systemic racism in our country continues to hinder BIPOC and other historically

6

underserved communities (Exec. Order No. 13985, 2021). He called for a systemic approach to
advancing equity in public and private institutions and emphasized that this work, including
increasing access to higher education, could add $5 trillion to the gross domestic product over
the next 5 years.
Field Performance Goal
This field study was designed with a broad focus that included multiple institutions, each
with its own goals. As such, an assumed field performance goal was established to act as a
benchmark. This goal assumes that universities intend to work toward EDI in their theater
departments and schools and that creating an action plan would be the first step in that process.
The goal established a timeline aligned with various stakeholders’ expectations (Cahill, 2020;
Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020a). The goal that guided the study was: By the end of
the 2022-2023 academic year, universities in the United States will fully implement discipline-
specific EDI Action Plans to address systemic racism in their theater departments or schools.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Four stakeholder groups are immediately relevant to this study. The first group includes
students of drama or theater at universities in the United States. In 2019, approximately 11,730
general drama and theater arts degrees were awarded in the United States (Data USA, 2019). The
second stakeholder group includes faculty members teaching in theater departments or schools at
universities in the United States. Administrators who oversee those theater departments and
schools comprise the third stakeholder group, and faculty leaders in those departments and
schools comprise the fourth.

7

Stakeholder Group of Focus and Stakeholder Goal
Individuals from all four stakeholder groups are integral participants in the educational
process, but this study focused on the group comprised of faculty leaders. This study defined
faculty leaders as university teaching faculty who also hold at least one concurrent role as a
leader in their department or school. This concentration acknowledged the faculty leader as a
nexus point connecting all stakeholders and values their unique role in organizational change
efforts. As with the organizational performance goal, an assumed stakeholder goal was identified
as a benchmark for the study. The goal was derived from the assumed field performance goal
and aligns with various stakeholders’ expectations (Cahill, 2020; Community of BIPOC
Theatremakers, 2020a). The goal that guided the study was: By the end of the 2020-2021
academic year, theater department or school faculty will create and begin implementation of a
discipline-specific EDI action plan.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this field study was to better understand the types of EDI initiatives that
university theater departments and schools across the country have undertaken and to identify
any gaps in knowledge, motivation, or organizational (KMO) influences that may have impacted
that work. Specifically, the study evaluated the degree to which theater department or school
faculty met the stakeholder goal to have created and begun implementing a discipline-specific
EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year. While a complete performance
evaluation would include all stakeholders, this study focused on faculty leaders as the primary
change agents. The following research questions guided the study:
1. In what ways, if any, are university theater departments and schools working to increase
EDI?

8

2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are impacting the promotion
of EDI in university theater departments and schools?
Methodological Framework
This qualitative study utilized Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model as a
foundation and involved completing a gap analysis to determine what work has been done by
university theater departments and schools to pursue increased EDI in their programs. First,
potential influences were identified based on personal experience and a review of empirical
research (Clark & Estes, 2008). These influences were then validated using interviews and
document analysis. Finally, the findings of this study were used to create recommendations.
Definition of Terms
Administration refers collectively to senior-level employees in the university. The term
includes deans, vice presidents, provosts, presidents, and chancellors.
Anti-Racism appeared in the vernacular of English- and French-speaking countries
around the 1960s and has since become a global phenomenon (Bonnett, 2005). Bonnett
described that the term is often erroneously understood as antithetical to racism. He noted that
anti-racists have often used racism in support of their missions and specified that the adherence
to categories of race gives credence to the process of racialization. He established that anti-
racism is the active work of dismantling the systems of racism within society and addressed three
concerns as part of the inherent work of anti-racism. He called these concerns the “moral core
and intellectual baseline of anti-racism” (p. 7). The first of those concerns was that “racism is an
intellectual error” (p. 6). He noted the disproven concept of race as a biological constant and
identified ethnocentrism as a key mistake of racism. The second concern Bonnett described was
that “racism distorts and erases people’s identities” (p. 6). He emphasized “the destructive power

9

racism has upon people’s notions of and ability to politically deploy ‘their own’ history, culture
and sense of social cohesion” (p. 6). The third concern Bonnett detailed as part of the inherent
work of anti-racism was that “racism is anti-egalitarian and socially unjust” (p. 6). This concept
aligns with deeply held political and religious beliefs in the fundamental equality of all people.
Anti-Racist Theatre is a pedagogical practice created by Nicole Brewer (2019) in
response to her dissatisfaction with many theaters’ ineffective EDI initiatives. She defines ART
“as practices and policies that actively acknowledge and interrogate racism, anti-Blackness, and
other discriminatory practice, while promoting anti-racist ideas, values, and policies that counter
the oppression of any people during the education or production of theatre” (p. 3).
Colorblindness, when used in the contemporary American vernacular, is commonly
associated with the absence of harmful prejudice against minoritized groups (Mazzocco, 2017).
Nevertheless, Mazzocco noted that it has often functioned as a tool of oppression against the
very groups it claims to protect. He acknowledged the existence of multiple definitions of the
concept and established that basic opposition to racial categorization has emerged as an
undercurrent in the scholarship. He also emphasized that use of the term normalizes Whiteness
as the benchmark against which all people are judged. Bonilla-Silva (2005) noted that, at the
time of his study, most White Americans endorsed colorblindness as an ideological goal.
Colorblind racism is a term coined by Bonilla-Silva as a more salient description of
colorblindness. The term highlights colorblindness as type of racism that harmfully minimizes
the role racism plays in society and wrongfully idealizes meritocracy as the path to absolute
fairness when deciding who can access elite spaces. Bonilla-Silva (2005) established that the
ideology is a core element in the preservation of White privilege.

10

Color-conscious casting and colorblind casting are terms used to describe theories of
how actors are chosen for roles by casting directors. Colorblind casting describes when “actors
are cast without regard to their race or ethnicity; the best actor is cast in the role” (Pao, 2010, p.
4). Pao also described that the term is sometimes conflated with the similar term, color-conscious
casting, which describes an awareness of race and ethnicity in casting decisions. Color-conscious
casting may include intentionally casting individuals of different races or ethnicities in the same
family or casting race or ethnicity in opposition to that described in the script. These choices may
be used to make a thematic statement about race, ethnicity, or multiculturalism. Pao also noted
that the ideology of colorblind casting often aligns with what Omi and Winant (1994) called the
assimilationist paradigm, the belief that the complete absorption of various ethnic groups into the
American mainstream culture was inevitable and desirable. Pao noted that the result of
colorblind casting has been the intentional assimilation of BIPOC actors that serves to devalue
and erase the cultural heritage of BIPOC communities.
Cultural competence “refers to the ability to help students appreciate and celebrate their
cultures of origin while gaining knowledge of and fluency in at least one other culture” (Ladson-
Billings, 2014, p. 75).
Culturally appropriate casting is a more progressive approach to multicultural casting in
the context of actor training in the university (Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020b).
The multifaceted concept builds upon color-conscious casting techniques, specifically opposing
the casting of White actors in any BIPOC roles, including equitable support of BIPOC students
without expecting assimilation, guaranteeing that students will never be cast in roles that
perpetuate cultural stereotypes, and including pathways for students to advocate for roles they
feel will contribute to their growth. Culturally appropriate casting is used throughout this

11

dissertation to highlight the educational ramifications and expectations of casting in university
theater.
Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy pushes the boundaries of the concept of culturally
relevant pedagogy coined by Ladson-Billings (1995). This newer incarnation “is built on the
same foundational notion of students as subjects rather than objects” (Ladson-Billings, 2014, p.
77). Culturally sustaining pedagogy goes further than some interpretations of culturally relevant
teaching that merely add token elements of various cultures into the curriculum. Instead, it places
value in the cultural knowledge students themselves bring to the classroom and repositions
marginalized students into a place of normativity.
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) refers to a set of conscious practices that involve
the re-shaping of policies and practices at the institutional level to achieve social justice (EDI
Definitions Task Force, 2021). Equity is the result of providing social justice through broad
access, full opportunity, complete support, and advancement for all people (EDI Definitions
Task Force, 2021). Equity demands organizational change to eliminate systemic and institutional
barriers that have prevented full participation and success for historically minoritized students
and employees, resulting in equitable power, opportunities, and outcomes for all. Diversity is the
representation of all our varied individual or group characteristics, identities, experiences, and
social statuses (EDI Definitions Task Force, 2021). Historical and systemic discrimination and
colonization have produced unequal power and have privileged certain social identities over
others. Inclusion is the active creation of environments where all individuals and groups can be
and feel welcomed, respected, supported, and valued. The work of inclusion succeeds when it is
ongoing, and all individuals are heard and participate in decision-making processes regarding

12

policies, practices, and daily organizational life at the college (EDI Definitions Task Force,
2021).
Faculty describes anyone contracted by a university to teach full- or part-time.
Faculty leader describes any faculty member who holds an additional role in campus
governance.
Intersectionality is the acknowledgement that individuals who identify as part of multiple
minoritized groups experience the multiplicity of those identities. When she coined the term,
Crenshaw (1989) was describing the way Black women are impacted by the interdependent
systems of white supremacy and patriarchy. She noted that her decision to center Black women
in her analysis served to highlight the way in which common notions of discrimination limit the
way subordination is understood to terms of single categories of people. She described that “in
race discrimination cases, discrimination tends to be viewed in terms of sex- or class-privileged
Blacks; in sex discrimination cases, the focus is on race- and class-privileged women” (p. 140).
Crenshaw also detailed the way Black women are excluded from both feminist theory and anti-
racist policy discourse. She emphasized that the exclusion cannot be solved by merely including
Black women in the established structures. She described that “the intersectional experience is
greater than the sum of racism and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into
account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are
subordinated” (p. 140).
Multicultural casting has increasingly replaced the older and more problematic terms,
non-traditional and colorblind casting, to describe the practice of choosing a diverse group of
actors for roles originally written for White actors (Pao, 2010). Pao noted that “by not calling

13

attention to the racial identities of the actors, multicultural casting enjoys the benefits of
diversification while minimizing artistic and economic risks” (p. 225).
Organizational culture refers to the values, beliefs, and behavioral expectations that a
group develops through shared learning (Schein, 2017).
Theater and Drama are sometimes used interchangeably. The word theater describes both
the physical location where performances occur and the activity of creating plays (Merriam-
Webster.com, 2021). The word drama refers to the play text itself (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate
Dictionary, 2021). In this dissertation, the word theater is used to reference the activity of
creating a play and the word drama is used to refer to a play text, except for in quotations from
participants. All quotations maintain the original phrasing.
Theater and Theatre are often used interchangeably in the United States. Both spellings
of theater are appropriate and tend to be determined based on one’s country of origin (Traffis,
2021). In American English, the spelling is theater, while in Britain and the remainder of the
English-speaking world, it is often theatre. The American English spelling is used in this
dissertation but original spellings in all quotations and titles are maintained. As such, both
spellings appear throughout the dissertation.
Traditional casting and Non-traditional casting are used to describe different theories of
how actors are chosen for roles by casting directors. Pao (2010) noted that the expression non-
traditional casting became popular in the late 1980s after the advocacy group Non-Traditional
Casting Project (NTCP) was formed in 1986. She described that non-traditional casting calls for
the casting of non-White, female, or disabled actors in roles when the characters’ or play’s
development does not depend on those categories. She emphasized that advocates of the practice
are as committed to social justice and inclusion as they are to the areas of artistic exploration

14

allowed by non-traditional casting. Pao also detailed the arguments of those opposed to the
practice. These individuals support traditional casting, the commitment to casting plays based on
an understanding of authenticity that prioritizes the original intent of the playwright and the
perceived reality of the time and location in which the play was set.
Organization of the Study
This dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter One introduces the need to
promote EDI and anti-racist practices in university theater departments and schools in the United
States. It also establishes the theoretical framework to be used and provides definitions for
terminology used in this manuscript. Chapter Two provides a review of relevant literature. This
review begins with an examination of racism in American theater training in higher education. It
continues with an overview of pre-existing and current circumstances that may be impacting EDI
and anti-racism initiatives in recent years. It also includes a discussion of Clark and Estes’s gap
analysis model, the model for the study, and Critical Race Theory (CRT), the primary theory
used in analysis of the findings. Chapter Three describes the conceptual framework, research
design, and methodology for the study. Chapter Four includes an analysis and discussion of the
study findings. Finally, Chapter Five presents a discussion of the study results, recommendations
for faculty leaders who wish to improve EDI in their departments and schools, and
recommendations for future research.

15

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter begins with a general literature review that discusses Critical Race Theory
(CRT) and its application in education. It also includes a discussion on combating racism in
university theater training with sections on curriculum and representation. Next is a review of
anti-racism in theatre and relevant challenges in higher education, including equity, diversity,
and inclusion (EDI) initiatives, the COVID-19 Pandemic, and funding challenges. Following the
general research review, the chapter explains Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis model and
defines the types of knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences examined in
this study. This includes identification of assumed KMO influences on faculty leaders’ ability to
execute the field goal of fully implementing discipline-specific EDI Action Plans to address
systemic racism in their theater departments or schools. The chapter culminates with a
presentation of the conceptual framework guiding this study.
Critical Race Theory
Delgado and Stefancic (2017) described CRT as a movement driven by a collection of
activists and scholars working to address fundamental inequities in the United States legal
system. They noted that individuals studying critical legal studies had been examining the
relationship between race, racism, and power since the early 1970s, when legal scholars began
responding to stalled advances from the civil rights era of the 1960s. Early scholars in the CRT
movement that emerged from this earlier discourse, such as Derrick Bell and Richard Delgado,
sought to create new strategies to dismantle the structural racism built into our systems of law
and government (Bell, 1980; Delgado, 1989). The late Derrick Bell, former professor at Harvard
Law School and New York University, is most known for writing much of the seminal work in
the theory and for his thesis on interest-convergence, which asserted that racism in the United

16

States advances the interests of those in the White population whether they are elite or working-
class (Bell, 1980; Bell, 2008). Bell’s (2005) work also highlighted the way in which the
American legal system conflates democracy and capitalism, despite the possibility that a
democratic government could exist with another economic system. He noted that the United
States’ particular brand of democracy, built on capitalism, elucidated a tension between property
rights and human rights as guaranteed in the Constitution. This discourse led to the establishment
of the concept of Whiteness as property, which acknowledges the inherent value placed on
Whiteness in the United States.
Although the modern CRT movement took shape with a firm grounding in legal theory
and practice, CRT is also evident in ethnic studies with roots that can be traced back farther than
the modern legal studies discourse. Scholarship in critical White studies explores White
supremacy and White privilege while highlighting the way in which White people continually
benefit from those systems today (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). This scholarship explores
“whites’ problematic, (hyper)racial colonial approach to black lives and struggles” (Rabaka,
2021). In his pioneering book The Souls of Black Folk: Essays and Sketches (1903), W.E.B. Du
Bois famously argued that “the problem of the Twentieth Century is the problem of color line”
(p. vii). His reference to the color line here is a metaphor for the many “forms of racial
segregation that socially and spatially divide black and white folk” (Rabaka, 2021, p. 42). In fact,
Rabaka established that Du Bois is often cited as an early architect of the intellectual work that
led to modern critical White studies, noting that scholars have grounded their work in Du Bois’s
1910 essay, “The Souls of White Folk,” and in his 1935 book, Black Reconstruction in America.
Another legally based concept from CRT that can be found in ethnic studies is intersectionality.
Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) coined the term while exploring the systems of power in American

17

and how they lead to the oppression of African American women. More recently, she offered a
definition of the term that focused on the power structures that lead to a broader array of
systematic erasures. She noted,
Intersectionality is a lens through which you can see where power comes and collides,
where it interlocks and intersects. It’s not simply that there’s a race problem here, a
gender problem here, and a class or LBGTQ problem there. Many times that framework
erases what happens to people who are subject to all of these things. (Crenshaw, 2017)
This focus on the interdependent power structures built into American systems and how they
lead to intersectional erasure has made intersectionality a key field of investigation across
multiple areas of CRT.
A third branch of CRT scholarship is the study of CRT in education. Scholars including
Adrienne D. Dixson, Celia K. Rousseau Anderson, Gloria Ladson-Billings, and William F. Tate
IV have used the lens of CRT to examine issues of school hierarchies, discipline, curriculum,
high stakes testing, and affirmative action (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Ladson-Billings,
2005; Dixson & Rousseau Anderson, 2018). CRT in education explores and challenges the
concepts of neutrality, objectivity, meritocracy, and colorblindness. Bensimon (2005) expanded
on the scholarship when she noted that some educators cause harm by displaying a deficit-based
cognitive frame when working with students from minoritized groups. She defined the deficit
cognitive frame in her discussion of organizational learning in higher education emphasizing
that:
Individuals with a deficit cognitive frame may value diversity and have positive attitudes
toward increasing minority student participation in higher education, but they are inclined
to attribute differences in educational outcomes for Black, Hispanic, and Native

18

American students, such as lower rates of retention or degree completion, to cultural
stereotypes, inadequate socialization, or lack of motivation and initiative on the part of
the students. (p. 102)
Bensimon emphasized that this assumption that students are to blame for their disparate
outcomes is not only harmful to the students but also pulls focus away from the actual causes of
disparate outcomes among certain minoritized groups.
Tenets of CRT
Four basic tenets of CRT emerge from the scholarship in its the application across the
areas of legal studies, ethnic studies, and education. The first tenet is the ordinariness of
racism—the proposition that racism is an endemic part of daily life for most people of color in
the United States (Bell, 1980). The second tenet, interest-convergence, works in tandem with the
third tenet, social construction. Bell described interest-convergence as the systemic nature of
White-over-color ascendency serving a purpose for the dominant group. The most fundamental
cornerstone to the scholarship is that race is not a biological reality. Rather, it is socially
constructed, continually modified, and utilized by hegemony when convenient. A fourth tenet is
the voice-of-color thesis, also known as counterstorytelling. This thesis asserts that experiences
with oppression give individuals in various BIPOC communities the inherent competence to
speak about race and racism (Delgado, 1989). A description of concepts derived from these four
generally accepted tenets of CRT follows.
The Ordinariness of Racism, Colorblindness, and the Critique of Liberalism
Delgado and Stefancic (2017) described the ordinariness of racism as one of the reasons
racism is so difficult to address. In their discussion of ordinariness, they noted that much of the
racism in the United States is not acknowledged. It is so thoroughly entwined with our society

19

that it is part of the way society functions. They added that the critique of liberalism as a
framework for responding to the racial problem in the United States is common among CRT
scholars. The errant liberal confidence in the assumed neutrality of constitutional law and in the
concept of colorblindness that emerged as a dominant viewpoint in the 1980s only serve to
reinforce White supremacy (Crenshaw, 2011; Bonilla-Silva, 2005). Crenshaw noted significant
bias in constitutional law and detailed the ways in which colorblindness harms people from
BIPOC communities by assuming Whiteness as normative, glorifying assimilation, and ignoring
White privilege. In the assumptions of legal neutrality and colorblindness, racism is seen as
aberrational, so only the most egregious forms of discrimination are recognized. However,
Crenshaw states that “colorblindness as doctrine not only undermines litigation strategies that
rely on race-conscious remediation, but it also soothes social anxiety about whether deeper levels
of social criticism, remediation, and reconstruction might be warranted” (p. 1326). As such,
colorblindness comforts proponents in the belief that a just legal system exists and excuses them
from any responsibility for social injustice. Bonilla-Silva found that most White Americans
endorsed colorblindness as an ideological goal, so the problem is pervasive and deeply
entrenched.
Alongside the critique of colorblindness, CRT also questions the concept of meritocracy.
While the definition of the term has shifted over time, meritocracy now references the idea that
people should be chosen for elite positions based on merit. For example, a person’s education
and ability should be considered while other factors such as wealth, social class, or race should
be ignored (Liu, 2011). Crenshaw (2011) noted that, in higher education and other selective
institutions, colorblind merit arose to establish whether a lack of inclusion of individuals from
BIPOC communities was the result of discrimination. She detailed that “at least with respect to

20

merit, the assertion-although contested-was that merit stood apart from racial power. Merit was
value set apart from the economy of racial power, qualities that may well be maldistributed but
not racially inscribed” (p. 1330). Additionally, Carbado (2011) noted that colorblindness can
produce racial preferences and that
CRT repudiates the view that status quo arrangements are the natural result of individual
agency and merit . . . Racial accumulation—which is economic (shaping both our income
and wealth), cultural (shaping the social capital upon which we can draw), and
ideological (shaping our perceived racial worth)— structure our life chances. CRT
exposes these inter-generational transfers of racial compensation. (p. 1608)
In this description, Carbado refutes the deeply held American ideology of upward mobility—the
belief that everyone can move up the economic ladder if they work hard enough (Bell, 2005).
Likewise, Delgado and Stefancic (2017) emphasized that, “if racism is embedded in our thought
processes and social structures as deeply as many crits believe . . . only aggressive, color-
conscious efforts to change the way things are will do much to ameliorate misery” (p. 27). In his
challenge of meritocracy and colorblindness, Bonilla-Silva (2005) described the need for a new
focus on anti-racism. He emphasized that individuals who ascribe to the harmful ideologies of
colorblindness and meritocracy must move from identifying as non-racist toward identifying as
anti-racist. His delineation reflects an acknowledgement that all individuals in a racialized
society benefit from that racial structure in both material and ideological ways. Bonilla-Silva
noted that the move to anti-racism demonstrates an understanding of one’s own responsibility for
(unwillingly) participating in systems that uphold White supremacy and called it an active
commitment to the goal of achieving real racial equality.

21

Social Construction, Interest-Convergence, and Racial Formation
Several significant CRT concepts can be derived from the tenets of social construction,
interest-convergence, and racial formation. Delgado and Stefancic (2017) identified two
categories within CRT scholarship: “idealists” and “realists.” They describe idealists as those
that believe that race is a social construction. Idealists see that “racism and discrimination are
matters of thinking, mental categorization, attitude, and discourse…not a biological reality” (p.
21). They added that this reasoning leads to the belief that racism can be diminished by changing
the social teachings and signifiers that convey racist beliefs. This may include teaching about the
inaccuracies of racial stereotypes or shifting the racialized words we use in everyday language.
The second group of CRT scholars can be categorized as realists. Although realists
believe attitudes and words are important, they also assert that racism is more complicated than
an arbitrary set of negative impressions of those in minoritized groups. Instead, realists believe
that “racism is a means by which society allocates privilege and status” (p. 21). Historically,
when socio-political circumstances have enabled one group to gain power over and exploit
another, the hegemony also deploys negative social attitudes about the subjugated group to
justify its actions. Delgado and Stefancic describe this process as material determinism and argue
that it also becomes a factor when the dominant group allows civil rights gains for BIPOC
communities. In this case, CRT scholars in the realist group argue that the decision to allow
those civil rights gains coincides with the self-interest of the dominant group (Bell, 1980).
Bell called this concept interest-convergence and identified significant moments in
American civil rights history to support his theory. Most notably, he argued that the Brown v.
Board of Education ruling was primarily driven by interest-convergence rather than being an
utterly altruistic ruling. Years later, legal historian Mary Dudziak (2000) validated Bell’s

22

assertion. Her extensive research revealed that the Justice Department had been responding to a
desire to improve the United States’ image in the eyes of foreign powers, which questioned the
United States’ push for democracy in other countries despite pervasive racial inequities at home.
These interrelated concepts of social construction and interest-convergence are also seen
in scholarship around racial formation, which Omi and Winant (2014) defined as “the
sociohistorical process by which racial identities are created, lived out, transformed, and
destroyed” (p.109). In their analysis, they problematize the conception of race as either a
concrete reality based in biology or as a purely ideological construct. Omi and Winant posited
that the dichotomy presented here offers a disservice to the scholarship and that a more nuanced
definition is needed—one that acknowledges the social meanings associated with race as well as
the constant political transformation of those meanings. Given those considerations, they offered
the following definition: “Race is a concept that signifies and symbolizes social conflicts and
interests by referring to different types of human bodies” (p. 110). The concept of racial
formation also includes what Omni and Winant call racialization, “the extension of racial
meaning to a previously racially unclassified relationship, social practice, or group” (p. 111).
This concept of racial formation comes into play in both large and small-scale ways. In large-
scale settings, racialization can be observed in colonialism and the development of African
slavery. In small-scale settings, it is evident in racial profiling—the practice of attaching
meaning to a perceived racial category.
Voices of Color, Revisionist History, and Counternarrative
The voice-of-color thesis, one of the most central tenets of CRT, was based on the
“recognition of the experiential knowledge of people of color” (Matsuda et al., 1993, p. 6).
Delgado (1989) noted that the legal storytelling movement was based on this recognition and that

23

the movement urged BIPOC individuals to write about their lived experiences with racism in the
legal system as part of a more targeted critique of the law.
This premise has also been used to support CRT arguments in favor of revisionist history.
For example, Delgado and Stefancic (2017) note that revisionist history re-examines our
country’s historical record, replacing the dominant group’s interpretations of events with
depictions more in line with the lived experiences of BIPOC communities. Another concept
related to the voice-of-color thesis and revisionist history is counternarrative, which is sometimes
referred to as counterstorytelling. Counternarrative involves the pointed use of BIPOC voices to
bring attention to those experiences not included in dominant narratives that maintain normative
Whiteness (Delgado, 1989). Counternarrative often includes lengthier stories but pointed use of
language on a smaller scale has also been engaged to counter false narratives. For example,
scholars employ the term “minoritized” in place of the word “minority” when describing non-
White people. This shift acknowledges immigration restriction in the United States, concretized
by the Johnson-Reed Immigration Act of 1924, which formally established quotas to
intentionally limit non-White immigration (Ngai, 2004). This act ended an era of open
immigration and manufactured a system by which the White majority has been maintained.
CRT in Education
Ladson-Billings and Tate (1995) were the first to publish an article applying CRT to
education and establish foundational arguments for that field of study. They asserted that
promoting the voices of individuals from BIPOC communities was necessary to link critical race
theory with education and they called the voice component of CRT “a first step on the road to
justice” (p. 21). Dixson and Rousseau Anderson (2018) noted that the study of CRT in education

24

has expanded significantly since that first publication, and they offered the following list of
common characteristics observed across the scholarship as well as in their own work (p. 122):
• CRT in education argues that racial inequity in education is the logical outcome of a
system of achievement premised on competition.
• CRT in education examines the role of education policy and educational practices in the
construction of racial inequity and the perpetuation of normative Whiteness.
• CRT in education rejects the dominant narrative about the inherent inferiority of people
of color and the normative superiority of White people.
• CRT in education rejects ahistoricism and examines the historical linkages between
contemporary educational inequity and historical patterns of racial oppression.
• CRT in education engages in intersectional analyses that recognize the ways that race is
mediated by and interacts with other identity markers (i.e., gender, class, sexuality,
linguistic background, and citizenship status).
• CRT in education agitates and advocates for meaningful outcomes that redress racial
inequity. CRT does not merely document disparities.
In addition to this list of characteristics, Dixson and Rousseau Anderson (2018) recognize the
central importance of counternarrative, the critique of colorblindness, and interest-convergence
in CRT in education. These concepts form the underpinnings of the scholarship in anti-racism in
education and inform the theoretical framework for the study.
Anti-Racism Initiatives in University Theater Training
Universities in the United States bear the legacy of early American institutions that were
established to exclude Black people and women (Howe et al., 2017). At these institutions, “the
superior status afforded White people, men, family lineage, Christianity, heterosexuality, and

25

able-bodiedness remains a latent device for guaranteeing that power resides within the hands of a
select few” (Howe et al., 2017, p. 7). Race-based inequities experienced by BIPOC university
students can be even more pronounced within theater departments or schools (Brewer, 2019;
Hartley, 2020; Howe et al., 2017; Ndounou, 2009). Scholarship on anti-racism in theater is
limited, but the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers established a description of relevant
principles of anti-racism in theater in BIPOC Demands for White American Theatre (2020b).
These principles include implementation of inclusive artistic practices; increased cultural
competency in teaching; improved practices around hiring and retention of BIPOC faculty and
staff; and improved practices around recruitment and retention of BIPOC students. University
theater departments and schools that wish to address historic inequities should first re-examine
the work they are doing in each of those four categories (Brewer, 2019; Hartley, 2020; Howe et
al., 2017; Ndounou, 2009; Tillis, 2007; Wood, 2007).
Inclusive Artistic Practices and Cultural Competency in Teaching
The parallel pursuits of inclusive artistic practices and cultural competency in teaching
must be addressed in tandem in university theaters where teaching and artistic practice overlap.
Tillis (2007) asserted that the Standard Western Approach in theater training in higher education
is steeped in Eurocentric progressivism. He added that this marginalizes and at times completely
erases non-Western theater. Tillis’ (2007) research also demonstrated a significant gap in the
representation of non-Western dramatic literature in theater history classes nationwide. The
literature in this area includes two common recommendations for addressing these problems. The
first is for faculty to update their syllabi so that the material represents an appropriate range of
human experience and the second is for faculty to organize their syllabi thematically rather than
by timeline to stimulate comparative learning (Tillis, 2007; Wood, 2017; Howe et al., 2017).

26

Abandoning the traditional timeline-based curriculum can lead students to question progressivist
interpretations of history that convey a harmful belief in Western dominance (Wood, 2017).
Wood added that this practice draws on other pedagogical theories, including queer, feminist,
and postcolonial politics. She found that requiring students to constantly reflect, not only on the
course content but also on how the information is being presented, encourages critical thought.
Through critical thought, students engage in academic and historiographical discourse as they
learn about artistic practice. They are also led to examine the underpinnings of the pedagogy so
they can identify the ways in which Eurocentric artistic practice undervalues the work of BIPOC
artists.
Theater departments and schools that wish to improve the experiences of their BIPOC
students should also consider the curriculum used in the acting classroom and the opportunities
they provide for BIPOC students through their production seasons (Hartley, 2020). Traditional
Western actor training reinforces systemic racism as it is grounded in colorblind ideology
(Brewer, 2018; Hartley, 2020). Brewer noted that “the insidious culture of discrimination is
symptomatic of a racialized system of knowledge that privileges the white narrative as superior
and universal” (p. 56). She detailed the harm done when universities produce only plays that
value and present the White experience. Emeka (2017) also detailed the way in which directors
use colorblind and multicultural casting practices to the detriment of BIPOC actors. He identified
three approaches that are often used by directors working with Black actors in roles originally
written for White actors. The first approach he described is the attempt to erase any cultural
significance of perceived racial distinctions with the goal of creating a colorblind reality in the
world of the play. The second is to simply engage in the theatrical tradition of suspended
disbelief—pretend that the actor playing the role is White just as one might pretend an adult

27

actor playing a child is a child. The third approach Emeka identified is to alter the race of the
character in the play and embrace the way the new dynamic impacts the audience’s
understanding of the story. Although Emeka noted the potential value in each of the three
approaches, he highlighted the inherent dangers of the first two as they result in the creation of “a
White cultural experience using Black and Brown actors” (p. 94). He noted that
Although it was once a progressive approach because of its ability to include Black and
Brown people into a largely exclusive American Theatre, actors of color who are asked to
participate in “color-blind casting” are often required to deny their culture and aesthetic
as a reference point for the sake of becoming race neutral or “universal.” (p. 95)
Brewer also commented on how these approaches normalize White cultural identifiers including
dialect and lead to the expectation that BIPOC students assimilate as part of their training. She
emphasized the harm caused when this active erasure of BIPOC identities denies BIPOC actors
training that would have prepared them to play roles in line with their racial and ethnic identities.
Hartley (2020) asserted that this traditional training methodology must be re-examined
and replaced with care-driven pedagogy that creates safe spaces for actors of color and those
from other minoritized groups. Similarly, the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers (2020b)
demanded “the urgent, immediate prioritization of the health & well-being of BIPOC bodies” (p.
25) in university theater spaces. They amplified the importance of placing special emphasis on
harm reduction and discussed the immediate decentralization of the White aesthetic as a key
step. Hartley noted that student actors must be led to consider their positionality and its impact
on their understanding of characters of dramatic texts. She also emphasized that, as part of the
learning process, actors must critically reflect and genuinely listen to the perspectives of those
with different lived experiences. Ndounou (2009) also recognized the need to combat the

28

inherent colorblind ideology in Western actor training that prioritizes and values the experiences
of White artists over those of BIPOC artists. She suggested that actor trainers must incorporate
cultural perspectives into their teaching, as appropriate for each teacher and without privileging
any one perspective over others. She emphasized that “due to metaphysical underpinnings of
Afrocentric concepts of community, spiritual elements of cultural perception are also useful for
teaching ensemble acting and ‘integrated actor training,’ which refers primarily to the merging of
theory and practice” (p. 96). Ndounou noted that this technique can complement the methods of
Sanford Meisner and Arthur Lessac, which continue to be cornerstones of contemporary
American actor training. The common focus on metaphysical interconnectivity and the
commitment to ensemble-based actor training are significant considerations for any practitioner
seeking to bridge the gap with traditional American pedagogical practice.
In their open letter, BIPOC Demands for White American Theatre, the Community of
BIPOC Theatremakers (2020b) argued for culturally appropriate casting. They use this concept
to describe a more progressive approach to casting and, consequently, actor training in the
university. The multifaceted concept includes an array of casting practices they described in their
list of demands. First, they demanded the “end of black face, brown face, yellow face, red face
and crip face casting, full stop” (p. 28). These phrases refer to the practice of casting White
actors in any BIPOC roles, regardless of the way in which the actor is costumed. They also
demanded equitable support of BIPOC students in every discipline through funding,
engagement, and mentorship. This crucial aspect of culturally appropriate casting highlights the
vital need for BIPOC students to learn from mentors that can support their growth without
expecting assimilation. Next, they demanded that the artistic vision of actors be supported
through the guarantee that they will never be cast in roles that perpetuate cultural stereotypes, be

29

cast in multiple leading roles throughout their study, and have pathways to advocate for roles
they feel will contribute to their growth. As part of this, culturally appropriate casting also
expects that “culturally specific material that reflects the full spectrum of what will be asked of
BIPOC students as working artists” (p. 27) will be provided. As such, universities must choose
productions that provide opportunities for BIPOC students to perform roles in line with their
ethnocultural identity. Finally, the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers demanded that acting
programs cultivate the diversity necessary to ensure no BIPOC playwright be forced to cast
White actors in roles created for BIPOC actors. These demands established parameters for the
concept of culturally appropriate casting that emphasize the need to support, not only BIPOC
actors, but also BIPOC students in other artistic areas.
Increased Numbers of BIPOC Students, Faculty, and Staff
The Community of BIPOC Theatremakers (2020b) also called for a re-examination of the
diversity of people allowed at the proverbial table in American theater and for institution of
ethnoculturally responsible hiring practices. Their call for increased representation was not
unique. In 1968, a San Francisco State College student group called the Third World Liberation
Front led what would become one of the most impactful student strikes in United States history
(Bates & Meraji, 2019). The strike led to the creation of the first College of Ethnic Studies and
two of the primary demands made by the students were increased numbers of students and
faculty of color. The students in the Third World Liberation Front argued that faculty of color
were vital for the success of students of color. Similarly, Howe et al. (2017) argued that students
in university theater departments need faculty with whom they can identify, so institutions must
examine their hiring practices to ensure quality BIPOC candidates make it to the candidate pool
in each search. They also asserted that university leadership must adapt practices to ensure they

30

adequately support BIPOC faculty through tenure and BIPOC students through graduation. In
addition, they recommended that universities use a cohort model to avoid tokenism and
exceptionalism. For example, instead of admitting one person of color into the MFA program,
universities must admit three, and rather than producing one play per season written by a person
of color or a woman, they must produce several. In addition to the expectation that university
theaters diversify their cohorts of students, faculty, and staff, the Community of BIPOC
Theatremakers (2020b) also demanded “the re-evaluation of criteria around ‘excellence’ and
‘scholarship’ to provide specific language in reappointment, promotion, and the tenure process to
weigh work at BIPOC organizations and theaters and on BIPOC work as ‘state of the field’” (p.
29). This expectation allows universities to prioritize anti-racism work in faculty applications for
tenure and promotion, embedding the work at the systemic level. Similarly, Howe et al. (2017)
noted that, although the work may begin with updating recruiting, casting, and hiring practices, it
must not end there. They emphasized that faculty must move past the expectation of diversity
and require an expectation of equity, parity, and inclusion.
Nicole Brewer’s Anti-Racist Theatre
Scholarship examining the application of anti-racism to theater is just beginning to
address the systems that deny access to people from BIPOC communities. Nicole Brewer, former
theater faculty at Howard University currently teaching in the Yale School of Drama, contended
that the vague, multi-faceted description of EDI in recent theater community initiatives had
undercut the movement, rendering it less effective than intended (Brewer, 2019). She
acknowledged that EDI initiatives have raised “awareness around misgendering, ableism,
consent, and calling out White dominance” (p. 1) but argued that collective efforts in the theater
industry have regularly ignored systemic oppression to appease certain funding groups. Brewer

31

noted that EDI as a concept is outward-focused and, thus, is ineffective in progressing social
justice. She asserted the “idea of ED&I is valued more than the practice of ED&I, and success is
measured by how well the values are displayed” (p.1). The result, she describes, has been the
creation of transactional policies and practices that support the ideological value of EDI while
ignoring the needs of individual practitioners. In her article, Brewer introduced a new theater
practice that openly acknowledges racism. She noted,
I folded the knowledge I acquired across disciplines, evolving my methods, and created a
practice known as Anti-Racist Theatre (ART). ART is defined as practices and policies
that actively acknowledge and interrogate racism, anti-Blackness, and other
discriminatory practice, while promoting anti-racist ideas, values, and policies that
counter the oppression of any people during the education or production of theatre.
Instead of being mission- and intentions-based, ART is based in action and
transformation. You’re not practicing ART properly unless change is felt, and
you experience an intuitive understanding that the plurality of your humanity is welcome.
(p.3)
This explicit recognition of racism aligns ART with CRT. It offers the theater community a more
focused way of addressing EDI issues by implementing policy, procedure, and fund allocation
changes that improve the experiences of BIPOC practitioners within the organization. However,
Brewer (2019) emphasized that ART is not just about racism. Instead, it seeks to eliminate all
forms of oppression and create true belonging for all. Centering on the three guiding principles
of harm reduction, harm prevention, and relationship repair, ART offers a framework that
supports incremental, long-lasting change. Brewer’s pedagogical framework currently offers the

32

most widely recognized and comprehensive scholarship on how to apply anti-racism to theatrical
practice.
Relevant Challenges in Higher Education
This section offers a review of circumstances that are underscoring faculty work in
theater departments and schools. It includes a summary of EDI efforts in higher education and
the COVID-19 Pandemic that has significantly impacted universities throughout the country
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020; Di Pietro et al., 2020). Finally, this section
summarizes the complex funding challenges facing university theater departments and schools
(Burki, 2020; Hubler, 2020; Young, 2018).
EDI Initiatives in Higher Education
Over the last 50 years, predominantly White institutions (PWIs) have responded to
federal regulations (e.g., 1965 Higher Education Act), student protests, and an influx of non-
White students by implementing formalized diversity initiatives (Patton et al., 2019). In their
study of 80 colleges and universities in the United States, Wilson et al. (2012) found that 75%
used “diversity” in their mission statements. These initiatives were intended to increase campus
diversity while supporting historically and racially underrepresented students (Patton, 2006;
Williamson, 1999; Young, 1986). However, Robertson et al. (2014) assert that “supporting a
cosmetic desire for inclusion . . . only serves to make the university appear inclusive but does not
illustrate a true commitment to students of color” (p. 14). Harper and Hurtado (2007)
demonstrated that, despite ongoing EDI initiatives, students of color attending PWIs still
perceive campus climates differently than White students at the same institutions. The students
of color found their campuses less tolerant of diversity and viewed the efforts to increase EDI as
nothing more than institutional rhetoric. In addition, significant discrepancies remain between

33

Black and Latino students and their White counterparts, including lower six-year graduation
rates and higher 12-year student loan default rates, as discussed previously (Nichols & Anthony
Jr., 2020). These gaps demonstrate that colleges and universities must improve their efforts to
meet their goals of promoting EDI. Bensimon and Malcom (2012) argue that more focused
strategic planning is key to closing these gaps and that institutional leaders must commit to
examining improved ways of addressing EDI issues.
More recently, in the weeks following the May 2020 murder of George Floyd and during
the subsequent Black Lives Matter protests, universities across the country issued statements
denouncing racism and committing to social justice initiatives (Belay, 2020). An analysis of
university responses in the United States found that 82% of institutions in the sample released a
statement in the summer or fall of 2020 (Belay, 2020). In addition, the study found that many of
those institutions committed to action. Approximately 60% of the statements in the study
included a commitment to short-term actions, including conducting campus listening tours, or
establishing an anti-racism task force. Only 39% of the statements committed to long-term
actions, with the most common being the development of anti-racism training, advancing
recruitment and retention of faculty of color, expanding resources for BIPOC students, staff, and
faculty, and improving partnerships with local and regional communities. The study also
demonstrated that the institution’s size and wealth impacted the scale of its plans. It showed that
smaller, less wealthy institutions were less likely to make commitments after the first statement.
In addition, the study identified some trends among the initiatives observed. These trends include
creating research centers for the study of race and racism, developing resource pages for
education in anti-racism, calling for institutional and unit-level diversity plans, assessing the

34

institution’s relationship with law enforcement, and creating memorials acknowledging past
racial injustice on campus.
Belay’s (2020) study identified three areas in which university commitments fell short. First,
an analysis of the language used by the institutions showed that many of them failed to
acknowledge the legacy of racism on campus. “To uproot racism, institutions must perform a
deep and honest analysis of how it has shaped their current reality” (Belay, 2020, p. 3). Second,
the study found a lack of anti-racist solutions at the systemic level. “Institutions must elevate
their tactical responses into a strategic and comprehensive plan in the same way that they address
their operational budgets, curricula, and enrollment goals” (Belay, 2020, p. 3). Third, the study
found that the resources allocated to address anti-racism were insufficient. Half of the statements
analyzed failed to mention the allocation of any resources to support anti-racism initiatives.
COVID-19 Pandemic
In December 2019, scientists first identified SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan, China, after an
outbreak of pneumonia (Stewart, K. et al., 2020). The resulting disease, commonly referred to as
COVID-19, quickly spread across the world. By the end of November 2020, there were
1,453,355 reported deaths and 62,195,274 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide. The United
States was among the hardest-hit countries, reporting 280,135 deaths and 14,462,527 confirmed
cases by December 6, 2020 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020). The fall-out of
the containment efforts was staggering. In April 2020 alone, over 20 million Americans lost their
jobs when non-essential businesses across the nation were ordered to close their doors (Burki,
2020). In addition, to maintain health and safety, many schools across the country suspended in-
person instruction, replacing it with various models of remote learning (Di Pietro et al., 2020).
Roms (2020) discussed the pedagogical challenge this posed for instructors of courses that

35

require direct interaction and highlighted theater as one area of study that was particularly
disadvantaged by forced remote instruction.
Burki (2020) noted that the value, and thereby the utility, of some degrees had been
called into question given diminished employment prospects for graduates. The implications for
university theater departments could be significant. The nearly complete shutdown of live
performing arts worldwide led to the permanent closure of many theater companies, while
reopening dates for the remaining venues were continuously pushed back (Roms, 2020). Durkee
(2020) described the impact of COVID-19 on theater, noting that it was the most prolonged
shutdown in the history of Broadway, with the longest previous shutdowns being 30 days and 25
days after industry strikes in 1918 and 1975, respectively. She asserted that the theater industry
was among the hardest hit by the pandemic, with the closing of Broadway theaters alone leading
to the loss of 96,900 local jobs.
Disparate Impact of the Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic amplified health disparities and social inequities present in the
United States before its emergence. The disease itself disproportionately affected those who were
unable to work from home, those living in group housing, those with low-paying or “essential”
jobs, and individuals with other chronic illnesses (Juliano et al., 2021). Harper (2020) indicated
that COVID-19 infections and deaths affected communities of color disproportionately and that
the pandemic has led to an increase in the number of individuals experiencing food and housing
insecurity. He also asserted that students living in low-income communities had been
disproportionately affected by digital inequities during remote learning as some lacked access to
wi-fi and reliable high-speed internet. In addition, Harper (2020) noted that instances of
stigmatization, stereotyping, discrimination, and acts of physical violence toward people of

36

Asian descent in the United States were documented throughout the pandemic. He emphasized
the magnitude with which these factors impacted university students and argued that universities
did not do enough to support students who depended on campus-based services.
Funding Shortfalls
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, universities were already contending with a
bourgeoning financial crisis that had been fostered by “years of shrinking state support, declining
enrollment, and student concerns with skyrocketing tuition and burdensome debt” (Hubler, 2020;
p. 1). Smaller university programs, including theater, bore much of the brunt of these budget
shortfalls (D’Amico et al., 2014; Young, 2018). Young (2018) found that at least seven colleges
and universities announced plans to limit or ultimately end theater training on their campuses in
2017, citing budget shortfalls as at least a partial cause. Even universities with relatively large
endowments have recently put theater degree programs on hold, citing budget concerns. For
example, Harvard University suspended its graduate actor-training program in 2017 (Jaschik,
2017). Ludwig (2019) noted that approximately 47% of university undergraduate theater
programs experienced declining completion rates between 2010 and 2016. He added that, over
the same period, college and university support for theater departments had been called into
question based on a popular book written by Robert C. Dickeson (2010). In the book, Dickeson
encouraged universities to systematically reallocate resources in response to budget shortfalls
rather than uniformly decrease budgets. He established the following list of criteria for use when
deciding the relative worth of academic programs:
1. History, development, and expectations of the program
2. External demand for the program
3. Internal demand for the program

37

4. Quality of program inputs and processes
5. Quality of program outcomes
6. Size, scope, and productivity of the program
7. Revenue and other resources generated by the program
8. Costs and other expenses associated with the program
9. Impact, justification, and overall essentiality of the program
10. Opportunity analysis of the program (p. 66)
In her critique of this process, Alvarez (2015) found that university theater departments are
particularly vulnerable when administrators engage the program prioritization method espoused
by Dickeson (2010) because the method fails to acknowledge how university theater departments
benefit the university community. In addition, Alvarez (2015) noted that theater programs scored
poorly on specific criteria such as the student-to-faculty ratios and revenue production compared
to cost. She also asserted that using this method has resulted in the elimination of degree tracks
and programs in theater departments.
Eckel (2002) noted prior evidence of similar reasoning used to justify program
elimination. He found that, when asked how their institution decided to cut specific programs,
people from three of four institutions noted the following as significant factors in the decision to
cut the program: a small number of faculty, low class capacities, and the program’s alignment
with the mission of the college or school. Interviewees at one large university specifically
mentioned the decision to cut their theater doctoral program as an example of a small program
functioning outside the college’s stated mission (Eckel, 2002). Eckel (2002) determined that this
was a common issue amongst theater disciplines, as they contain programs that include both
professional and scholarly degree tracks.

38

COVID-19 amplified the financial challenges universities were already facing. Some
estimates predicted that the pandemic would ultimately “cost institutions more than $120 billion
in increased student aid, lost housing fees, forgone sports revenue, public health measures,
learning technology and other adjustments” (Hubler, 2020; p. 2). In addition, enrollment data for
Fall 2020 illustrated a staggering shift, with more than 16% fewer first-year students enrolled at
colleges and universities nationwide (St. Amour, 2020). Burki (2020) asserted that the decreased
auxiliary revenue associated with the lower enrollment would pose a significant challenge for
higher education. She noted a predicted drop in revenue from $44.6 billion in the 2017 fiscal
year to approximately $30 billion in 2020. Hubler (2020) noted that many universities
experienced increased costs due to the institution of the smaller class sizes required by mandated
social distancing and other new expenditures, including COVID-19 testing, contact tracing, and
quarantining students. He added that anticipated budget shortfalls led universities across the
country to take austerity measures including elimination or suspension of degree tracks, faculty
and staff furloughs, and school closures.
Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model offers a framework for evidence-based
organizational change efforts. The framework asserts that performance gaps fall into three
categories: knowledge and skills, motivation, and organizational influences. In their six-step
process model, Clark and Estes offer a clear pathway for organizational change that focuses on
analyzing the causes behind performances gaps. The first step in their model requires that an
organization identify its key business goals and the second step includes identification of
individual performance goals. In step three, the organization’s progress on attaining those goals
must be assessed to identify performance gaps. In step four, the organization analyzes the gaps to

39

determine causes. In step five, simultaneous assessments on the gaps in knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences are conducted, and appropriated changes implemented. If the
identified gap is the knowledge or skills of employees, the organization appropriately responds to
the type(s) of knowledge that is missing. For example, the gap might be in factual, conceptual,
procedural, or metacognitive knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). If the gap is employee motivation,
Clark and Estes (2008) describe the three types of motivation gaps. These are active choice (in
which the employee chooses whether to act in the first place), persistence (in which the
employee can work through challenges), or mental effort (in which employees actively engage in
challenging work). Organizational influences causing gaps need further examination as to
whether those gaps result from the organizational culture or ineffective processes. Finally, the
sixth step in the model requires organizations to evaluate the results of the implemented changes.
At this point, the organization may use those results to create new goals and move forward in
ongoing change efforts.
This study utilized the Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model to identify
performance gaps and assess which influences are impacting the successful implementation of
appropriate EDI initiatives in a sample of university theater departments and schools across the
country.
Knowledge Influences
The first step in assessing which knowledge influences may be causing performance gaps
is identifying the different types of knowledge involved. In his revision of Bloom’s original
taxonomy, Krathwohl (2002) reorganized the three original categories of knowledge (factual,
conceptual, and procedural) and added a fourth category called metacognitive knowledge. These
four categories are used within Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model. Factual knowledge

40

describes the most basic facts an individual must know in each field of study (Krathwohl, 2002).
Conceptual knowledge describes the interrelationships between those basic elements and
involves understanding theories, models, and structures in the field. Procedural knowledge
requires the application of factual and conceptual knowledge in the performance of an action.
Finally, metacognitive knowledge is the knowledge of general cognition and involves an
awareness of one’s cognitive thought and learning.
Potential performance gaps in theater faculty leaders may be attributed to deficits in
conceptual or procedural knowledge. The first assumed knowledge influence is in conceptual
knowledge and is that faculty leaders need to understand how the principles of anti-racism relate
to theater training and practice. (Brewer, 2019; Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020b).
The relevant principles of anti-racism as related to theater training and practice are inclusive
artistic practices, cultural competency in teaching, representation and support of BIPOC faculty
and staff, representation and support of BIPOC students (Community of BIPOC Theatremakers,
2020b). The second assumed knowledge influence is in procedural knowledge and is that faculty
leaders need to understand how to apply anti-racism in the context of theater training and
practice. Strong conceptual and procedural understanding of these principles and their
application can help faculty leaders create and implement an appropriate theater-specific EDI
Action Plan. Table 1 demonstrates the two assumed knowledge influences, the knowledge types,
and the ways in which this study assessed those knowledge influences.

41

Table 1
Knowledge Influence, Type, and Assessments for Analysis
Field mission
University theater departments or schools in the United States will provide equitable,
inclusive, high-quality educational opportunities for all students.
Field global goal
By the end of the 2022-2023 academic year, universities in the United States will fully
implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans to address systemic racism in their
theater departments or schools.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the 2020-2021 academic year, theater department or school faculty will
create and begin implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
Knowledge influence Knowledge type Knowledge influence
assessment
Faculty leaders need to
understand how the
principles of anti-racism
relate to theater training
and practice.
Conceptual Interview faculty leaders to
assess their knowledge of the
following principles of anti-
racism as related to theater
training and practice:
inclusive artistic practices,
cultural competency in
teaching, representation and
support of BIPOC faculty
and staff, representation and
support of BIPOC students.
Faculty leaders need to
understand how to apply
anti-racism in the context
of theater training and
practice.
Procedural Interview faculty leaders to
assess their knowledge of
how to apply anti-racism on
a systemic level in their
department or school.

Motivation Influences
The first step in assessing which motivation influences may be causing performance gaps
is identifying the different facets of motivation involved. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that
three facets of motivation come into play when individuals are working towards a goal: active

42

choice, persistence, and mental effort. Active choice describes the motivation to begin work on a
particular goal, while persistence refers to the sustained focus necessary when working toward
the goal. Finally, mental effort refers to the effort put into challenging work and the application
of innovative solutions. All three of these facets of motivation are necessary for an individual to
complete any specific task, and they can be affected by that individual’s personal, behavioral,
and environmental supports (Bandura, 2005). Social cognitive theory (SCT) offers a valuable
lens to analyze these influences. In his discussion of SCT, Bandura (2005) asserted that all
individual learning occurs within social contexts, and the reciprocal interactions of personal,
behavioral, and environmental supports influence that learning. Some motivation influences
relevant to this study include task value, self-efficacy, and goal setting.
Bandura (1993) discussed task value in his description of expectancy-value theory. He
noted that the anticipation of outcomes one expects to be produced given certain behaviors
impacts motivation. These anticipated outcomes can increase motivation if the individual values
those outcomes. Bandura described the value an individual places on a given outcome as task
value. Individuals with low task value do not see the outcomes as valuable, and thus, motivation
to complete the task diminishes.
In his description of expectancy-value theory, Bandura (1993) also described self-
efficacy as necessary for maintaining motivation. He defined it as the belief in one’s ability to
achieve a given task. Bandura (1993) established that individuals who question their ability to
complete a task have low self-efficacy and are more vulnerable to experiencing achievement
anxiety when encountering the demands associated with achieving the task. Furthermore, he
found that those with low self-efficacy and are more likely to engage in avoidance behaviors
when presented with the task. These avoidance behaviors may impact an individual’s active

43

choice, persistence, and mental effort when working toward completing the task (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
The third motivation influence relevant to this study is goal setting. Ambrose et al. (2010)
asserted that “goals provide the context in which values and expectancies derive meaning and
influence motivation” (p. 70). When individuals have not set goals for themselves, it may reflect
low motivation while also contributing to diminished motivation in the future. Ambrose et al.
(2010) noted that one key consideration when assessing goal-oriented behavior and its relation to
motivation is the potential that the individual’s personal goals may not align or may conflict with
the organization’s goals. In this event, the individual’s motivation to achieve the tasks associated
with the organization’s goal is diminished.
Potential performance gaps in university faculty may be attributed to a lack of motivation
(Clark and Estes, 2008). The first assumed motivation influence is that faculty leaders must
believe there is value in creating and implementing an EDI Action Plan. The second assumed
influence is that faculty leaders need to believe they can successfully implement EDI or Anti-
racism initiatives. The final assumed motivational influence is that faculty leaders need to have
goals for creating and implementing an EDI Action Plan. Table 2 demonstrates the three
assumed motivation influences, the motivation types, and how this study assessed these
motivation influences.

44

Table 2
Motivational Influences and Assessments for Analysis
Field mission
University theater departments or schools in the United States will provide equitable,
inclusive, high-quality educational opportunities for all students.
Field global goal
By the end of the 2022-2023 academic year, universities in the United States will fully
implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans to address systemic racism in their
theater departments or schools.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the 2020-2021 academic year, theater department or school faculty will
create and begin implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
Assumed motivational influence Motivation type Motivational influence
assessment
Faculty leaders must believe
there is value in creating and
implementing an EDI Action
Plan.
Task Value Interview faculty leaders to
determine their perception of
the value they place on
accomplishing the goal of
creating a discipline-specific
EDI Action Plan.
Faculty leaders need to believe
they can successfully
implement EDI or Anti-racism
initiatives.
Self-Efficacy Interview faculty leaders to
determine their self-efficacy
for instituting successful
EDI or anti-racism
initiatives.
Faculty leaders need to have
goals to create and implement
an EDI Action Plan.
Goals Interview faculty leaders to
determine which goals they
have set for accomplishing
the larger field goal.

Organizational Influences
The final category to be considered when assessing performance gaps are the
organizational influences. Clark and Estes (2008) note that, to be successful, organizations must
support their employees’ ability to meet field goals by providing adequate resource allocation

45

and by creating appropriate procedures and policies. This category of organizational influences
also includes the organizational culture. As complex systems, organizations have their own
cultures that significantly impact their processes and resource allocation (Schein, 2017). As such,
the organizational culture impacts employee performance. Clark and Estes (2008) defined culture
as “the core values, goals, beliefs, emotions, and processes learned as people develop over time
in families and work environments” (p. 108).
Schein (2017) suggested three levels of analysis when examining culture: artifacts,
espoused beliefs and values, and basic underlying assumptions. He used the word “level” to
describe “the degree to which the cultural phenomenon is visible to you as participant or
observer” (p. 17). Artifacts comprise the first group and are the phenomena most visible. These
are things immediately recognized when encountering an unfamiliar culture. In the
organizational context, artifacts include mission statements, team communication, attire,
observed behavior, or workspace layout. Schein (2017) emphasized that, although artifacts are
the most recognizable of the three levels of culture, they are the most difficult to decipher. The
first level of culture is how an observer’s cultural lens skews their understanding of the artifacts
they encounter. As such, he encourages analysts to refrain from making assumptions about
culture based on the artifacts alone. The second level, espoused beliefs and values, consists of the
shared beliefs and values articulated by members of the organization or observed in the actions
taken by the group (Schein). These beliefs and values do not always align perfectly with the
behavior of the group. In the academic institutional organizational context, espoused beliefs and
values can be seen in things like an oft-repeated statement that the organization is student-
focused, followed by allocating resources that reinforce that mantra. One example of this would
be a college that only funds new computers for student computer labs and then redistributes used

46

computers from the labs to faculty. Basic underlying assumptions comprise the third level of
culture. They are the unconscious beliefs that can control behavior in organizations. In the
analysis of the organizational culture of the participants’ organizations, this study focused on the
first two levels of culture: artifacts and interview responses that demonstrate espoused beliefs
and values.
In addition, another frame for the analysis of organizational culture that involves the
identification of cultural models and cultural settings will also be utilized (Rueda, 2011). Rueda
describes cultural models as the underlying, shared beliefs held by members of an organization
that can go unnoticed, and he describes cultural settings as the visible signs of those beliefs.
Potential performance gaps may be attributed to specific academic institutional
organizational barriers (Clark and Estes, 2008). Of the three assumed organizational influences,
two fall into the category of cultural models, and one falls into the category of cultural setting.
The first cultural model influence is that the organizational culture must acknowledge that
systemic racism is present in the institution. The second is that the organizational culture must
acknowledge that anti-racism initiatives are necessary. The final assumed organizational
influence is the cultural setting that the organization must allocate the resources necessary to
create and implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans. Table 3 demonstrates three assumed
organizational influences and how this study assessed those organizational influences.

47

Table 3
Organizational Influences and Assessments for Analysis
Field mission
University theater departments or schools in the United States will provide equitable,
inclusive, high-quality educational opportunities for all students.
Field global goal
By the end of the 2022-2023 academic year, universities in the United States will
fully implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans to address systemic racism in
their theater departments or schools.
Stakeholder goal
By the end of the 2020-2021 academic year, theater department or school faculty will
create and begin implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
Assumed organizational
influence
Organizational
influence type
Organizational influence
assessment
The organizational culture
must acknowledge that
systemic racism is present in
the institution.
Cultural Model Interview faculty leaders to
identify the cultural model.
The organizational culture
must acknowledge that anti-
racism initiatives are
necessary.
Cultural Model Interview faculty leaders to
identify the cultural model.
The organization must allocate
the resources necessary to
create and implement
discipline-specific EDI Action
Plans.
Cultural Setting Interview faculty leaders to
determine the amount and types
of resources the organization
allocates to discipline-specific
EDI initiatives.

Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework organizes the models and concepts used in a study into a
framework that supports that study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study utilized a conceptual
framework adapted from Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model. The KMO influences gap
analysis was integral in developing the research questions, interview protocol, and analytical

48

codes. Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework for this study. This framework highlighted
assumed KMO influences. The assumed knowledge influences were the conceptual knowledge
of how the principles of anti-racism relate to theater training and practice and the procedural
knowledge of how to apply anti-racism in the context of theater training and practice. A review
of the literature revealed that these areas of conceptual and procedural knowledge are necessary
for the implementation of effective, discipline-specific EDI initiatives in theater. The assumed
motivational influences were task value, self-efficacy, and goals. A review of the literature
revealed that each of these three influences positively impact motivation. Finally, the assumed
organizational influences included two cultural models: the acknowledgment of structural racism
in the institution and the acknowledgment that anti-racism initiatives are necessary and one
cultural setting: the organization must allocate the resources necessary to create and implement
discipline-specific EDI Action Plans. A review of the literature revealed that these supports are
necessary for faculty leaders to affect the desired organizational change. The conceptual
framework described is illustrated in Figure 1.

49

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Note. This conceptual framework demonstrates the assumed KMO influences that
contribute to successfully creating and implementing a discipline-specific EDI action plan.

Conclusion
The chapter began with a discussion of CRT and its application in the field of education.
It also included a discussion on combating racism in university theater training that detailed
curriculum and representation as key areas of focus. Next, there was a discussion of anti-racism
as applied to theater training and practice, Nicole Brewer’s ART, and relevant challenges in

50

higher education, including EDI initiatives, the COVID-19 pandemic, and university funding
shortfalls. The chapter explained Clark and Estes’s (2008) Gap Analysis model and defined the
types of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences examined in this study. This
included identification of assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the
ability of faculty leaders to execute the field goal of fully implementing discipline-specific EDI
Action Plans that address systemic racism in their theater department or school. The chapter
culminated with a presentation of the conceptual framework guiding this study. Chapter Three
presents the methodology for the study.

51

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this field study was to better understand the types of equity, diversity, and
inclusion (EDI) initiatives that university theater departments and schools across the country
have undertaken and to identify any gaps in knowledge, motivation, or organizational (KMO)
influences that may have impacted that work. Specifically, the study evaluated the degree to
which theater department or school faculty met the stakeholder goal to have created and begun
implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year.
The project’s design was a field study using interviews to understand what work has been done
in response to calls for theater-specific EDI initiatives and what influences impacted any
performance gaps in the pursuit of the stakeholder goal. A review of existing documents was also
used to triangulate the findings. The following research questions guided the study:
1. In what ways, if any, are university theater departments and schools working to increase
EDI?
2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are impacting the promotion
of EDI in university theater departments and schools?
This chapter begins with a discussion of the participating stakeholders and the primary
data collection and instrumentation (including the interview instrument, protocol, procedures,
sampling criteria, and strategy). It continues to address secondary data collection and
instrumentation (including the existing document instrument, criteria, and procedures). Finally,
the chapter discusses credibility and trustworthiness; and ethics (including researcher
positionality).

52

Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholders chosen for this study were faculty leaders in university theater
departments and schools. Epistemologically speaking, this study was centered on university
theater faculty leaders as the authority on theater training and acknowledged their professional
accountability around pedagogy and curriculum design (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This
stakeholder group was chosen because faculty leaders are the stakeholders most able to offer
descriptions of the work being done in their department or school, and they are individuals best
situated to facilitate department or school-wide change efforts. These individuals are the experts
on any actions their department or school has taken to promote EDI and the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences that impact that work.
Primary Data Collection and Instrumentation
The world view that guided this study was constructivist, defined by Creswell and
Creswell (2018) as an approach to qualitative research that seeks to understand a situation based
on the subjective meaning assigned to it by the individuals involved. As such, the study sought to
understand faculty leaders’ perceptions of their department or school’s progress in creating and
implementing theater-specific EDI initiatives. This study examined what type of work is being
done to promote EDI in university theater departments and schools and assessed what KMO
influences might be impacting that work. This study sought to develop recommendations for
faculty in higher education derived from the lived experiences of a sampling of theater faculty
leaders. Interviews were chosen because they help researchers understand things that cannot be
observed, such as the things that influence one’s behaviors, thoughts, and feelings (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). As such, interviews were necessary to help fully elucidate faculty perceptions of
the complex KMO influences impacting their EDI work. This study was designed as a case

53

study, an in-depth analysis of a process bounded by time and activity (Creswell & Creswell,
2018). In this case, the period being examined was the 2020-2021 academic year, and the activity
was the response to heightened calls for the creation of a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
The primary data for this qualitative study involved conducting 12 interviews with a purposeful
sampling of theater faculty leaders from a collection of universities from differing regions across
the United States. The decision to conduct 12 interviews was based on Guest, Brunce, and
Johnson’s (2006) findings in a metanalysis of 60 studies. In their research, they found that a
saturation of themes occurs within the first 12 interviews. Interviews allow for a complete
understanding of faculty leaders’ experience with discipline-specific EDI measures and their
respective universities’ organizational culture and resource allocation models. The interviews
were conducted via computer-mediated communication using Zoom videoconferencing platform
(Zoom Video Communications Inc., 2020). As the COVID-19 crisis has led to widespread use of
this platform among higher education professionals in the United States (Chaka, 2020), it was a
natural choice for this stakeholder group. This platform also provided the transcription of the
interviews.
Interview Instrument
The primary data for the study was collected through semi-structured interviews
(Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). This approach allowed consistency while also providing the
flexibility necessary to explore relevant areas in greater depth, as necessary. The interviews
sought to gain a deeper understanding of faculty leaders’ perception of the progress made toward
the stakeholder goal of creating and implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan and
their perception of the influences that may be impacting their progress. A purposeful sampling
strategy was used to ensure an appropriate representation from private and public universities

54

with differing student demographics. The sample was purposefully chosen to include faculty
leaders who understand the work being done across their department or school. Interview
questions were created to derive an understanding of the progress made toward creating and
beginning to implement discipline-specific EDI initiatives and of the KMO influences on any
performance gaps in the area. This data collection focused on both above research questions.
Interview Protocol
As part of the semi-structured interview protocol, each participant was asked five
demographic questions followed by 13 interview questions. As is typical with semi-structured
interview protocol, follow-up questions were used to thoroughly examine emergent themes
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The 13 main interview questions were divided into areas that
addressed recent discipline-specific EDI initiatives, perceived faculty understanding of
discipline-specific EDI in education, faculty perception of the current state of their department or
school in terms of EDI, perceived faculty beliefs around the value of EDI initiatives, perceived
faculty beliefs about their ability to implement discipline-specific EDI initiatives, and perceived
organizational support of discipline-specific EDI initiatives. The interview questions were
designed to align with the categories of KMO influences found in Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap
analysis model. See Appendix B for the interview protocol.
Interview Procedures
The interviews were conducted in August and September 2021. Each interview lasted
between 60-120 minutes. The participants lived in various geographic areas across the United
States, so conducting the interviews via Zoom allowed convenient interaction with each
participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The Zoom interviews were recorded to allow full
participation in the discussion. The use of video cameras facilitated a natural conversation, but

55

only the transcriptions of the interviews were saved. Any names from the transcripts identifying
participants or their institutional affiliations were replaced with pseudonyms before analysis.
Zoom transcriptions were saved as password-protected files in Dropbox and were accessible on a
password-protected laptop. The video files were deleted as soon as the transcripts were
transferred to Dropbox.
Interview Sampling Criterion
The participants for the study were selected through a purposeful sampling and included
at least one faculty leader from each university theater department or school studied. The sample
group included department chairs, program directors, and deans. All participants also had
teaching duties in their department or school. The universities were chosen to reflect a broad
cross-section of public and private universities across the United States. The universities studied
are situated in different geographic areas and have varied student demographics. Participants
were recruited individually, and each were sent a personal message through their publicly
advertised university email address. Inclusion criteria for participation in the study are described
in Figure 2.

56

Figure 2
Inclusion Criteria

Interview Sampling Strategy and Rationale
Faculty leaders were identified as the most appropriate stakeholder group for interviews
based on their position in their respective department or school. Faculty leaders are active
teachers in the classroom, so they have a working knowledge of the curriculum and pedagogy.
At the same time, they represent their departments or schools in discussions with administration
and have direct experience with resource allocation processes at the university, school, and
department level. Due to their central role in the day-to-day workings of their department or

57

school, these individuals also have the most holistic understanding of the organizational culture
and of the work they and their colleagues may be doing to promote discipline-specific EDI.
Secondary Data Collection and Instrumentation
Secondary data was collected as a means of triangulating the findings collected in
interviews. This process allowed for the identification of themes in documents that confirmed
and elucidated information shared in interviews (Trochim, 2001). The secondary data collected
included previously generated materials consisting of both public-facing and internal documents
concerned with EDI within the participants’ respective universities. The process of collecting the
existing documents coincided with the interviews, as participants were invited to share relevant
materials. This study examined anti-racism statements, anti-racism action plans, and other
relevant personal documents provided by the interviewees or found on the institutions’ public
websites. No classified documents or personal records were used. These materials were
requested from all participants but were not required, as some of the institutions included in the
study did not have such documentation.
Existing Document Selection Criterion and Rationale
Secondary qualitative data were taken from existing public-facing and internal materials
concerning recent discipline-specific EDI initiatives that have taken place in the participants’
departments or schools. Some previously generated materials were collected directly from
participants, and others were taken from university websites. They included documents created
by the participants themselves, by their colleagues, and by their respective universities.
Classified documents and personal records were not included in the study, and all identifying
information was redacted from the materials. Existing documents that were selected include anti-

58

racism statements, anti-racism action plans, syllabi, and internal documents listing department or
school goals.
Existing Document Collection Procedures
The collection of previously generated materials coincided with the interview process. At
the end of each interview, participants were asked to share any relevant documents via email. In
addition, a single follow-up email was sent that thanked interviewees for their participation and
again asked them to email any relevant documents. The participants that mentioned documents
during their interview were explicitly asked for those documents in the email. In some cases,
participants described relevant materials that were later accessed from the affiliated university’s
website.
Data Analysis
Interview transcripts and previously generated materials were both coded for the study.
Multiple coding iterations were completed (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016) on each set of findings using Dedoose (Version 9.0.17), an online coding application. A
codebook developed before the interviews and refined through the process used a combination of
both a priori and open codes. The completed codes are displayed in the codebook in Appendix C.
The a priori codes were derived from Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model and were
analyzed through the lenses of CRT (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017), Krathwohl’s (2002)
dimensions of knowledge, social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1993), and organizational culture
(Schein, 2017). Open codes were created as themes emerged in the coding process. The first step
of that process involved an open coding of the interview transcripts and existing documents.
Then all interview transcripts were coded a second time, using the a priori codes. The next step
involved aggregating the a priori codes into axial codes. Finally, emergent themes and patterns

59

were coded in alignment with the conceptual framework. Patterns and themes were identified
when at least three interviewees shared similar responses to respective interview question(s) or
when at least three documents utilized similar language or concepts.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
The credibility and trustworthiness of the qualitative case study was maximized by
triangulating multiple data collection methods. In addition to conducting interviews, existing
materials were collected and analyzed. These included public-facing and internal documents
concerning EDI-focused initiatives that had recently taken place in the participants’ department
or school. The field study also used multi-site triangulation as the participants were chosen from
universities from various areas across the country (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Additionally, the
study contained a clear audit trail, including high-quality transcriptions, field notes, memos, and
data reconstruction to ensure confirmability. The transferability of the study was maintained by
focusing the interview questions on topics that are common to the field of theater in higher
education. As such, the study’s findings may be transferrable to theater and performing arts
departments or schools in other universities. Finally, as with any dissertation, this study
underwent peer review increasing its credibility. The dissertation committee consisted of
specialists in both theater and higher education leadership.
Ethics
Creswell and Creswell (2018) asserted that the trust of research participants must be
gained through maintaining integrity in the research. One fundamental way to do this is to
anticipate and address any potential ethical issues. As such, this study was conducted with the
following three ethical principles in mind: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. To that
end, protecting the participants from any adverse repercussions was a primary concern during the

60

study. The participants were made aware of the purpose of the study and of the voluntary nature
of their participation. Upon acceptance, each participant was sent a confirmation email that
contained the Information Sheet for Exempt Research, so they had the opportunity to review and
ask questions about the purpose of the study, confidentiality measures, and other details about
their participation (see Appendix D). Before beginning the interviews, each participant gave
verbal permission for the interview to be recorded. As a gesture of gratitude, $10 gift cards were
given to participants, but no other monetary incentive was offered.
Appropriate confidentiality measures were taken throughout the study to decrease any
potentially negative repercussions on the participants. The interview transcripts were edited with
pseudonyms for the institutions, the interviewees, and any other individuals mentioned during
the interviews by the participants. Any identifying information on the existing documents was
redacted or replaced with pseudonyms as necessary. No identifying information was divulged at
any point before, during, or after the study. Once transcripts and existing documents were edited
for confidentiality, they were saved as password-protected files in Dropbox and were accessible
on a password-protected laptop. All video recordings were deleted once transcriptions were
complete, and interviews were conducted in private to ensure that none of the participants knew
which other individuals were participating.
To ensure that the study adhered to ethical research principles, all guidelines for
protecting the rights and welfare of participants in research were followed. The Collaborative
Institute Training Initiative for Basic Human Research in Social-Behavioral Human Subjects was
completed, and the University of Southern California's Internal Review Board approved the
study before implementation of any study procedures.

61

Researcher Positionality
As a theater professor and department chair, I have been particularly interested in
studying the work being done to promote EDI in university theater departments and schools
across the country. My interest was heightened after I participated in a series of workshops on
ART in 2021 (Brewer, 2021a; Brewer, 2021b). Brewer’s (2021a; 2021b) workshops helped
elucidate some practical applications of the theoretical work in which I had previously engaged.
The workshops were empowering, and I began to engage more actively in change efforts in my
own institution. This interest led me to shape the study around the process of implementing
necessary and appropriate anti-racism initiatives in higher education.
I am a tenured professor, theater director, actor, and producer and was acknowledged as a
peer by study participants. I hold a Master of Theater Arts in Directing, which is comparable to
the MFA degree held by most of the study participants. My status as a married, cisgender,
heterosexual, middle-class, educated White woman affords me many privileges in my work as a
department chair, professor, and researcher. In addition, I have had the privilege of studying
performance traditions from multiple countries while living in Hawaiʻi and Aotearoa New
Zealand. While pursuing my bachelor’s degree in theater at the University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa,
I studied a wide range of theatrical traditions including Jingju, Noh, Kabuki, Kyogen,
Kutiyattam, Wayang Kulit, and Randai. I have also had multiple opportunities to train for
months at a time with master teachers from Japan and China. The first of these experiences was
when I worked as a costumer and toured to China with the 2002 traditional Jingju production of
Judge Bao and the Case of Qin Xianglian. The following year, I trained with master teachers
from Japan in preparation for my performance in a traditional Kabuki production of Nozaki
Village. In 2006, I trained with master teachers from China when I performed in a traditional

62

Jingju production of Women Generals of the Yang Family. Later, while pursuing my master’s
degree at Victoria University of Wellington and Toi Whakaari: New Zealand Drama School, I
had the privilege of studying a leadership model grounded in the Maori worldview and
collaborated with indigenous theater artists. All these experiences underscore the work I do
today. They have shown me the value of arts training that celebrates each artist’s ethnocultural
traditions and de-centers Whiteness in artistic and teaching practice.
I have been aware of the impact of my privileged training and experience as a White
woman on this study as I crafted parameters, conducted research, and analyzed results. To
mitigate the potential for bias, I kept a journal to record my thoughts during the interview
process. After each interview, I also engaged in metacognitive reflection to identify how my
personal experiences impacted my response to the interview findings.
Conclusion
This chapter described the methodology used to conduct the study. It included
discussions of the participating stakeholders, primary data collection, and instrumentation
(including the interview instrument, protocol, procedures, sampling criteria, and strategy). In
addition, the chapter detailed secondary data collection and instrumentation (including the
previously generated document instrumentation, criteria, and procedures). Finally, the chapter
discussed credibility and trustworthiness; and ethics (including researcher positionality). The
primary and secondary data for the study were collected simultaneously, with the primary data
being collected from qualitative interviews. These interviews were used to examine what work
theater faculty have been doing to promote discipline-specific EDI and what influences impacted
that work. Chapter Four will present and analyze the findings from the interviews and the
previously generated materials.

63

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this field study was to better understand the types of equity, diversity, and
inclusion (EDI) initiatives that university theater departments and schools across the country
have undertaken and to identify any gaps in knowledge, motivation, or organizational (KMO)
influences that may have impacted that work. Specifically, the study evaluated the degree to
which theater department or school faculty met the stakeholder goal to have created and begun
implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year.
The conceptual framework highlighted assumed influences in the areas of KMO support. The
assumed knowledge influences were the conceptual knowledge of how the principles of anti-
racism relate to theater training and practice and the procedural knowledge of how to apply anti-
racism in the context of theater training and practice. A review of the literature revealed that
these areas of conceptual and procedural knowledge are necessary for the implementation of
effective, discipline-specific EDI initiatives in university theater. The assumed motivational
influences were task value, self-efficacy, and goals. A review of the literature revealed that
considerable task value, high self-efficacy, and appropriate goal setting are positively correlated
with motivation. Finally, the assumed organizational influences included two cultural models:
the acknowledgment of structural racism in the institution and the acknowledgment that anti-
racism initiatives are necessary and one cultural setting: the organization must allocate the
resources necessary to create and implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans. A review of
the literature revealed that these supports are necessary for faculty leaders to affect the desired
organizational change. For the complete theoretical framework alignment matrix, see Appendix
A. For a diagram of the conceptual framework, see Figure 1. The conceptual framework helped
shape the following research questions:

64

1. In what ways, if any, are university theater departments and schools working to increase
EDI?
2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are impacting the promotion
of EDI in university theater departments and schools?
Description of the Participants
This study included 12 participants from different universities. The participants were
chosen to represent as many universities in various geographic regions in the United States as
possible, with no more than one university per state. The region with the most representation was
the Pacific region, with five universities. There was one university in the Midwest region and
two universities each from the Rocky Mountain, Northeast, and Southwest regions. The size of
the participant’s institutions varied with two small institutions (fewer than 5,000 students), six
mid-sized institutions (5-15,000 students), and four large institutions (greater than 15,000
students). Nine of the universities represented in the study were public institutions, one
university was a private secular institution, and the other two universities were private non-
secular institutions. Descriptions of the relevant university demographics are included in Table 4.

65

Table 4
University Demographics
Institution
pseudonym
Region Size of institution by
enrollment
Type of institution
University A Pacific Mid-sized Public
University B Pacific Mid-sized Public
University C Pacific Small Private, Secular
University D Midwest Large Public
University E Southeast Large Public
University F Rocky Mountain Mid-sized Public
University G Northeast Mid-sized Public
University H Rocky Mountain Mid-sized Public
University I Pacific Mid-sized Public
University J Southeast Large Public
University K Northeast Small Private, Non-Secular
University L Pacific Large Private, Non-Secular

Sample Group
The sample group included a single theater department or school leader from each of the
chosen universities. Eight of the participants were male, four were female. Out of the 12
participants, 10 identified as White, one identified as Mexican, and one identified as African
American. Two of the participants stated they would describe themselves primarily as White but
added that they also identify as European or European American. Each of the leaders have
terminal degrees in theater, with seven holding MFAs and five holding PhDs. They ranged from
39 to 64 years of age. There was a wide range in the amount of experience each participant had
in higher education. Two participants had 8 years of experience, four had between 12 and 15
years of experience, four had 19 or 20 years of experience, one had 25 years of experience, and
the final participant had between 34 years of experience. There were commonalities in the length
of time each participant has served in their leadership role. Nine participants had served in their
leadership role for fewer than 5 years, two had served in their leadership role for 6 to10 years,

66

and the final participant had served in their leadership role for approximately 19 years.
Descriptions of the participants are illustrated in Table 5.

Table 5
Participant Demographics
Institution
pseudonym
Participant
pseudonym
Age Gender
identity
Ethnicity Highest
degree
earned
Years in
higher
ed.
Years
as
leader
University A Dr. Arnold 43 Male W Ph.D. 8 2.5
University B Dr. Becker 57 Male W, E Ph.D. 20 2
University C Prof. Campbell 56 Male W MFA 25 9
University D Dr. Darby 44 Female W Ph.D. 13 1
University E Dr. Elek 64 Male W, E Ph.D. 34 8
University F Prof. Fisher 39 Male W MFA 13 3
University G Prof. Graham 49 Female W MFA 12 <1
University H Prof. Harrison 47 Female W MFA 20 3
University I Dr. Ingram 48 Male W Ph.D. 15 1
University J Prof. Jiménez 42 Male M MFA 8 3
University K Prof. Kepler 62 Male W MFA 19 19
University L Prof. Lewis 49 Female A MFA 20 4
A=African American, E= European, M=Mexican, W=White

67

Participant Biographies
Each of the 12 participants discussed how their identity has impacted the work they had
been doing promoting EDI. This section honors that discussion by providing short biographies
for each participant. These participants were chosen based on their leadership roles within each
of their respective departments or schools. Descriptions provided below have been edited to
depict the individuality of each participant while maintaining confidentiality. All names have
been replaced with pseudonyms and some details have been omitted. Pseudonyms were chosen
to correlate with their university alias, so each participant’s pseudonym begins with the affiliated
university letter.
Dr. Arnold
Dr. Arnold reported being involved in theater since he was a child when his mother
started him in acting classes. He eventually went on to study British Theatre and earned a
master’s degree abroad, followed by a Ph.D. back in the United States. Dr. Arnold identified
himself as a 43-year-old gay White man who had been teaching theater in higher education since
2013. He had served as chair of the Department of Theatre and Dance at University A for a little
over 2 1/2 years. University A is a public, mid-sized, predominantly white institution (PWI) in
the Pacific Region. The university administration had recently informed Dr. Arnold that at least
one of the theater degree tracks in his department is being canceled, due to budgetary concerns.
Since the notification, Dr. Arnold had been leading his department in efforts to appeal that
decision. He also shared that the experience of having depression, post-traumatic stress disorder,
and anxiety had shaped some of his focus in the classroom saying,
So, this is becoming a more emerging interest of mine. I've been gay my entire life, so it's
just always been there. I don't know how much it affects my work. . . . I tend toward

68

shows where there is some aspect of sexuality that's in question or gender or something
like that . . . the other part of my identity, which I don't think I would have claimed a year
ago, is very significant depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and anxiety. And so,
those have become, along with other sort of invisible disabilities like ADHD and, you
know, a whole host of others. Like that's become my new sort of interest and focus, not in
terms of research but just in terms of paying attention to students and seeing where they
are, you know, because I know what a day when you’re super depressed and you can
barely get out of bed and show up at school looks like.
Dr. Becker
Dr. Becker has a Ph.D. and over 20 years of experience teaching theater at University B,
a public, mid-sized university in the Pacific Region with a diverse student population. He
identified himself as a 57-year-old “White, straight male from Europe.” Dr. Becker had previous
experience serving in university leadership roles but had been serving in his current position as
chair of the Department of Theatre and Dance at University B for a little over 2 years. Like Dr.
Arnold, Dr. Becker had also been informed by his university’s administration that at least one of
the theater degree tracks in his department would need to be cancelled, due to budgetary
concerns. As such, he had been leading his department in efforts to submit counter proposals that
would allow them to continue supporting students in their academic pursuits. He noted,
When I became chair 2 years ago, none of these problems were yet in the making. And,
you know, last year felt like ‘oh god you know here I am’. You know, a white, straight
male from Europe, running a department that is kind of trying to become more diverse.
You know trying to decolonize its structured curriculum and season planning. So that has
been an issue because . . . when the person on top of the hierarchy basically within that

69

department represents the opposite of what this department is actually trying to achieve. .
. . Of course, also another side to the coin, which is because I perhaps represent the more
problematic identity, I may in many ways, within the larger administrative frame, be in a
better position to actually introduce some of those changes.
Professor Campbell
Professor Campbell began performing in theater when he was a very young child. He
went on to earn a Master of Fine Arts with a specialization in one of the theater areas and had
been teaching theater in higher education for about 25 years. He identified himself as a 56-year-
old White “cis gay male” and emphasized his Catholic faith’s importance in his identity.
Professor Campbell had previous experience serving in university leadership roles but had been
in his current position as Director of the Theatre Program at University C for more than 9 years.
University C is a small, private, secular PWI in the Pacific Region. He shared,
I was raised Catholic. And so, you know just being a gay Catholic and being embraced
[by the university] community [makes me] feel very much at home. I love teaching . . . at
a much smaller institution. It's way more personal. I get to know my students so much
better than at a large university and we really can sit down and talk about challenging
things and do one-on-ones with them and it feels like a much better use of my talent and
my calling as a teacher to be at this small university.
Dr. Darby
Dr. Darby earned a Master of Arts, a Master of Fine Arts, and a Ph.D., with most of her
scholarship focused on intercultural performance. She had been teaching theater in higher
education for about 13 years and had spent a little over a year as Chair of the Department of
Theatre and Dance at University D, a large, public, PWI in the Midwest. She identified herself as

70

a 44-year-old White woman and, when asked which aspects of her identity most impact her
work, she discussed being a woman and a mother. She noted that working from home during the
COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on her professional interactions as well. She said,
I've never been more sort of aware of my status as a woman, I never felt more treated like
a woman than I have in the last year, which I think says something, you know, about
women in leadership. Up until this past year, I wouldn't have said that my female-
presenting identity is a big part of who I am, but now it feels as though the world reads
me that way. And it might also be that you know having worked from home for over a
year and having my children constantly in the mix, like very visibly in the mix, that that's
been an interesting piece of the puzzle . . . I think that those interactions expose an
unconscionable, like astronomically huge bias. And it's a bias against women, against you
know conventionally female-associated types of communication. I think it's a bias against
parents . . . I want this to be a different story. I want the story to be all about, you know,
sort of succeeding no matter what and all that kind of stuff and I feel like we've done
amazing things the past year.
Dr. Elek
Dr. Elek earned two terminal degrees in different areas of theater—a Master of Fine Arts
and a doctorate. He has been teaching theater at University E, a large, public PWI in the
Southeast Region, for over 34 years and had served as chair of the drama department for over 8
years. He identified himself as a 64-year-old White male and discussed details about his father’s
emigration from Europe before he was born. Dr. Elek also described how his childhood travels
around the world with his family impacted his later research interests saying,

71

My dad had emigrated to the states from [Europe]. . . . He spoke about eight languages,
including two dead ones (Latin and ancient Greek). And my mom is . . . Brooklyn Jewish
and grew up speaking Yiddish as her first language. So, it was very important to both of
my parents that. . . . I knew at least one other language. They didn't care what it was . . .
So, I was always very interested in international education. . . . My area of expertise is
Latin American and Latina Latino Latinx Theater and Performance.
Professor Fisher
Professor Fisher held a Master of Fine Arts with a specialization in one of the theater
areas and had been teaching theater in higher education for about 13 years. He identified himself
as a 39-year-old “White gay male” and shared that his early research interests centered around
the presentation of gay men in performance. Professor Fisher had previous experience serving in
university leadership roles but had been serving in the position of Director of the School of
Theatre and Dance at University F for about 3 years. University F is a mid-sized, public PWI in
the Rocky Mountain Region. He shared,
I'm a white gay male in the theater, so I don't know if I count as a diversity hire. There's
plenty of us out there, but it is an important part of who I am. . . . a lot of my research
work in voice and speech was in the area of “sissy speak” and the way that gay men are
presented. It's a research interest that I realized a lot of other people had and so I
abandoned it pretty quickly after I realized I was barking up a well-barked tree. . . . I
would say all aspects of my identity [impact my work] but you know being a gay man in
the Mountain West, even in a place like [this] which is very liberal. I spend a lot of time
thinking about how that affects me as a faculty member and how it affects the students I
have . . . But like I said, being a white male, I think I have a lot of responsibility to also

72

make room for other voices. Even just being part of the, you know, dominant majority
that tends to rule the roost around here, there comes responsibility with that, to make
room, and to step back.
Professor Graham
Professor Graham earned a Master of Fine Arts in one of the fields of theater and had
been teaching theater in higher education for about 12 years. At the time of the interview, she
had just begun serving as Chair of the Department of Theatre at University G, a mid-sized,
public university in the Northeast with a diverse student population. She identified herself as a
49-year-old White woman and shared that she had been the first woman to hold her position at
University G. When asked which aspects of her identity most impact her work, she discussed
being a woman and an ally. She also noted that University G has a predominantly BIPOC student
population and discussed how that impacts her role as an ally. She noted,
I think obviously being a woman and trying . . . to pay attention to under-representation,
both as a feminist and as somebody who is a queer ally. And increasingly because of my
student population, learning more and more every year, about being, you know, an anti-
racist BIPOC ally and what that really means. Not just, you know, talking the talk, but
actually looking at decolonizing . . . white academia.
Professor Harrison
Professor Harrison holds a Master of Fine Arts with a specialization in one of the theater
areas and had been teaching theater in higher education for about 20 years. She identified herself
as a 47-year-old White woman and shared that she had been serving in the position of Theatre
Department Chair at University H for about 3 years. University H is a mid-sized, public PWI in
the Rocky Mountain Region. Professor Harrison shared,

73

I think that I identify as being an artist. Someone who cares about artistic endeavors. For
me, it's not really about, um, I don't know, I might jumble how I say this but for me it's
not, if you're a man or a woman or, you know, non-gendered. And, and to some people, I
think that matters a great deal, but for me I just love artists and love to communicate and
work with people of all aspects to make artistic projects. . . . I think, ultimately, anyone
can have any idea. And it's more about a variety of people, regardless of what they are,
who they are, what they believe. . . . I don't care what skin color you are, I don't care what
you identify with, as she, him, they. You can bring it, and it won't diminish your art. Like
me personally, I identify with she/her. You know, but that's, that's my philosophy.
Dr. Ingram
Dr. Ingram’s highest degree is a Ph.D. with a focus on theater studies. He identified
himself as a 48-year-old “White, cisgender, male” and shared that he had been teaching theater
in higher education for about 15 years. For the previous year, he had been serving as chair of the
Department of Theatre and Dance at University I, a public, mid-sized PWI in the Pacific Region.
When asked about his identity, Dr. Ingram discussed the ways in which his identity and
upbringing in a small town impacted his professional interests noting
I don't know that they most impact my work, but I'm a white cisgender male. So that's the
lens that I see the world through and that’s certainly been a big part of my life journey
and education. I think one of the reasons why I teach college is I was also raised in a
small farming community in [the Midwest]. So, learning that most of what I was taught
as a young person was not true and being exposed to playwrights like August Wilson and
Wendy Wasserstein and Larry Kramer etc. changed my life, and I think that's one of the

74

reasons why I found my way to higher ed to introduce other students to those playwrights
and other amazing newer playwrights.
Professor Jiménez
Professor Jiménez earned a Master of Fine Arts in a theater field and had spent the last 8
years teaching theater at University J, a large, public PWI in the Southeast Region. He had
served as chair of the theater department for about 3 years. He identified himself as a 42-year-old
Mexican male and discussed details about his heritage. Professor Jiménez also described how his
upbringing had impacted his work in academia as he said,
I mean from a background standpoint, we'll start specifically with, you know, race and
ethnicity. So, I am Mexican. I grew up in a household with a Mexican mother and a
Caucasian father. And so, in a lot of ways, I identify through things that I do with that
kind of Mexican and Hispanic culture because, while I'm Mexican, I have a more
Hispanic, Cuban, Spanish, you know, descent. So also culturally, that's how I was really
brought up—being close to my mother and my grandmother and my family, that sort of
thing. So that's how I was brought up, so work ethic is really part of that, and you know
culturally—pleasing people, pleasing people that's what we do. . . . Seeing that growing
up impacts how I work a lot today. Culturally, I’m very, you know, probably more
relationship-based than task-based, but for me personally because I love to work and love
tasks, it's probably 50/50. But also in work ethic . . . in wanting to go to work and do the
things that we need to do to serve my community or my communities as well.
Professor Kepler
Professor Kepler worked in the theater industry before returning to graduate school where
he earned a Master of Fine Arts with a specialization in one of the theater areas. He has nearly 20

75

years of experience serving as a leader at University K, a small, private, non-secular PWI in the
Northeast Region. Professor Kepler described himself as a 62-year-old “cisgender, heterosexual,
white male” and, when asked about how his identity impacts his work, he discussed his
intersectional privilege saying,
I'm a cisgender, heterosexual, white male from a background of considerable economic
and class privilege and although I am not a practicing Christian, I can pass for one. . . .
I'm keenly aware that my own lived experience is refracted through that privilege and
supported by that privilege, all the time, to this day, and my positional power in the
institution simply magnifies that. So, in some ways, I'm grossly unqualified and in other
ways, because of my positional power, I'm useful.
Professor Lewis
Professor Lewis also earned a Master of Fine Arts with a specialization in one of the
theater areas and had kept active in the theater industry throughout her career in academia. She
had nearly 20 years of experience teaching in higher education and more than 4 years of
experience as a leader at University L, a large, private, non-secular PWI in the Pacific Region.
Professor Lewis described herself as a 49-year-old African American woman and emphasized
the importance of her identity in the work she does. She shared,
As an African American . . . and as a cisgender woman, you know, I would say that those
two identities in particular are very much salient and are kind of how I move through the
world. . . . Particularly because, you know, one of the things that really inspired me to
want to teach—I was very fortunate to have mentors and people that really poured into
me throughout my educational journey, you know K through 12 and undergrad and even
in my graduate dynamic. But what I saw and witnessed in every rung of that educational

76

journey is that I was few and far between. People that looked like me, were few and far
between. And so, for me in this work, I just really want to be a mirror for students and
colleagues . . . and the other part is a window. Right. So just my very presence in the
room in the space, in the meeting . . . it is a sphere of influence that I take very seriously.
Not because of some kind of power grab dynamic, but because it's another diverse point
of view and perspective that can have a value-add into whatever conversation is
happening, or into whatever decision that is being made . . . in terms of formulating or
shaping policy.
Findings Pertaining to Research Question One
The first research question was this: In what ways, if any, are university theater
departments and schools working to increase EDI? This section includes a discussion of the
attainment of the stakeholder goal and an overview of the anti-racism initiatives university
theaters and schools have implemented. Finally, this section concludes with an analysis of
previously generated materials.
Attainment of Stakeholder Goal
The assumed stakeholder goal that guided the study was this: By the end of the 2020-
2021 academic year, theater department or school faculty will create and begin implementation
of a discipline-specific EDI action plan. All interviews took place in August and September of
2021, allowing participants the full academic year to achieve that goal. Six out of 12 participants
reported that they had not achieved the assumed stakeholder goal of creating an EDI action plan
in the 2020-2021 academic year. Although they used differing verbiage to describe their plans,
the other six detailed the creation or update of some type of plan and shared details about how
they had begun instituting that plan. Professor Kepler, Professor Lewis, and Dr. Elek each

77

described extensive plans for their departments and schools and shared that their schools would
be creating program-specific action plans in addition to the school-wide plan. Professor Lewis
shared that the program-specific plans “will actually be a part of our revised strategic plan.”
Dr. Becker shared that his department had created an EDI Action Plan that included a
complete overhaul of their season selection process and a department-wide focus on
decolonizing syllabi. He noted that they had already begun instituting the changes. Similarly,
Professor Campbell explained that his department quickly instituted their strategic plan. He said,
“We do have a strategic plan that came out from those three workshops that we underwent, and
part of that strategic plan is we have a handbook that we are writing now.”
Dr. Darby discussed the significant and immediate impact of her department’s action
plan. She said, “One of the immediate action items was the development of . . . a Student
Advocacy Council. . . . [It’s] a change in the hierarchy . . . that's the biggest thing. . . . it goes
back to that idea of . . . partnership between the faculty and the students.” She also highlighted
the significance of the one-year anniversary of their action plan saying, “one of the things that
we're doing [for] our one-year anniversary of having made the statement and having made the
Student Advocacy Council . . . is putting together a video of sort of what did we do last year.”
Anti-Racism Initiatives in University Theater Training
The anti-racism initiatives described by study participants can be organized into five
categories as described by the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers in their open letter, BIPOC
Demands for White American Theatre (2020b). Those categories are inclusive artistic practices,
cultural competency in teaching, representation and support of BIPOC faculty and staff,
representation and support of BIPOC students, and fiscal transparency and accountability. Most
of the initiatives discussed were in the categories of inclusive artistic practices and increased

78

cultural competency in teaching. Fewer solutions were offered in the categories of representation
and support of BIPOC faculty and staff and representation and support of BIPOC students, even
though many of the participants expressed goals in those areas. The final category of fiscal
transparency and accountability yielded the fewest responses in general. An overview of the anti-
racism initiatives described by the participants follows.
Inclusive Artistic Practices
The first set of initiatives shared by participants in the category of inclusive artistic
practices had to do with the institution of new processes focused on increasing inclusion in
decision-making. Out of 12 participants, 10 discussed the institution of such processes. Those
participants offered descriptions of a range of initiatives including institution of what they called
town hall meetings, listening sessions, community meetings, discipline-specific EDI committees,
and inclusion of students in some faculty meetings. Dr. Darby emphasized that “it goes back to
the idea of partnership. It's only through partnership with the faculty and partnership between the
faculty and the students that we will be able to solve these problems.” The committees and
general gatherings described were all created with the goal of building these partnerships as
described by Dr. Darby and of amplifying the voices of BIPOC students, faculty, and staff in the
decision-making process. Participants also discussed diversifying existing decision-making
bodies based on self-defined ethnocultural identity. Dr. Elek shared that his department has now
been “actively trying to make each creative team (designers, as well as director, and/or
playwright) 50% BIPOC.”
The second set of initiatives shared by participants in the category of inclusive artistic
practices had to do with the institution of updated season selection and casting processes. The
ultimate goals of these initiatives have been to decenter and deprivilege White narratives and

79

provide equitable opportunities for BIPOC students. Out of 12 participants, 10 discussed ways
they had been adapting their protocol to ensure inclusive artistic practices in the selection of their
production season and in their casting. Professor Campbell discussed increased inclusion in his
department’s play selection process saying, “up until last year, students were not asked to be on
the play selection committee. It was held by one person. . . . When that person stepped out, we
brought in students to voice what they wanted to do.” Dr. Becker and Professor Harrison also
described the adoption of more egalitarian play selection processes that shifted the decision from
being the sole responsibility of the directors to being a decision made by committee. They
described conflict in their respective season selection committees when proposed plays were
identified as being problematic based on the principles of anti-racism. Despite the conflict, both
Dr. Becker and Professor Harrison shared that the committee practices were upheld, and the
proposed plays were not included in the production seasons.
In addition to the initiatives described around season selection processes, all 12 of the
participants described the goal of diversifying the production arms of their department or school.
Dr. Ingram described the progression of an initiative they had instituted approximately 5 years
earlier saying,
We as a faculty also voted . . . [deciding that] one of our five mainstage production slots
would always have an EDI focus. . . . We're now getting to the place where we don't need
to talk about that in terms of our show selection . . . that's just the norm now—and not
one of five, but now multiples out of the five.
Similarly, Dr. Elek described a new initiative in his department saying that “50% of our seasons
are going to either be written, directed, and/or created by women and people of color.” Dr.
Becker also described a type of quota system that established genre and EDI expectations in the

80

annual rotation of plays. Two participants, Professor Harrison and Professor Jiménez, described
the creation of BIPOC playwright festivals aimed at offering opportunities outside the tradition
season of plays.
In the area of culturally appropriate casting, participants discussed the importance of both
providing ethnoculturally appropriate roles for students and casting roles with actors who share
the ethnocultural identity of the character. One participant, Professor Jiménez, described an
initiative to clarify the ways in which directors in his department would be engaging in culturally
appropriate casting. He said, “I basically made all of the directors write an EDI statement
concerning casting for their show and we published those when we announced the season.”
Professor Fisher shared another initiative aimed at updating casting practices. He described his
department’s new practice of excusing students from the traditional requirement of accepting any
role. Rather, students were invited to declare interest in particular roles based on their
understanding of how the character aligned with the various aspects of their own identities.
Professor Fisher noted that this new practice empowered students and acknowledged the power
actors should have to choose how they are being represented.
Cultural Competency in Teaching
Out of 12 participants, 10 discussed initiatives they enacted to decolonize or diversify the
curriculum in their department or school. The most common initiative in this area was the
updating of course-level syllabi. Specifically, participants described decentering the work of
White artists by increasing the numbers of BIPOC playwrights and non-Western performance
texts in the syllabi. The changes discussed were primarily made in theater appreciation, history,
theory, and criticism courses. Other participants discussed pedagogical shifts. Professor Kepler
noted that “it's not just my syllabus. It's my checking in with students. It's not just what I'm

81

teaching, it's teaching it to the person who's right in front of me.” He also emphasized the need
for pedagogical approaches that are responsive to the heightened needs of some students. He
shared,
I think students are experiencing harm. I think students have been experiencing harms
here for decades and decades. And the good news is we're hearing more about them in
real time and because of that we're able to prevent some and mitigate others and
apologize for them. But, you know, it's still a predominantly white institution and there
are still costs being paid by really, you know, people who have been marginalized before
they got [to the university], are still experiencing marginalization, including faculty
members.
Similarly, Professor Lewis shared that she had instituted curriculum and pedagogy updates that
went beyond the decision of whose work was presented in the reading. For her, decolonizing the
curriculum required pedagogical shifts that altered the way she approached the work with
students. She described encouraging students to approach their study through the lens of personal
identity and emphasized the importance of inviting dialogue about the “contextualization of the
time period, the history, the culture, the social, political, you know landscape that the story is
situated within.” Five out of 12 participants discussed the institution of more broad program
updates in which they diversified curriculum for multiple classes in the degree track, created new
courses in non-Western theater techniques, or combined degree tracks so that study of
exclusively Eurocentric theater was no longer an option.
Other initiatives in the area of cultural competency included the institution of intimacy
training, limiting student time commitments (i.e. discontinuing the practice of “10 out of 12”
technical rehearsals or establishing a limited schedule for classes and rehearsals to ensure

82

students have time for self-care) and ongoing training from outside consultants. Out of 12
participants, 11 discussed departmental or school-wide participation in EDI or anti-racism
trainings. Six of those described attending theater-specific anti-racism trainings with five
mentioning Nicole Brewer’s workshops specifically.
Representation and Support of BIPOC Faculty and Staff
Nine out of 12 participants shared a personal or departmental goal to increase BIPOC
faculty and staff while only four described initiatives they had instituted to update recruitment
and hiring practices. Two of the initiatives shared involved establishing expectations for levels of
diversity on the search committees and in the finalist groups. Dr. Elek described that “if we don't
have at least one woman, one person of color in our group of finalists, that's a failed search. So,
it’s about representation.” Similarly, Professor Kepler described a focus on the makeup of their
search committees saying, “all of our search committees are at least 50% BIPOC faculty.”
Professor Lewis described a university-level initiative that led to the creation of completely new
teaching lines with the express purpose of increasing BIPOC representation among the faculty.
Only one participant, Professor Kepler, discussed an initiative aimed at supporting BIPOC
faculty once they had been hired. He described the institution of a new faculty reception as a first
step toward more effective onboarding and nurturing a sense of belonging in new faculty.
Representation and Support of BIPOC Students
Out of 12 participants, 10 discussed the desire to increase the proportion of BIPOC
students in their programs. Three of those shared details about updates they had made to
recruiting practices. Dr. Darby focused on the importance of building relationships with
prospective students and shared that she saw an increase in BIPOC applicants after one of their
Black faculty members began attending recruiting events. Professor Lewis said that the school

83

covers partial travel costs for applicants who can’t afford to visit the school for their audition.
Professor Campbell shared that his department had begun more pointed advertising that
highlighted the financial support offered by the university. He described,
[We] really are starting to focus more on identifying those, you know, students of need
or those that may dismiss this university as an option because it is about $60,000 a year to
come here. So, I think the percentage is 99% of the students who are on this campus get
some sort of scholarship or some sort of help with that.
In addition to his description of the way in which they advertise student funding opportunities,
Professor Campbell was one of two participants to connect financial assistance with overall
student support. Three other participants described BIPOC student support initiatives not
connected to funding including extensive Welcome Week onboarding events, ongoing affinity
groups, student advocacy groups, and the creation of safe anonymous reporting protocol.
Fiscal Transparency and Accountability
Relatively few respondents discussed fiscal transparency and accountability, but those
who did shared clear initiatives they had instituted in the area. Two participants shared that their
universities had created of new positions for theater-specific work in EDI, including roles at the
level of Dean and Consultant. Four participants discussed initiatives to ensure the equitable
compensation of BIPOC faculty and staff who take on extra work mentoring BIPOC students or
serving on committees. Professor Kepler said,
We give people bigger raises. You know, if we're doing, you know, two and a half or
three percent, then a BIPOC faculty member who's also serving on committees is
probably going to see three and a half or four percent.

84

Another participant discussed embedding EDI work in the tenure and promotion review process
and two others shared new equitable funding allocation models for programs that primarily serve
BIPOC students.
One participant, Professor Fisher, shared that he would be taking a significant sum of
money from the department’s general fund to create a new EDI Fund. He also described his
intent to contribute a percentage of all revenue to that EDI Fund moving forward. He called this
a reparation tax and shared that
It's putting our money where our mouths and hearts are. . . . We're at the reparation
stage—repairing something that we broke. And part of it is acknowledging that we
played a role in the breaking of it. Even if we weren't intentional about it. We've all
participated in this system and benefited from it.
Professor Fisher noted that he was in the early stages of putting his plan into action and
acknowledged that he still needed to work out the details. When asked about the potential ways
in which the funds could be used, he said,
I want to make sure [BIPOC students] have a performance opportunity, so I’ll hire a
playwright of color who can write an original play. . . . I could commission new work. I
could hire a [BIPOC] guest artist to play a role that we can't cast. I could create a
scholarship to find a student at another university who's interested in studying with us for
a semester. . . . Hiring a designer of color.
Discussion of Previously Generated Materials
Three of the six participants who indicated they had action plans shared these documents.
Dr. Becker shared his Department Action Plan and a draft of their New Season Planning
Guidelines. Professor Campbell shared his department’s DEI Theater Strategic Plan and a list of

85

faculty commitments around promoting DEI. Dr. Elek shared his Department Accountability
Statement. The documents shared all align with and confirm the descriptions made by the
participants during their interviews. Attainment of the stakeholder goal by each participant is
illustrated in Table 6.

Table 6
Attainment of Stakeholder Goal
Participant
pseudonym
Described
action
plan in
interview
Type of document Materials shared
to confirm
Dr. Arnold no - -
Dr. Becker yes Action Plan yes
Prof. Campbell yes Theater-Specific Strategic Plan yes
Dr. Darby yes Action Plan no
Dr. Elek yes Step-by-Step Accountability Statement yes
Prof. Fisher no - -
Prof. Graham no - -
Prof. Harrison no - -
Dr. Ingram no - -
Prof. Jiménez no - -
Dean Kepler yes Five-Year Plan no
Dean Lewis yes EDI Action Plan
(Program-Specific Plans in Progress)
no

86

After identifying language had been removed from the documents, the remaining
language within each action plan was used to create a single word cloud. This image was created
to reflect the relative frequency of the language used in the action plans. Figure 3 reflects the
common verbiage used, with the size of the word displayed corresponding to the relative
frequency.

Figure 3
Action Plan Word Cloud

87

Findings Pertaining to Research Question Two
The second research question was this: What KMO influences are impacting the
promotion of EDI in university theater departments and schools? Eight themes around KMO
influences emerged to address this research question. The knowledge themes that emerged to
address whether participants had conceptual and procedural understanding of anti-racism as
applied to theater were organized based on the principles described by the Community of BIPOC
Theatremakers in their open letter, BIPOC Demands for White American Theatre (2020b).
Those principles were inclusive artistic practices, cultural competency in teaching, representation
and support of BIPOC faculty and staff, and representation and support of BIPOC students. The
motivation themes that emerged were task value, self-efficacy, and goals. The organizational
influence themes that emerged were organizational culture and resource allocation. There was no
document analysis for this research question.
Findings Validation
The assumed KMO influences identified in Chapter Two were used to interpret interview
findings. Each of the assumed influences were validated or not validated based on the findings.
A gap was validated if at least 50% (six) of the respondents demonstrated a need in that area and
the validation indicates that improvement in the area is a high priority. A gap was not validated if
more than 50% of the participants (seven) have the KMO support necessary. In those cases, the
area is considered an asset and is not considered a high priority in the field. In these cases,
recommendations are still offered for universities that wish to maintain the asset. Table 7
summarizes the KMO influences that were either validated as a gap or identified as an asset in
faculty leaders’ efforts to promote EDI in their theater departments and schools.

88

Table 7
Summary of Results of KMO Influences
Type Knowledge Gap / Asset
Conceptual Faculty leaders need to
understand how the principles
of anti-racism relate to theater
training and practice.
Gap
Procedural Faculty leaders need to
understand how to apply anti-
racism in the context of
theater training and practice.
Gap
Motivation
Task Value Faculty leaders must believe
there is value in creating and
implementing an EDI Action
Plan.
Asset
Self-Efficacy Faculty leaders need to
believe they can create and
implement an EDI Action
Plan.
Asset
Goals Faculty leaders need to have
goals to create and implement
an EDI Action Plan.
Asset
Organizational influence
Cultural Model The organizational culture
must acknowledge that
systemic racism is present in
the institution.
Gap
Cultural Model The organizational culture
must acknowledge that anti-
racism initiatives are
necessary.
Asset
Cultural Setting The organization must
allocate the resources
necessary to create and
implement discipline-specific
EDI Action Plans.
Gap

Knowledge Findings
Participants’ knowledge of how the principles of anti-racism relate to theater training and
practice was examined through their rote definitions of EDI as applied to theater education, their

89

direct discussion of anti-racism in theater, and their descriptions of EDI initiatives they had led in
their departments and schools. The findings demonstrated that all participants were familiar with
some ways in which the principles of anti-racism can be applied to theater. The degree of
familiarity varied, however, with seven of the 12 participants conveying limited conceptual
understanding of anti-racism in theater and insufficient procedural knowledge of how to
implement anti-racism in the context of theater training and practice. As such, gaps around both
conceptual and procedural knowledge were validated. The evidence of conceptual and
procedural knowledge is closely intertwined, so findings are discussed in conjunction. The
knowledge themes that emerged to address whether participants had conceptual and procedural
understanding of anti-racism as applied to theater were organized based on the principles
described by the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers in their open letter, BIPOC Demands for
White American Theatre (2020b). Those principles were inclusive artistic practices, cultural
competency in teaching, representation and support of BIPOC faculty and staff, and
representation and support of BIPOC students. A discussion of each of those emergent themes
follows.
Inclusive Artistic Practices
The first principle of anti-racism in theater that surfaced as a theme was inclusive artistic
practices. Out of 12 participants, 10 demonstrated clear conceptual understanding of inclusive
artistic practices while discussing ways they had been adapting their protocol in the selection of
their production season and in their casting. These participants described the importance of
culturally appropriate casting in terms of both providing appropriate roles for students and
casting roles with actors who share the ethnocultural identity of the character. Only two out of
the 12 participants discussed casting practices in a way that was not supported by the literature

90

on CRT. Professor Harrison described frustration with the premise that White actors should not
play characters from BIPOC communities. She also discussed the conflict in her department over
the choice to produce a play requiring BIPOC actors, despite their very low numbers of BIPOC
students saying,
It is . . . partly because the entertainment industry is saying this is what we should do. We
will never do the show again unless we have this type of person playing that role. And so,
these faculty are like, “Not unless hell burns over.” And then these people are saying,
“We're, look at where we live. We're never going to get to do that show unless we have—
where are we going to get these people? So, we are just never going to get to do that
show ever again in our life?” And they're heartbroken because they love the show. And
so, I struggle with that. . . . I see both sides of the fence and me personally, I feel like—If
there is absolutely no other option, me personally, I don't want to miss doing the show.
Similarly, Dr. Arnold demonstrated a lack of understanding of culturally appropriate casting
processes in his discussion of one of his Southeast Asian students. He described how the
student’s heavy accent was a problem that required special accommodations other students do
not typically need. Dr. Arnold shared that this student ultimately stopped acting to instead focus
on directing. He described this shift as a positive outcome saying,
She had a really thick accent. And so, like, the first show she was in, I really worked on
voice, really worked on pronunciation, and even then, we were worried we might have to
give her a mic, you know, unlike everybody else. Um, and so, but that improved over
time. And what she discovered was that, while she likes performing, she actually is a
director. I think once she figured that out, things shifted for her. . . . But I could see her
saying like, you know, she didn't get all the same kind of roles because, you know, she

91

doesn't talk like a white person, she doesn't look like a white person, you know. That's
not the kind of person she is, but I think it would be a fair thing to say.
The remaining 10 participants discussed the importance of inclusive artistic practices and
described ways in which they had been working to update their departments’ casting processes.
Professor Fisher discussed the importance of appropriate casting in terms of the way in which
characters represent certain demographics of people on stage. He also addressed the way in
which that depiction impacts the student actor cast in the role when he said,
One thing that came out of that was we changed our casting and audition policies, and we
got rid of all the old, “You will accept any role?” . . . We’re allowing students to submit
themselves for roles, so that we aren’t asking, “Are you gay?” “Are you a woman?” “Are
you non-binary?” Like students declared their interest and we trusted them to put
themselves forward and then it was up to us to decide, “Okay, is this acceptable and
appropriate?” So, it was a change that I think was important because all of a sudden, if a
student was uncomfortable about the way a character represented their identity, they
could say, “This is not something that I'm comfortable with.” And . . . I feel like it took
away some of the stigma in our casting policies. That any job was important and that the
way a piece of art makes you feel is important and that, you know, it took away a level of
abuse to the system that we had just accepted as tradition.
Despite their discussions of the importance of inclusive artistic practices, six of the 12
participants shared that they did not know how to provide culturally appropriate roles for all their
students or how to consistently cast the appropriate person in each role. In a description of his
department’s casting practices, Professor Fisher illustrated the challenge of trying to find roles
that he felt could be played by BIPOC actors. Some variation of this process was also described

92

by Dr. Arnold, Dr. Elek, Dr. Ingram, Professor Jiménez, and Professor Kepler. Professor Fisher
said,
And, I mean, I became the people that disappointed me when I was in undergrad. . . . We
do this, the usual song and dance of finding roles that we can put them into that will
work, or they're the first that get a call if there's a play that just happens to have a role that
works for them.
Professor Jiménez was another of the six participants who shared frustration with not knowing
how to provide culturally appropriate roles for his students, despite his understanding of the
importance. He discussed having a small percentage of students from Asian and Pacific Islander
communities and was unsure of how to provide roles that enable these students to play characters
that share their specific race and ethnicity. He said,
We have about 150 undergraduate majors in theater. We have three students who identify
as Asian Pacific Islander and it’s extremely difficult for us to find a show where we can
serve them in a role that they can play their identity. So, their race and ethnicity. So, it’s a
challenge, I mean from an education, higher education standpoint, that's really hard for
us. . . . One of our Asian students was like, “Well, what are you doing for me?” When I
push back, she's like, “I'm really proud and happy we're doing this, but you're not serving
me.” Which I have . . . three Asian students and we have roles you can play throughout
the season, but yes, I understand that we're not addressing you culturally in the season
this year. So, but how do you address every culture and every season—in a five-show
season? So, it's like, we'll work on that, you know, in a rotation—addressing that over the
next few years.

93

The participants’ descriptions of their frustration around the challenge of how to employ
culturally appropriate casting practices coincided with discussions about the need for discipline-
specific EDI working groups. Each of the six participants who expressed frustration in this area,
along with two additional participants, emphasized the need for focused working groups to help
contextualize and concretize information from the trainings they had taken. Four of those
participants described having already created some type of working group in their department or
school, including EDI committees, communities of practice, and other stakeholder groups, while
the other four expressed a desire for more collaboration and peer support around anti-racism and
leadership in theater. Professor Kepler was one of the participants that discussed the successful
implementation of a new committee he assembled to address EDI deficits in his theater school.
This group consisted of a wide array of stakeholders and was the first step they took on the path
to addressing student equity concerns. He said,
We put together a committee of a dozen or so people. . . . We have faculty, we have
union staff, we have management and professional staff. [It was] the first ever committee
that was really large and included all of those groups at all levels of positional power.
Professor Jiménez and Dr. Ingram also discussed assembling EDI working groups as a first step
in their response to increased calls for equity in 2020. Professor Jiménez said, “we felt like we
needed to have a committee that could speak to [EDI issues], so we can address those things
ourselves as a department.” Dr. Ingram described the move as a direct response to a grievance
letter they had received from faculty, students, and alumni in 2020. He said, “I scheduled
additional faculty meetings for us . . . to go through and address each [concern]. Then, I had a
smaller group of faculty . . . who would meet with three of the alumns and students [to report
progress].”

94

Professor Lewis described a working group of stakeholders that collaborated on equity-
based curriculum updates and detailed the multi-step process involved in creating a well-
balanced, high quality, equitable curriculum. She said,
So, we did research in the field, looking at a wide variety of peer institutions. . . . looking
at the contemporary kind of trends in theater and the types of shows that are being done. .
. . We were talking to different professionals in the industry about [what skills] they're
looking for a trained actor in the 21st century to possess. . . . We then started to map out a
new framework for that curriculum and . . . had working groups with different members
of the performance faculty across that trajectory to get their input and feedback.
The four participants that expressed a desire for more collaboration and peer support around anti-
racism and leadership in theater shared that they had enjoyed previous EDI training sessions but
needed continued help. Dr. Darby expressed the need for support around the specific work of
being a female chair at the helm of these significant equity-based change efforts. She described
the potential benefit of a peer mentor group for female theater chairs:
I would really like to see . . . a whole lot more women chairs in the arts, you know [and]
what is it that we can do to help each other . . . in a really muscular way. . . . What does
that look like and . . . what are different kinds of mentorships that are not sort of like
mentor and mentee, but that are kind of lateral mentorship?
Professor Fisher discussed how his teaching commitments kept him so busy that he rarely had
time for really thinking through what needed to be done to overall the current system. He said, “I
wish we had time to just sit down and only talk about this.” Dr. Elek noted a similar need for
support for his department saying, “At times, there's been confusion and perhaps a lack of

95

understanding as to what they're being asked to do . . . or a lack of understanding as to why
something might be important.” Dr. Becker specifically mentioned the need for models:
I think the goals are clear. It's less clear how to get there. What's also perhaps less clear is
what our goals will actually look like in practice, once realized. So, you know, what does
decolonized acting style look like, you know, and of course again with theater theory
that's a major issue. So, the question, yeah so there is perhaps a lack of models.
Cultural Competency in Teaching
The next principle of anti-racism in theater that surfaced as a theme was cultural
competency in teaching. Out of 12 participants in the study, only Professor Harrison did not
discuss cultural competency at all. The 11 other participants each spoke directly about this
concept. They described updating curriculum in theater history and theater appreciation courses
as an important step in achieving cultural competency in the classroom. Those 11 participants
spoke about either diversifying or decolonizing the curriculum in those classes by increasing the
numbers of BIPOC playwrights and non-Western performance texts in the syllabi. Dr. Arnold
described some inherent problems with the high importance placed on Shakespeare’s work
within the traditional theater curriculum. He noted,
If you are someone who in high school didn't really understand Shakespeare all that well,
or you went to a school in which Shakespeare wasn't taught very much, it's this whole
thing where you're like, “Oh my god, everybody's so connected to it and I don't, I just
don't.” And I can easily see how minority students don't connect to Shakespeare. I mean
sometimes there's lovely productions that are very diverse and it shows you how much
there is in his text, but, you know, it’s usually sort of thought of as a very White, very
older middle-class institution.

96

Professor Fisher shared that the biggest problem has been in “theatre history, dramatic literature,
our introductory classes where we tend to start with, you know, Western stuff and just stay
there.” Professor Campbell encapsulated the importance those 10 participants placed on
improving by simply stating, “I think decolonizing the Western canon, the instruction, is our
number one goal.”
Five out of 12 participants (Dr. Becker, Dr. Elek, Dr. Ingram, Professor Jiménez, and
Professor Lewis) even discussed program updates which apply curricular changes across
multiple classes in the degree track, create new courses, or combine degree tracks to better shape
the diversity of content required for students. Dr. Becker described the institution of program-
level changes that lead to diversified content. For example, he shared that “now . . . if someone
pursues an MFA degree in acting or directing with us, the expectation is that the person will
actually take directing classes across various cultural offerings.” He described that, in the new
program design, all students would study world theater practices including multiple non-Western
theatrical forms.
Professor Lewis also discussed cultural competency at length. She addressed the
diversification of curriculum in detail, as did nine of the other participants, but she also discussed
necessary pedagogical updates. In addition to Professor Lewis, four other participants discussed
the importance of updating pedagogy, including Dr. Darby, Dr. Elek, Professor Fisher, and
Professor Kepler. In her discussion of cultural competency, Professor Lewis detailed the actions
she had taken to improve curriculum and pedagogy and the reasons she felt it was important:
One of the things that was very important was from the 100 level to the 400 level, that
there was diversity in terms of content . . . you know the different artists and scholars that
the students were being introduced to at every level of the curriculum. So that was a

97

major shift—and the infusion of like dramaturgy and research at every level, from an
inclusive and closely responsive perspective. Really approaching the work through that
lens of identity and the intersections of those identities. And really, inviting that into the
room, into the conversation, into the dialogue in terms of the contextualization of the time
period, the history, the culture, the social, political, you know landscape that the story is
situated within and to really just add that it's just a part of—it’s normative . . . that it's a
part of the work that we do as artists to bring that into the art that we're making and the
stories that we're telling, as opposed to this sense of like, “Well, I've got to leave that out.
I can't bring myself into it,” because that was the other thing that we really heard. We've
heard that very clearly from not only some current students, but alumni. Just saying how
they just did not feel like they were able to bring their whole selves into that room or into
that rehearsal hall for the production. That they had to somehow leave pieces of
themselves and their identities out of it. Huge, because time, place, period, style . . . all
this kind of stuff that again goes back to an old paradigm – has to be contextualized. . . .
So, we really are trying to explode that, expand that, and to even diversify the approach . .
. because we felt strongly that it's, you know, it's not enough just to add a few more
diverse authors into, you know into the class. And also, being open to, as the teacher,
exploring a diverse array of how acting can be taught.
Although he discussed the importance of updating pedagogy, Professor Kepler noted a
general lack of knowledge in the area. He spoke about his school’s experience with CRT and
noted a gap in research about how to apply it to theater practice:
You know, there—unless I'm mistaken . . . there aren't a lot of go-to books about how to
be an Anti-Racist Theater practitioner. So, a lot of what's going on with our faculty is

98

what I would call related reading. So, people are reading X. Kendi [and CRT] and then
they're thinking, “Well, what does this look like in a theatrical space?”
Seven out 12 participants conveyed a lack of understanding of the importance of
culturally relevant pedagogy, while six did not discuss culturally relevant pedagogical practice at
all. One participant, Dr. Becker, specifically mentioned confusion about how to diversify
pedagogy in the acting courses. He shared,
I also have a colleague who teaches acting and, of course, in the mainstream American
Psychological realism tradition, it is very difficult for her. I think she wants to change her
approach and methodology, but she has a hard time because that technique is so linked to
a white Western canon. . . . So, you're also dealing with the question of, you know, what's
kind of universal? What kind of connects different traditions? What connects different
cultures? And of course, they're so steeped in this kind of Western way of looking at non-
Western stuff.
Representation and Support of BIPOC Faculty and Staff
The third principle of anti-racism in theater that surfaced as a theme was representation
and support of BIPOC faculty and staff. Eight out of 12 participants discussed the need for
increased BIPOC representation among the ranks of their faculty and staff. Each of those eight
participants noted that the faculty and staff in their department had historically been
predominantly, if not entirely, White. Dr. Becker commented on his department’s long-standing
all-White faculty. He questioned “What were they afraid of? I mean . . . for 50 years [the
department] was actually well known for its [non-western] theater program, in particular, but
[they] had never bothered to actually hire a person of color.” Professor Graham also noted that
the faculty in her department have been predominantly White and that they had never matched

99

the demographics of the very diverse student body. She emphasized her goal for future hiring
and said, “for sure one of the things we'd be looking for is making sure that anybody we would
hire would reflect the people that they be teaching.” Professor Lewis described the progress they
had made in her school and shared how community stakeholders had been calling for the
diversification of faculty:
[Our number of BIPOC faculty] increased 30% going from one to now we have five.
[I’m] really proud of this because this was like a major action item in the call-to-action
that we put forward last July after we had all the town halls, all the focus groups, and
those conversations building on the infrastructure work that was already in motion . . . the
diversification of the faculty was something we heard over over and over again.
Professor Kepler made similar comments, describing the progress they’ve made in
diversifying the leadership within the faculty ranks. Referring to the growth in numbers over the
previous 3 years, he said “you know, to some extent, anatomy is destiny. We've gone from
having nine programs with an entirely white leadership to having eight programs, five of which
are led by people of color.”
Four participants specifically discussed diversification of faculty in terms of the positive
effect that the mere presence of BIPOC faculty has on BIPOC students. Dr. Ingram referenced
the research in the area and added that the diversification of faculty could ultimately increase
their numbers of both BIPOC and LGBTQ students:
I think that right now we're on the cusp of a huge opportunity . . . with these two big
hiring years to, you know, make a huge difference, because as we know from all the
research, that's the number one thing that makes a difference for students of color and
LGBTQ students—that they see themselves represented in their faculty. So, you know, I

100

hope to improve upon our numbers there, so that is one of the things that again encourage
more students to come.
Similarly, Professor Lewis, described her own experience as a Black student and noted the
importance of having Black teachers. She discussed how those teachers were like “mirrors,”
allowing Black students to see themselves in successful positions. Dr. Darby also discussed the
impact Black faculty can have on Black prospective students. She noted that she had seen an
increase in the number of Black students in the program and felt there may be a connection to
this faculty member’s presence at the large open audition sessions. She described that
Once they decided to start bringing this one faculty member [to recruiting events] . . . all
things with recruitment started to change. And the way that this faculty member describes
it is that when the students who are auditioning see her, they’re like, “Oh, I could go to
that program because I guess, ‘I see myself,’ kind of a thing. That’s how it’s
characterized, as “I see myself,” and then they will have their own like private
conversations with her about [the city] and about the university and about the program
and what their opportunities are and so it’s just like by her sheer presence in the room
that makes a big difference.
Professor Fisher was also one of four participants to directly discuss the impact BIPOC faculty
can have on BIPOC students. He shared details about how he had been trying to increase the
numbers of indigenous students in his programs noting:
I’ve already started conversations with folks in the various reservation communities, and
in the tribes about what can we do to facilitate theatrical engagement amongst their young
people, so they’ll want to study here. I know the first thing I have to do is hire like three
Native American faculty. That’s one thing. So, I just have to find three faculty lines.

101

Five out of 12 participants discussed the importance of updating departmental hiring
practices to ensure equity in their faculty searches and ultimately increase the number of BIPOC
faculty in their departments. Among those participants, Dr. Becker, Dr. Elek, Professor Graham,
Dr. Ingram, and Professor Lewis, the two specific hiring practices shared were requiring
expanded representation of BIPOC faculty serving on the search committees and declaring a
search failed if the advertisement did not yield a diverse pool of candidates. For example,
Professor Kepler noted that “all of our search committees are at least 50% BIPOC faculty.” Dr.
Elek said that “if we're searching for somebody for a position and we don't have at least one
woman and one person of color in our group of finalists, that's a failed search.”
All but one of the participants identified low turnover in faculty positions in higher
education as a key barrier to diversifying faculty. Professor Jiménez was the only participant
who did not describe this as a challenge. Professor Graham encapsulated the sentiment of the
other 11 participants when she detailed how she focuses on diversifying the pool of adjunct
professors as one way to increase diversity. She noted that she has much more control over the
hiring of adjunct professors when she said,
We are looking at our hiring practices for our adjuncts, in particular, because that's the
place where we have power . . . a full-time faculty [position is] something we beg for and
of course [diversity] would be a huge consideration in our search, but we haven't been
offered a line in years.
Five of the participants commented about the importance of supporting BIPOC faculty
from the time they are hired with a special focus on the tenure process. One of those, Dr. Darby,
described the positive impact of one Black faculty member earning tenure. As part of her
discussion about how this faculty member had helped in recruitment and in diversifying the

102

student body, she said “I think part of it too is she has been empowered. She got tenure. . . . And
I think that tenure, even if you are a very powerful human being, you’re kind of just always
waiting, like ‘what’s going to happen?’”
Another of those five, Professor Campbell, described a recent faculty member who left
the university. He couldn’t discuss the details of his colleague’s departure but intimated that race
and not having a sense of belonging may have played a role. He said “we did have a black guy
here . . . and he just didn't survive. . . . It wasn't his place. This was [a while] ago, so things were
even more different, and we weren't as aware of people on campus.”
Dr. Ingram and Professor Harrison both detailed concern about how the university’s
predominantly White city negatively impacted the willingness of BIPOC scholars to join the
faculty ranks. Dr. Ingram’s discussion encapsulated the sentiment from both:
A lot of that has to do with also living in [this city]. [It] is an extremely white place and
both the two faculty of color that I'm closest with . . . are often talking about like, ‘we feel
great when we're here at work, but living [here] is constant stress.’”
Professor Kepler was the only participant who focused on the extra burden BIPOC
faculty carry when the university has relatively few BIPOC faculty but leans on those faculty to
support BIPOC students and to provide appropriate representation on committees. He
emphasized the importance of supporting those faculty and of recognizing their labor saying,
That disproportionality means that a smaller number of faculty are understandably called
upon to be mentors to a larger cohort of students and that puts an additional burden on
those faculty who are BIPOC that white faculty don't have. . . . [Also] all of our search
committees or at least 50% BIPOC faculty. That also puts a disproportionate burden on
them. So, we have to be very careful to not have the same people's number come up all

103

the time and also to recognize that additional labor in compensation and promotion
conversations.
Professor Kepler was also the only participant to describe the importance of onboarding
for faculty. He shared that his university had struggled with providing appropriate support to
BIPOC faculty from the point of hire. He noted that they had recently had a sharp increase in
faculty turnover and were able to hire a significant number of BIPOC faculty. This situation led
them to realize that they needed to instate new practices for supporting those new faculty
members. He noted,
I wouldn't say that we have a robust set of strategies for BIPOC faculty. . . . We arrived at
the conclusion that we were pretty bad at onboarding, largely because, well among other
characteristics of white supremacy in our institution, there wasn't a lot of transparency.
So, to give you an example . . . we never had a reception for new faculty until [recently.]
That was the first one we ever had. Because we had so few new faculty that it was just
like people were kind of expected to come in and keep up.
Representation and Support of BIPOC Students
The last of the four principles of anti-racism in theater that surfaced as a theme was
representation and support of BIPOC students. Out of 12 participants, 10 shared that they would
like to increase the numbers of BIPOC students in their department or school. The other two
participants, Dr. Becker and Professor Graham, stated that their programs had been very diverse
for a long time and that they were pleased with the proportion of BIPOC students. Professor
Graham encapsulated the sentiment of both in saying “We are, as both the campus and a
department . . . [we’re] probably one of the most diverse campuses in the United States.” The
other 10 participants all described a need for increased diversification of their student body. Dr.

104

Darby emphasized that the problem is more significant for her department than for other areas on
campus as she said, “our department is certainly not nearly as diverse as the university.”
Professor Fisher was particularly concerned about the lack of students from one demographic.
He said, “it's the Native American number that really disturbs me because we don't have an
excuse to have that few students, other than we're not a welcoming place.” Dr. Ingram
acknowledged the challenge of recruiting students to attend a university in a predominantly
White city and emphasized the importance of creating a welcoming environment for BIPOC
students. He explained,
I hope to improve upon our numbers there . . . I mean it's a real challenge because, you
know, if I was a student of color, many of our students come from the [larger city a few
hours away]. And if I lived [there] and I was a student of color, I would not move [to this
smaller, predominantly White city] to train. I would stay [there]. So, it's a real—it's a
geographical, regional challenge for us . . . so all we can do is, you know, do our best to
create an environment that's welcoming and open and then go from there.
Professor Jiménez discussed the value of increasing the numbers of BIPOC students in
terms of how a larger community of BIPOC students would positively impact the BIPOC
students they currently serve. In particular, he addressed the challenge of choosing culturally
appropriate roles for BIPOC students when there were relatively few of them. He said, “I want
better. That's how I would describe it. Partially it's selfish because it makes choosing our season
a little bit easier in serving all of our students.”
All the participants except for Professor Harrison discussed the need to better support
BIPOC students in their programs. Each of those 11 participants discussed prioritizing student
voices in some way including hosting listening sessions and providing them representation in

105

departmental decision-making processes. One participant, Dr. Darby, discussed the creation of a
group that would provide a system by which students had a significant say in the decision-
making process. She said that “one of the action items, the immediate action items, was the
development of something called a Student Advocacy Council.” One other participant, Professor
Lewis, also discussed the importance of providing an “anonymous reporting system” so that
students had an accessible way to voice concerns. She noted that “students . . . were afraid to
express their concern . . . because they didn't know exactly how the teacher was going to respond
or . . . if the teacher was going to feel like it was a threat or a question to their authority.”
As part of his school’s push to embolden student voices, Professor Kepler had BIPOC
students come forward to describe ways in which they had not been receiving the support
necessary:
Students have told us pretty regularly over the last 5 years or so that, you know, “hey, it's
great that we're so diverse as a student body, but you weren't ready for us.” And, of
course, they're right. And, of course, if we waited until we were ready, we would never
start.
Professor Jiménez discussed the challenge of having an applicant that he described as
being unprepared for graduate study but did not discuss ways in which the department might
address that problem through additional support of the student. None of the other participants
discussed the challenges of diversifying the student body in terms of the level of preparedness of
BIPOC students. Professor Jiménez noted,
I will say, in complete candor that . . . there was a candidate, 2 years ago, who I wanted to
bring in but, there was just—we would have made an error by bringing her here because
they would not have been successful academically, they just wouldn't have been. And she

106

was a very great artist, but we would have set her up for failure. . . . We just know she
wouldn’t pass, you know, history and lit. classes. She just . . . did not have, out of
undergraduate, have a command of the canon at all, which is also a red flag for a
directing student.
Of those 11 participants who addressed the need for increased support of BIPOC
students, five referenced the possible significance of providing financial support. Those five
included Professor Campbell, Dr. Darby, Professor Jiménez, Professor Kepler, and Professor
Lewis. Dr. Darby shared that, in her department, there had been “an enormous endowment for
scholarships. So, our undergrads and our grads both enjoy, you know, quite significant amounts
of support, because of those endowments.” Professor Campbell also discussed ways in which his
university had been using scholarships to support the efforts to increase enrollment of BIPOC
students. He described,
[We] really are starting to focus more on identifying those, you know, students of need or
those that may dismiss this university as an option because it is about $60,000 a year to
come here. So, I think the percentage is 99% of the students who are on this campus get
some sort of scholarship or some sort of help with that. We have some deep pockets. But
that was a mission that they set out to do about 3 or 4 years ago—but since, you know,
since the summer of injustice they're really turning that up a lot.
Professor Jiménez commented on how additional funding had not been helpful in
increasing BIPOC enrollment. He referenced the challenge of helping BIPOC students feel safe
even though there are not enough BIPOC students or faculty to build a sense of community. He
said,

107

I literally cannot pay a black student to come here because they don't feel safe. Even if
they're from [in state], they will not come to [University J] because, without ever even
stepping foot on campus, they don't feel as though they'll be safe on campus. And that's
just perception it’s not reality. But that's perception because of historical things that have
happened at [University J]. I should say we have very low violence and, you know, those
sorts of things on our campus, but that's the perception. So, they don't feel like they’re
going to be safe, and I can't ever ensure anybody’s safety . . . there's no safety in
community, right, so there's not enough people that you feel safe because you have a
community that you can see and feel safe because there are people who are like you
there, and I think that's a bigger problem than crime.
Professor Lewis used similar language referring to students’ perception of safety but
instead described efforts they had made to successfully mitigate that problem. She described her
recent efforts to create stronger support systems for BIPOC students in her school. She focused
on onboarding of new students and shared how they were using “Welcome Week” activities to
train new students about EDI and to help nurture a sense of belonging in all students. She
explained,
We did an EDI onboarding and orientation workshop for those student . . . joining into
our community and, from the students’ point of view and perspective, the feedback that
we received from that experience was they were so thankful that we thoughtfully created
space for them to come together to be able to dialogue and get to know each other. The
things that came up in the small group discussions allowed them to feel less alone, or less
isolated in . . . their transition . . . [into] their undergraduate journey. They really were
windows and mirrors for each other and that provided for them a sense of safety and a

108

sense of belonging. And they appreciated that it happened before classes started . . . one
student described it so beautifully, she said, “Thank you for today. And for the
workshop.” She said, “I feel held . . . held and supported and I was seen,” and I was like,
well, it doesn't get much better than that. I mean, at the core, it doesn't get much better
than that. I feel like that's at the heart, that's the heartbeat of it all.
Summary of Knowledge Findings
The knowledge themes that emerged to address whether participants had conceptual and
procedural understanding of anti-racism as applied to theater were organized based on the
principles described by the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers in their open letter, BIPOC
Demands for White American Theatre (2020b). Those principles were inclusive artistic practices,
cultural competency in teaching, representation and support of BIPOC faculty and staff, and
representation and support of BIPOC students. The findings demonstrated that all participants
were familiar with some of the principles, but that seven participants conveyed a limited
understanding of anti-racism in theater as a whole and of how to implement it. As such, gaps
around conceptual and procedural knowledge were validated.
Findings relevant to the first principle of inclusive artistic practices showed that all
participants had an awareness of how these practices impact their current season selection and
casting processes. Despite this awareness, six of the participants shared that they did not know
how to provide culturally appropriate roles for all their students or how to consistently cast the
appropriate person in each role. Findings relevant to the second principle of culturally competent
teaching demonstrated that 11 participants conveyed some conceptual knowledge around
diversification of curriculum. Another subset of cultural competency in teaching, culturally
appropriate pedagogy, was highlighted as a gap with only five participants conveying a

109

conceptual understanding of these pedagogical practices or of how to implement them in their
department or school. Findings relevant to the third principle of representation and support of
BIPOC faculty and staff demonstrated that eight participants understood the need for increased
BIPOC representation among the ranks of their faculty and staff. Despite that, only five
participants mentioned the importance of updating hiring practices to ensure equity and to
increase the number of BIPOC faculty and staff in their department or school. In addition, only
one participant discussed the importance of effective onboarding for BIPOC faculty. Similarly,
only one participant shared concern over the extra burden BIPOC faculty often carry when the
university leans on them to support BIPOC students and to provide appropriate representation on
committees. Findings relevant to the final principle of representation and support of BIPOC
students demonstrated high understanding in general. All the participants expressed an
understanding of the value of admitting and supporting a diverse student body. Out of 12
participants, 10 shared that they would like to increase the numbers of BIPOC students in their
programs and the other two reported that they already had an exceptionally diverse student body.
Motivation Findings
Participants’ motivation for leading initiatives to increase EDI in their departments and
schools was examined through their discussion of whether they had clear goals for the work and
how much confidence they had in their ability to succeed in the initiatives they felt were
necessary. Each of the assumed motivation influences were identified as assets in the field, as
more than 50% of the participants demonstrated considerable task value, high self-efficacy, and
appropriate goal setting when it comes to the task of creating a discipline-specific EDI Action
Plan. A discussion of the three motivation influences follows.
Task Value

110

The first assumed influence in motivation was task value. Out of 12 participants, eight
reported high task value for the work of creating a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan in their
department or school. The four that did not convey high task value were Dr. Arnold, Professor
Fisher, Professor Graham, and Professor Harrison. Dr. Arnold and Professor Harrison expressed
conflicted views around the principles of anti-racism when related to theater training and
practice. They each spoke of the value of providing a fair education to all students in general
terms but indicated that they did not value the work of establishing an EDI Action Plan. When
asked whether her department was working on establishing a list of goals, Professor Harrison
said, “I do think it's something that we have talked about. But . . . I think everyone has kind of
pushed it around . . . no one wants to take it on.” Dr. Arnold described his university’s request
that departments update their peer review guidelines to include EDI measures and indicated that
they would not be making those amendments because the theater degree had recently been
canceled. He said, “unless we decided to go for full professor early, there isn't really anybody
who is going to be made based on those guidelines during the 2 years we [have left].”
The other two professors who did not demonstrate high task value in this area were
Professor Fisher and Professor Graham. Both discussed the need for EDI work in general but
expressed low task value for the specific work of creating an EDI Action Plan. Professor Fisher
listed many initiatives he was interested in pursuing but shared that he had no intention of
creating an EDI Action Plan. Professor Graham conveyed the belief that an EDI Action Plan was
not necessary in her program because she did not see any significant deficits. She said, “I don't
think that we have any specific goals simply because we're—it's kind of an ongoing thing. . . .
So, I don't think we have any like, oh my gosh we're noticing this terrible deficit.”

111

Of the eight participants that expressed high task value for creating EDI Action Plans in
their departments and schools, six had already created some type of EDI Action Plan. Those six
were Dr. Becker, Professor Campbell, Dr. Darby, Dr. Elek, Professor Kepler, and Professor
Lewis. The other two participants discussed their goals around creating a plan. Dr. Ingram
discussed plans to create an EDI Action Plan in the coming year and Professor Jiménez
expressed the expectation that his department’s EDI Committee would be announcing a plan
shortly.
Self-Efficacy
The second assumed influence in motivation was self-efficacy and specifically addressed
how participants felt about their own ability to lead successful EDI or anti-racism initiatives. Out
of 12 participants, 11 expressed some level of confidence in this area. Only Dr. Arnold discussed
feeling as though he would not be able to affect the change he wanted:
I hope it works, but I also have a strong sense of . . . it's not going to work as well as
everyone wanted it to work. Because there's a lot of things that people are unwilling to do
that actually have to happen in order to make these things successful . . . I think that
there's a lot of distrust between a given university and the communities that it's
historically ignored, and unless the university does the right things, they're not going to
end that problem. So, I don't know, we'll see. I hope. I really hope that this is the time that
we have some kind of reckoning that fixes this, but right now . . . there's a lot of people
on the either side of it.
Each of the other 11 participants described a greater sense of optimism. Of those, seven
brought personal identity into the conversation. Four of those commented on their identity as
White men and acknowledged how their privilege impacted their work. When asked how he

112

would characterize his ability to lead the EDI initiatives he feels are necessary, Professor Fisher
said, “I have no idea. I mean, I think part of it is, I'm the wrong face for any of this.” Professor
Kepler highlighted how his positional power in the university had magnified the privilege he
already had based on “ability, age, class, country citizenship, race, religion, gender, and sexual
orientation.” He continued to say, “I’m keenly aware that my own lived experience is refracted
through that privilege and supported by that privilege, all the time. . . . So, in some ways, I’m
grossly unqualified and in other ways, because of my positional power, I’m useful.”
Dr. Becker also discussed the privilege he had as a White male. He described how, in
some ways, his identity had been more significant over the past few years and that he had been a
target for student complaints, but he also shared that this had not impacted his confidence. He
explained,
Last year I felt like, oh god you know here I am . . . a white, straight male from Europe,
running a department that is trying to become more diverse. You know trying to
decolonize its structured curriculum, season planning. So that has been an issue because I
personally have not always felt comfortable being in that position and, of course, you are
an easier target in many ways when students are angry and furious. And, you know, when
the person on top of the hierarchy within that department represents the opposite of what
this department is actually trying to achieve . . . but I have to say that that hasn't
necessarily impacted my confidence in terms of this. Of course, the other side to the coin
is, because I perhaps represent the more problematic identity, I may in many ways within
the larger administrative frame be in a better position to actually introduce some of those
changes.

113

The fourth participant that discussed his identity as a White man when asked about his
ability to do the necessary work in promoting EDI was Professor Campbell. He implied that his
identity as a White man hindered his progress, but that the intersectional nature of his identity as
a gay man improved his position:
I think identifying as queer helps me a lot. I certainly, again I present . . . [first as] a white
male right . . . but as soon as I open my mouth and I talk, you know the third or fourth
thing out of my mouth is either my husband or I'm gay and that qualifier helps me a lot. I
think, you know, reading several books and watching many things and starting out [by
saying] I'm going to make mistakes and I'm going to be vulnerable in this moment. I
think [that] qualifies me more just because of the fact that I admit vulnerability and I
admit that I'm going to stumble and fall. I will not be defensive when I get called in or
called out on . . . something that I've said.
Of the seven participants that discussed identity alongside their ability to lead the
necessary change efforts, two highlighted the impact of being women. Throughout the interview,
Dr. Darby shared how her experience as chair had been impacted by her identity as a woman and
a mother. She said that the interaction she had had with certain faculty in her department
“exposes that my location in other people's imagination . . . it's a very gendered location and that
their way of interacting with me is consistently, I mean it's like shockingly different than the way
that they interact with my male counterparts.” When asked specifically about her ability to lead,
she described the power she did have to effect change when she said,
It's always through partnerships . . . and the only way forward for our department . . .
whether it's talking about EDI . . . [or] making sure that students get their scholarships,
whatever it is, it's only going to happen if the department allows the people with the

114

vision and the ability to move forward. . . . My job is to help ensure that their work is
visible and honored and appreciated within the department. That they are connected with
resources across the university and beyond to ensure that they can continue to strengthen
and embolden their voice and also that I'm directing our department resources towards
them.
Professor Graham also discussed the role gender had played in her success and shared
that she currently held a position that had never been held by a woman. She described the role
her gender identity played in terms of communication and leadership styles that are more
typically viewed as feminine:
I think for the most part I feel pretty good about it, I feel humbled, you know. I definitely
feel like it's my place as a leader to lead from a different viewpoint than perhaps others
have led before me, you know, a more, for lack of a better term, like feminine . . . but I
mean that as, you know, femininity on a spectrum not a gender based . . . that idea of, you
know, a give and take, a listening/learning, a willingness to be more transparent . . . while
still being able to set boundaries and lead. But to do it in a more collaborative way . . . A
willingness to switch course if new information comes along and say, this was not a good
choice that I made, so we're going to make this choice now.
Professor Lewis also discussed identity when she described the way her presence as a
Black woman positively impacted those around her. She detailed her life-long commitment to
equity through her artistic, teaching, and leadership work saying,
I'm excited about that question because, long before I was appointed any kind of title, all
of these things that we have been talking about, have been like deeply rooted . . . it’s the
work I've been doing all along…. which kind of goes back to what I had said earlier

115

about the perspective of being from my own journey. And then what inspired me to want
to continue to be an artist and interrupting, disrupting healthily these different spaces . . .
because I know what that is to be the only one. One of a few, you know, and to not have
many mirrors. That inspired me to sort of teach and flow in these different spaces . . . I
feel very much an accountability and responsibility as an artist, for what I create and
actually what I put out there in the world what kind of imagery and representation . . . I've
always believed in theater and art as a catalyst for social change to provoke dialogue and
curiosity and empathy and inquiry and compassion.
Out of those 11 participants who expressed confidence in their ability to lead, the
remaining four described various degrees of self-efficacy. Professor Harrison described a recent
situation in which she was unable to lead her department past conflict about their season
selection choices. She said that the conflict over culturally appropriate casting was too intense to
solve, so they decided to refrain from deciding. She shared that they would continue the
discussion the following year. Despite the discussion of this recent unresolved conflict, Professor
Harrison said, “I mean, I feel pretty confident that I can engage all types of people and all types
of conversation with people at large and that conversation doesn't bother me.”
Dr. Ingram also discussed his ability to lead change efforts in a positive light, although he
also noted the challenge. He described being a faculty leader without extensive leadership or EDI
training. He said, “you know, it's terrifying and I feel way out of my element. This was never a
part of my training, so I'm just kind of going by my own soul and what I think we need.”
Similarly, Professor Jiménez described confidence in his ability and emphasized the role his own
moral compass plays in those efforts:

116

I'm confident in my ability to do it because I do it with an open heart and nothing in
mind. I don't have any pre-determined thoughts on any of it. While I may have personal
thoughts on it . . . I don't matter. So, it's completely open and making sure everybody gets
a voice and has a say and we hear everybody. . . . I'm an open book over here. . . . I can't
be better if you don't tell me what you think I'm doing wrong. So that's just my leadership
style.
Dr. Elek discussed his ability in much more definitive terms. When asked what he
thought about his ability to lead EDI-focused change efforts, he discussed his views on the
position of chair in general saying,
The only reason that I can see to take a position like chairing a department is because
you want to build something, and I think that we have successfully built something over
the past nearly 8 years. . . . My leadership style is very much a collaborative one. It's not
hierarchical. . . . It's been finding ways to get as many people as possible, if not the entire
population of the building, invested in this work and making sure that, from the get-go,
that everybody understands that it's never intended as a one off. It is iterative and what
we need to do is build the culture and the structure in which it will continue long after
any of us are gone.
Dr. Elek’s discussion of his leadership style and previous successes convey a high level of self-
efficacy in his ability to successfully institute the anti-racism initiatives he sees as necessary.

Goals

117

The third assumed influence in motivation was goals. Out of 12 participants, 10 described
having goals that could be associated with the creation or implementation of a discipline-specific
EDI Action Plan. These included goals for future trainings, working groups, stakeholder
listening sessions, diversifying curriculum, implementing program changes, updating recruitment
and retention practices for students and employees, diversifying the season of plays produced,
establishing new processes to ensure BIPOC representation in decision-making committees, and
reconsidering student time commitments. The extent of goals described by each participant
varied dramatically. Professor Fisher shared that he had one goal at the forefront of his thinking
having recently completed an EDI training. He said, “we were supposed to have one thing that
we were going to do by the end of next year. . . . I want to have a shell of an idea in place . . . to
increase Native American participation in our programming.”
Six participants, including Professor Lewis, Professor Kepler, Dr. Elek, Dr. Darby,
Professor Campbell, and Dr. Becker, described the creation of a more formal list of goals that
their department or school had adopted as a road map for addressing EDI deficiencies. These
include plans woven into broad Strategic Plans, EDI Strategic Plans, EDI Action Plans, and
Accountability Statements. Professor Kepler said, “we have a five-page five-year plan in draft.”
Dr. Darby described a list of action items on which her department had been working for the
previous year. The list included diversifying the curriculum, increasing the number of BIPOC
faculty, staff, and students in the department, adopting more equitable funding models for the
programs within the department, and promoting student voices within the department through the
creation of a Student Advocacy Council. She also described work they are doing to honor the
one-year anniversary of their action plan. She said they are working on ensuring accountability

118

and are “putting together a video of . . . some of the things that we said we were going to do and
like what we actually did.”
Professor Campbell described three primary areas of focus including decolonizing their
syllabi, “bringing student representation to our program” and creating a department handbook
that would be included in their strategic plan. He said the third significant goal was “getting this
handbook out and making sure that's part of our strategic plan that's also part of our
accreditation. It's important for us to know that [students] know that we’re all trying to operate as
fairly as possible.” Dr. Elek also described the importance of making sure students know about
the work being done around EDI. He discussed the creation of multiple accountability statements
that included goals for future work:
You know the other thing that we've done in the last year is write two accountability
statements for both the department and the professional company. The accountability
statement for the department has sections for the undergraduate program, for each of the
three MFA programs, and for the theater company—our undergraduate production arm . .
. these are living documents. They're not set in stone. So, they're meant to be constantly
revisited and updated.
Professor Lewis shared that her school already had a three-to-five-year EDI strategic plan
before the murder of George Floyd acted as a catalyst for increased EDI efforts, but that the work
they had been doing since had led to new discipline-specific efforts. She explained,
It really is the collective work of all of us to put into practice and apply these core values
and principles of equity, diversity inclusion access and opportunity for all of the students
in every area of the school and across all of our different programs. . . . So, the other

119

strategic goal, an action item that we are doing that will actually be a part of our revised
strategic plan, is we're actually creating EDAI action plans for every single area.
Three participants shared that their department did not have goals in the area or that they
were waiting on others to set goals. Each of the three, however, listed personal EDI goals
throughout the interview and discussed ways in which they were working to achieve those goals.
Professor Jiménez described the work he had done diversifying syllabi, but when asked about
what goals the department had to promote EDI he said, “I don't know. If we do, I'm not privy to
them at the moment. The committee may have come up with some, but they haven't shared them
with anybody yet.” Similarly, Dr. Ingram discussed wanting to hire more BIPOC faculty,
diversify syllabi, provide ongoing training, and increase enrollment of BIPOC students, but when
asked about goals he said, “No, but that's something that I'm hoping to lead us through this year
with that outside expert coming in. That's on the agenda for that training.” Professor Graham also
shared personal goals including decolonizing syllabi and hiring more BIPOC faculty, but then
reported that her department had no goals saying,
I don't think that we have any specific goals . . . simply because it's kind of an ongoing.
You know, it's just who we are. But it's still needs to evolve and grow and change and
adapt. So, I don't think we have any like, “oh my gosh we're noticing this terrible deficit
here there somewhere else.
Two participants did not share any goals for promoting EDI. The first, Professor
Harrison, simply said, “No, we have not” when asked whether her department had a set of goals
in the area. The second participant, Dr. Arnold, addressed the impact the cancellation of his
department’s degree track had on goal setting. He shared that many other departments had
recently followed the college’s lead in amending peer review guidelines to include EDI work,

120

but that his department chose not to amend theirs with goals as the faculty would not likely be
around to be impacted. He explained,
The College is amending our peer review guidelines to include diversity as one of the
things that faculty should be doing in their work. . . . They didn't force the departments to
each amend theirs, we didn’t. There are some departments who did, but we didn’t, mostly
because what's the point. Like all the faculty members who remain are tenured. And so,
like, unless we decided to go for full professor early, there isn't really anybody who is
going to be affected by those guidelines over the 2 years we're here.
Summary of Motivation Findings
The three assumed motivation influences included task value, self-efficacy, and goals.
The findings indicated that each of the three influences was an asset for most of the participants
with eight of them expressing high task value for creating EDI Action Plans in their departments
and schools, 11 expressing confidence in their ability to lead theater-specific EDI or anti-racism
initiatives, and 10 describing having goals that could be aligned with the eventual creation or
implementation of a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan. As such, no gap in motivation was
validated.
Organizational Influence Findings
The organizational influences that affect the participants’ work promoting EDI in their
departments and schools were examined through participants’ discussions of two cultural models
and one cultural setting within their organization. The first cultural model analyzed was that the
organizational culture must acknowledge that systemic racism is present in the institution. The
second was that the organizational culture must acknowledge that anti-racism initiatives are
necessary. The cultural setting analyzed was that the organization must allocate the resources

121

necessary to create and implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans. The validation of these
three assumed organizational influences was split. Gaps were validated in the areas of resource
allocation and acknowledgment that systemic racism is present in the institution, while
acknowledgment that anti-racism initiatives were necessary was identified as an asset. A
discussion of the three influences follows.
Organizational Culture: Cultural Models
The cultural models that were highlighted as assumed organizational influences were
discussed by all 12 participants. These two models were that the organizational culture must
acknowledge that systemic racism is present in the institution and that anti-racism initiatives are
necessary. Furthermore, each participant connected their organization’s culture to the EDI
initiatives undertaken. Findings reflected a range of belief systems within the organizational
cultures of the 12 universities.
Acknowledgment That Systemic Racism is Present in the Institution. The first
cultural model examined was the organization’s acknowledgment of systemic racism in the
institution. None of the 12 participants shared evidence that their organizational culture fully
acknowledged that racism was present in the institution. Dr. Arnold addressed the issue directly
saying, “I think acknowledging the presence of racism and ableism and all of these other things
[is] going to be a challenge for a lot of people.” The other 11 participants discussed their
organization’s culture in more nuanced terms. They discussed similar conflicting stakeholder
beliefs, but they also described the belief in systemic racism as more of a continuum. Dr.
Campbell shared that his colleagues had an awareness of systemic racism but emphasized that
his colleagues were not wholly aware of the degree to which it was present. He said, “I just don't
think that some of my faculty are aware that Asian students can feel left out.”

122

Dr. Becker, Professor Fisher, Professor Graham, and Dr. Ingram all noted that, although
their colleagues were staunchly opposed to racism, some were resistant to the idea that systemic
racism was deeply ingrained in their institution. Dr. Becker conveyed the shared sentiment
saying,
Most of my colleagues probably believe that they had some knowledge because they are
convinced that they are not racist. And they know what racism means and of course they
are against it on an intellectual, political level. But what I think isn't fully clear is how
ingrained racism is . . . on a systemic level. . . . I think it depends so much on background
and training and earlier exposure.
When asked about the general campus culture and about whether his colleagues believed
systemic racism was present in his institution, Professor Jiménez said, “I can identify individuals
who are better with it. But some—it just makes them angry. They don’t want to deal with it,
which is challenging, . . . They're just not on the bus, so they just don't say anything.” Dr. Darby
also shared that some of her colleagues were resistant to continued work and that they didn’t see
systemic racism in their institution. She noted that these individuals appeared to engage in anti-
racism work in the months following the murder of George Floyd but had become anxious to
move on. She described a sort of virtue-signaling in which faculty were concerned about looking
like they were committed to anti-racism work without really engaging. She said, “that actually
makes problems for people that are really doing the work and not just performing the work.”
Dr. Elek described one situation in which his colleagues did not see systemic racism that
was present in the institution. He referenced his choice to discontinue the traditional scheduling
of “10 out of 12 rehearsals.” He described this type of rehearsal as a lengthy technical rehearsal

123

in which the union allows technicians to work 10 hours out of the 12-hour day. He shared that
the practice disproportionately impacted BIPOC students in his program. He said,
We decided to do away with “10 out of 12 rehearsals” and to, as much as possible, avoid
working on weekends. . . . Obviously, we still perform on weekends, but I think there
were a lot of people who aren’t sure why a “10 out of 12 Rehearsal” would be seen as an
equity issue.
Professor Kepler and Professor Harrison both discussed their university culture in terms
of the actions taken, or conspicuously not taken, by university leadership. As he discussed
structural racism, Professor Kepler noted that individuals in the highest level of the
administration seemed resistant to address the issue. He said,
The officers of this university are, with one exception, terrible on the subject. Whether it's
because they're afraid of—I think they're well-intentioned people, but I think they don't
like the sound of the analysis. . . . They appear to be concerned that . . . to return to the
subject annually will somehow alienate the donor base.
Professor Harrison made similar comments about the organizational culture on her
campus. She shared that her university had not issued any statements on EDI issues saying, “they
really keep their mouths shut about justice issues.” She also described a culture in which faculty
who teach social justice feared retribution. She noted, “I have a couple of friends in political
science that thought they were going to lose their job. Really, really, like truly thought, I'm going
to get fired because I teach this class that’s all about social justice.”
In her discussion of systemic racism on campus, Professor Lewis discussed her
philosophy on how to move forward despite the inevitability that some stakeholders would be
resistant to the necessary changes. She said,

124

I [used to] spend a lot of time and energy feeling like, how do I reach the resistors . . . and
[now] I have learned that . . . it is not a productive and healthy use of time and energy. . .
. I need to invest in the individuals who are showing up and present and engaged. . . .
There was a quote that was on the board from one of our fabulous facilitators [in a recent
EDI training] and the question was: How do you change culture? The answer simply was
one room at a time. It's one room at a time. It's one person at a time. It's one conversation,
one action at a time.
Acknowledgment That Anti-Racism Initiatives Are Necessary. The second cultural
model examined was acknowledgment of the necessity of anti-racism initiatives. Eight out of 12
participants described evidence that their organizational culture reflected a shared belief in the
necessity of anti-racism initiatives. Dr. Elek and Professor Lewis both addressed organizational
culture explicitly and in a similar way. Dr. Elek encapsulated the mutual sentiment when he said,
“We've built a culture, or are building a culture, where [anti-racism] is . . . becoming a part of our
DNA.” Dr. Ingram expressed a similar experience with his university’s culture as he discussed
the recent changes brought on by faculty retirements saying,
I think that I would say maybe those who didn't understand or fully embrace the dire
importance of this in our work are now going on their way into retirement and, of course,
my hope is that the new people that will be replacing them will have this as part of their
core teaching philosophy. But the half who are here, I think, are the ones who take this
more seriously, doing the most work with me and who want to really engage in this.
The other four participants described their organization’s culture around anti-racism in
more complex terms. Although they shared evidence that many stakeholders in their
organizations believed anti-racism initiatives were necessary, they illustrated a greater degree of

125

conflict within the institution. Dr. Becker described tension in his department’s season selection
meetings when faculty members disagreed about the need to alter existing practices saying,
I would say the majority are in favor of it and no one is open to come out against it. So,
the tricky thing is, you can't really have an open discussion about this, if you're against it .
. . there may be other [places] in more, kind of, white environments where you could
voice a more critical position. I think that would be very difficult to do within the context
of our department right now . . . So, at our faculty meetings . . . members have said things
like, “We can no longer do white colonial plays?” [in an ironic way]. Of course, that
language is interpreted as a trigger to other people who find this, you know unreflective
white privilege deeply problematic. Then the person who used the problematic language
just kind of shuts up and no longer contributes any discussion. I prefer the problematic
language to someone clamming up completely, but there's also kind of fine balancing it.
Professor Harrison also discussed departmental tensions around season selection and
culturally appropriate casting practices. She said, “we're working through that specific issue right
now. But we're also working on the larger picture, and the hard part is, of course, we don't agree .
. . our faculty are split on that—we have varying opinions.” Professor Campbell shared similar
experiences he had with the faculty in his department. He referenced the importance of EDI work
when he said, “I don’t think it is for the other two faculty – I don’t think it is as imperative for
them. They’re still doing things sort of like they did.” Professor Fisher referenced his colleagues
as well when he said, “I think some of them support it, but it would be a substantial change in the
culture and the way we do things here.” He went on to discuss the way in which some faculty
members are well-meaning, but resistant to change when he said,

126

In my department I would say that everybody has a big open heart. But everybody's very
protective of making sure that students have the experiences they think are important.
And because we're in a discipline that's rooted in this colonial Western tradition, it can be
very difficult for people to walk away from that which they valued in their education—In
order to make room for what education needs to become. And I think that's the number
one struggle we're going to have amongst the most beautiful and open hearted of all of us
that, like, how do you say no to Tennessee Williams, when it meant so much to me, and
it's meant so much to my development?
Professor Graham made similar comments about faculty in her department. The
difference in her discussion was that she detailed her colleagues’ resistance to change in terms of
their experience teaching a diverse student body. She noted,
I think there are definitely some folks who think this is the way that we do this, right, the
way it's always been done. This is how you teach classical acting. Period. And it should
be universal and standardized. And then in smaller ways, you know, people are just like,
but I love this play and I want to leave it on my syllabus, you know, or my reading list.
And . . . I think there are a couple people who think “Well, I've been teaching here
forever, and I've been teaching people of color. I know how to do this.”
Professor Jimenez noted a disparity in the way people on his campus responded to people
from differing demographic groups. He said, “the video doesn't match the audio . . . they'll talk a
good game but from my experience as Mexican, as Hispanic . . . they're very focused on making
sure they're serving our black population and not necessarily . . . other races, ethnicities on
campus.”

127

All 12 participants alluded to the murder of George Floyd and the ensuing calls for equity
and justice as some type of catalyst for recent EDI initiatives. Two participants described the
way members of their organizational community had tired of the efforts since that initial push.
Dr. Darby described this but was optimistic about the increase in overall support saying,
There's at least twice [as] many of us now who are invested in making those
transformations. Now, that's still less than half of our department, right, but that's okay
too. So, whereas last year the whole department was rallying around certain ideas and
concepts and that was a beautiful thing . . . [now] there’s been a little bit of the grief and
the sadness…[because] actually everybody's sort of just busy doing their thing and . . .
[EDI] isn’t the center of their [focus like it was].
Professor Kepler also illustrated the eagerness a few individuals had to return to the way
they had been working before the spring of 2020. When asked whether there was resistance to
the continued EDI initiatives, he described how some in the organization envisioned the work
saying,
I would say that [resistance is] higher among staff, than it is among faculty. I think that
an overwhelming majority of the faculty would say that stepping up to become more
fluent in anti-racist practice is the number one priority . . . And when I say the
overwhelming majority, I think there are people who are conflicted because they think
that, at some point, we should be getting back to doing what we do . . . a couple of people
have actually sort of said it in those terms, as though you can somehow, you know, take
the anti-racism pill and then, you know, that there's like an equivalent of Beano for anti-
racism. And then you can go, you know, eat a burrito and all is well because you've taken

128

the pill. I don't think that's going to get us there . . . it has to be woven into the fabric of
every, every program and every decision that we make.
Organizational Culture: Cultural Setting
The final organizational influence examined was the cultural setting of appropriate
resource allocation. When asked whether their university had allocated sufficient resources for
discipline-specific EDI initiatives, eight out of 12 participants scoffed and said they had received
little to no financial support from the university for school or department-level EDI initiatives.
Of those eight participants, seven cited university-level budget shortfalls. Dr. Arnold discussed
his university’s recent decision to cancel the theater degree in response to those budget deficits.
He continued to discuss overall budget cuts for the university after his state’s governor began to
“hack the state budget apart.” Professor Harrison also described decreases in state-level financial
support for the university when asked about whether her department was well-funded. She
shared that, not only had state universities lost funding from the legislature, but that she believed
the funding was withheld “because of their stance on social justice.”
Dr. Becker described similar challenges and shared that his department had been
“threatened with elimination by the administration” over the previous 2 years due to university
budget shortfalls. He described that university administration genuinely supported work to
improve EDI, but when directly asked about financial support for discipline-specific EDI
initiatives, he laughed saying,
Oh god financially, no, no, really, no. But that's also because [the university] has been in
financial trouble for many years. COVID has been devastating—I mean, that's the reason
why we were threatened with elimination. Basically, it was just the fallout of the

129

economic impact. know COVID cost the University . . . I don't know, $240 million or
something and then it had to figure out where to cut.
Dr. Darby, Professor Fisher, Professor Graham, and Professor Jiménez all described
similar aspirational support from the university for discipline-specific promotion of EDI but
added that there has been no allocation of funding to make that happen. They described ongoing
university funding limitations. Dr. Darby shared that her university “is sort of a fundamentally
under-resourced institution that has always tried to maintain multiple identities without the sort
of infrastructure or support that it needs.” She emphasized that the department typically struggles
to fund its basic production season, so finding extra money for EDI work has been a challenge.
Professor Jiménez reported similar funding challenges, but in his discussion, he emphasized that
his department chair had used money from her chair startup fund to support EDI trainings. When
asked about support from the university, he said, “No financial support for it. I mean they want
us to do it, and they support us through words of kindness . . . but there's no additional funding
for departments.”
As with the other seven participants described, Professor Kepler also cited a lack of
university funding for school and department-level EDI initiatives. His description differed from
the others, however, as he discussed the immense wealth of his university. He reported that he
had recently requested funding and had been given a paltry amount compared to the request. The
amount he described receiving was significantly higher than any of the other schools, but he
noted that the amount was grossly inadequate, given the wealth of the university and the amount
the school itself had already committed when he explained,
It took until the fall of 2020 for the university to come up with anything like a
comprehensively announced plan. And . . . I'm pretty confident if it hadn't been for the

130

murder of George Floyd, it wouldn't have happened even then, because that was really
what changed. And even when the university did come up with this plan, they announced
that all the schools would have to have a 5-year plan—that there would be no money
forthcoming to any school for these purposes, except for $5,000 per school to hire a
consultant . . . That's just this side of non-serious, right—especially if you're a university
that is regularly named among the wealthiest in the nation . . . Within a few months, [one
of the Vice Presidents] began to make noises about how maybe there will be some
resources forthcoming and so, we went in with a very, very big ask. On the basis of our
having already committed hundreds of thousands of dollars to work, and we were initially
shut down, but then given a kind of one year bump of, you know, about $125,000 which
was, you know, that's not chump change, but relative to what we were looking for, what
our aspirations were or how much money we have spent in the last 5 or 6 years, it felt like
an insult.
The remaining four participants expressed satisfaction with the amount of financial
support they had been given for departmental or school-level EDI initiatives. Professor Campbell
discussed the financial support his program has received from his dean and chair favorably. He
reported that the religious mission of the university has been reflected in the financial support he
has been given for EDI training opportunities for faculty saying,
[My dean] said yes immediately. She put in $500 and then the rest of it came from my
chair, who is very much about this training, too. So, even in a year that we had to, you
know, tighten our belts, they found money for us to hire a leader for these workshops. So,
I would say [the support is] great. I would say it's getting better.

131

Dr. Elek reported receiving financial support from the college for consultants who
offered a series of trainings. He said, “we've been given a lot of support for the facilitators that
we brought in. It was a combination of departmental funding and funding from the College. . . .
It's a priority of the university’s, so I don't anticipate it going away.” Dr. Ingram also described
receiving funding from his dean. In addition to funding for EDI trainings, he was able to secure
funding to pay a team of theater faculty for summer work after students in his department
submitted a petition calling for implementation of anti-racist theater practices in the spring of
2020. He described continuing that work through the academic year but noted that the financial
support was only for work done outside of faculty’s contracted time:
I only was able to get the funding, like $50 an hour for, I can't remember like six or so
hours each . . . because we're off contract in the summer. And I wanted to have it ready to
hit the ground running in the fall, so the students can see us actively responding to their
petition. . . . I think the university is putting its money where its mouth is.
Professor Lewis reported that her university had committed appropriate funds to the
promotion of discipline-specific EDI. In this case, the university had created multiple new
teaching positions to help diversify the faculty and to increase support for EDI efforts. She said,
“we were able to secure more teaching lines . . . with the support of the provost in the president's
office at the upper university level.” She continued to detail the support faculty are given:
[In] these initiatives and efforts . . . workload balance is very important. So, you don't get
burned out—that you're being mindful of the health and wellness. . . . I was able to
communicate and dialogue with my dean . . . about what work-life balance is for me in
terms of like my teaching load in relationship to my administrative load or at the service
level. So that I am available and can do the work and do the work effectively and what

132

needs to be done [to make that possible] So, I have had a very positive dynamic in that
way. And I fully acknowledge that and saying that I know many of my colleagues do not
have that.
Summary of Organizational Influence Findings
The three assumed organizational influences included two cultural models and one
cultural setting. The two cultural models were that the organizational culture must acknowledge
that systemic racism is present in the institution and that anti-racism initiatives are necessary.
None of the 12 participants shared evidence that organizational culture fully acknowledged that
systemic racism was present in the institution. They each noted that, while their faculty
colleagues and administrators were openly opposed to racism, some were resistant to the idea
that systemic racism was deeply ingrained in their institution. The findings demonstrated a gap
around the expectation that the organizational culture must acknowledge that systemic racism is
present in the institution. The second cultural model that the organizational culture must
acknowledge that anti-racism initiatives are necessary yielded more varied responses. Eight
participants shared evidence that their organizational culture acknowledged that anti-racism
initiatives are necessary. Notably, every participant alluded to the murder of George Floyd and
the ensuing calls for justice when discussing the organizational acknowledgment of the necessity
of anti-racism initiatives. In addition, two participants described the way members of their
organizational community had tired of the efforts since that initial push. In this case,
organizational acknowledgment that anti-racism initiatives are needed was shown to be an asset
across the field. The cultural setting influence examined was that the organization must allocate
the resources necessary to create and implement discipline-specific EDI Action Plans. Eight
participants noted this as a high priority need as they described the lack of adequate financial

133

support for discipline-specific EDI initiatives in their organization. As such, findings
demonstrated gaps in the organizational culture’s acknowledgment of systemic racism in the
institution and the organization’s appropriate allocation of resources. The expectation that the
organizational culture acknowledge the necessity of anti-racism initiatives was identified as an
asset.
Summary of Findings
The findings yielded varied results across the assumed KMO influences. In the area of
knowledge, the findings demonstrated that all participants were familiar with some principles of
anti-racism in theater, but that seven participants conveyed a limited understanding of the
concepts and how to implement them. As such, gaps around conceptual and procedural
knowledge were validated. In the area of motivation, the findings indicated that each of the three
influences was an asset for most of the participants. Eight participants expressed high task value
for creating discipline-specific EDI Action Plans in their departments and schools, 11 expressed
confidence in their ability to lead discipline-specific EDI initiatives, and 10 described having
goals that could be aligned with the eventual creation or implementation of a discipline-specific
EDI Action Plan. As such, all motivation influences were identified as assets. In the area of
organizational influences, findings showed that none of the 12 participants reported that their
organizational culture fully acknowledged that systemic racism is present in the institution.
However, eight participants shared evidence that the organizational culture acknowledges that
anti-racism initiatives are necessary. In addition, eight participants noted appropriate fund
allocation as a high priority need as they described the lack of adequate financial support for
discipline-specific EDI initiatives in their organization. Ultimately, gaps were validated in the
areas of appropriate resource allocation and the organizational culture’s acknowledgment of

134

systemic racism in the institution. The organizational culture’s acknowledgment that anti-racism
initiatives are necessary was identified as an asset.

135

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
The purpose of this field study was to better understand the types of equity, diversity, and
inclusion (EDI) initiatives that university theater departments and schools across the country
have undertaken and to identify any gaps in knowledge, motivation, or organizational (KMO)
influences that may have impacted that work. Specifically, the study evaluated the degree to
which theater department or school faculty met the stakeholder goal to have created and begun
implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year.
While a complete performance evaluation would include all stakeholders, this study focused on
faculty leaders as the primary change agents. The following research questions guided the study:
1. In what ways, if any, are university theater departments and schools working to increase
EDI?
2. What knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are impacting the promotion
of EDI in university theater departments and schools?
Discussion
Each of the participants in this study conveyed a genuine desire to equitably serve all
their students. In addition, they each acknowledged that traditional theater practices in higher
education must change in order to equitably serve BIPOC students. These two basic premises are
a good place to start, but they are inadequate in the face of the necessary changes. Faculty
leaders must be supported if they are to move beyond these premises to successfully combat
systemic racism and White supremacy in university theater. The salient findings of the study
revealed concerning gaps around knowledge of anti-racism as applied to theater training and
practice, the acknowledgement of systemic racism in universities, and appropriate funding
allocation models.

136

The findings around knowledge were particularly concerning. Seven out of 12
participants conveyed limited conceptual and procedural understandings of anti-racism as
applied to theater training and practice. This included a lack of understanding of the theories,
models, and structures in the field of anti-racism in theater and confusion around how to
implement principles of anti-racism in their departments and schools.
In the findings, four principles surfaced as themes associated with conceptual and
procedural knowledge of anti-racism in theater. They were inclusive artistic practices, cultural
competency in teaching, representation and support of BIPOC faculty and staff, representation
and support of BIPOC students. Participants in the study demonstrated need in the areas of
cultural competency in teaching and inclusive artistic practices. Specifically, seven participants
demonstrated the need for additional knowledge of culturally relevant pedagogy, a subset of
cultural competency. One participant conveyed a harmful misunderstanding of this premise as he
described the problem of the heightened value assigned to Shakespeare in theater training. He
said,
I can easily see how minority students don't connect to Shakespeare. I mean sometimes
there's lovely productions that are very diverse and it shows you how much there is in his
text, but, you know, it’s usually sort of thought of as a very White, very older middle-
class institution.
This phrasing is particularly harmful as it equates appreciation of Shakespeare with a student’s
ethnocultural identity. It also demonstrates the application of a deficit cognitive frame that
blames the student for lack of successful connection with the text (Bensimon, 2005).
Six participants conveyed a lack of understanding around culturally appropriate casting
as described by the Community of BIPOC Theatremakers (2020b). One participant shared her

137

particularly harmful belief in colorblind casting saying that White actors should be able to
perform roles originally written for BIPOC actors. The casting preference she described is an
example of colorblind racism which Bonilla-Silva (2005) warned against because it incorrectly
conflates equality with equity, minimizes the impact of racism, and leads to the erasure of
BIPOC identities. It is also decried in literature around anti-racism in theater (Community of
BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020b). While none of the other participants explicitly promoted
colorblind casting as a goal, six bemoaned the perceived impossibility of employing culturally
appropriate casting practices given the demographics of their student body. Each of those
participants described some variation of multicultural casting in which they cast a BIPOC actor
in a role originally written for a White performer. One participant even detailed his efforts to
teach a Southeast Asian student to assimilate—to perform the dialect and other ethnocultural
markers of the White character. These participants conveyed a harmful lack of understanding of
the way in which colorblind racism perpetuate White supremacy and harms BIPOC students in
theater training.
The findings in this area overlap with findings around the need for increased
representation of BIPOC students in the student body. All participants expressed the desire to
admit more BIPOC students, but only three shared details about initiatives they had undertaken
to address that aspiration. One participant even detailed a recent experience he had when he
chose not to admit a Black woman into the MFA Directing program despite believing she had
great promise as a director. He described that she did not have a strong enough understanding of
the canon and that she would need to have been more well-read to succeed in the program. This
specific description demonstrates a problematic commitment to meritocracy that is common, if
not endemic, in theater in higher education. Meritocracy—the belief that the most fair and

138

appropriate way to choose candidates is to base the decision solely on their preparedness, skills,
and talents (Crenshaw, 2011; Liu, 2011) is one of the most significant challenges faced by
practitioners of theater higher education.
The next most impactful findings came in the area of organizational culture. Findings
validated a gap around the organizational culture’s acknowledgement of systemic racism in the
institution. This is especially notable when analyzed alongside the identified asset of the
organizational culture’s acknowledgement of the need for anti-racism initiatives. None of the
participants demonstrated the perception that their organizational culture fully acknowledged the
presence of systemic racism in the institution. However, eight participants described an
organizational culture that acknowledged the need for anti-racism initiatives. These findings
demonstrated that faculty leaders believed that their organizational culture prioritized anti-racism
initiatives without necessarily acknowledging racism in the organization. Eight participants
identified societal pressure following the 2020 murder of George Floyd as a primary reason for
the increased need for anti-racism initiatives. These findings could be described as an example of
the CRT concept of interest-convergence (Bell, 1980) as participants connected their university’s
push for anti-racism initiatives with societal pressure rather than with the problem of racism.
Regular listening sessions would contribute to the development of a community that values and
uplifts the voices of BIPOC stakeholders. These listening sessions would allow opportunities for
White stakeholders to hear about the way racism in the institution has impacted their peers,
colleagues, or students. This understanding could contribute to the development of an
organizational culture that acknowledges the racism present in the institution and that grounds
the value of anti-racism initiatives in its ability to solve the problem of racism rather than in
societal pressure.

139

Recommendations for Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
The assumed KMO influences related to the creation and implementation of a discipline-
specific EDI Action Plan were examined to determine the current gaps and assets in the field.
Each of the KMO influences are considered high priorities for any faculty leader who is working
to achieve the field goal. This chapter includes discussion and recommendations for each of the
assumed KMO influences.
Knowledge Influence Recommendations
As shown in Table 8, the assumed influences of conceptual and procedural knowledge
were both validated as gaps by the interview findings. In this study, a gap was validated if 50%
(six) or more of the participants conveyed the need for increased knowledge in the area. As
validated gaps, the influences of conceptual and procedural knowledge are high priorities.
Evidence-based principles have been identified to guide field recommendations for improving
performance in the areas. Table 8 lists the validated conceptual and procedural knowledge needs,
gap finding, principle, and context-specific recommendations. A detailed discussion of the
recommendations and supporting literature is provided after the table.

140

Table 8
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Validated knowledge
need
Gap / Asset Principle Context-specific
recommendation
Faculty leaders need
to understand how
the principles of
anti-racism relate to
theater training and
practice.
(conceptual)
Gap The understanding
of theories,
models, and
structures in
context of the field
improves goal
achievement
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Universities should
provide theater
leaders with the
support necessary to
engage in ongoing
working groups that
incorporate theater-
specific EDI or anti-
racism trainings.
Faculty leaders need
to understand how to
apply anti-racism in
the context of
theater training and
practice.
(procedural)
Gap The understanding
of how to apply the
concepts in the
field improves goal
achievement
(Krathwohl, 2002).
Universities should
provide theater
leaders with the
support necessary to
engage in ongoing
working groups that
incorporate theater-
specific EDI or anti-
racism trainings.

The conceptual and procedural knowledge of anti-racism in theater is necessary for
faculty leaders to assess their department or school’s specific needs and to guide the creation of
an appropriate EDI Action Plan. The context-specific recommendation is that universities should
provide theater leaders with the support necessary to engage in ongoing working groups that
incorporate theater-specific EDI or anti-racism trainings. This recommendation is supported by
the findings, as four participants shared that previous EDI training sessions were inadequate in
isolation. They expressed a desire for more collaboration and peer support around
implementation of anti-racism in theater and around leadership in general. In addition, eight of
the participants emphasized the need for discipline-specific EDI working groups to contextualize

141

and concretize knowledge gained in trainings. Four of those described having created some type
of working group in their department or school, including EDI committees, communities of
practice, and other stakeholder groups.
Motivation Influence Recommendations
As shown in Table 9, none of the assumed motivation areas were validated as gaps by the
findings, as more than 50% of the participants (seven) demonstrated considerable task value,
high self-efficacy, and appropriate goal setting. As such, these motivation areas have been
identified as assets in the field and a single, context-specific recommendation has been provided
for universities that wish to maintain the assets. Table 9 lists the motivation, gap finding,
principle, and context-specific recommendation. A detailed discussion of the recommendation
and supporting literature is provided after the table.

142

Table 9
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendation
Unvalidated
motivation need
Gap / Asset Principle Context-specific
recommendation
Faculty leaders must
believe there is
value in creating and
implementing an
EDI Action Plan
(task value).
Asset Motivation is
increased if the
individual values the
outcome expected
(Bandura, 1993).
Universities should
continue to support
faculty leaders by
helping to establish
lateral mentorships or
working groups for
support.
Faculty leaders need
to believe they can
successfully
implement EDI or
Anti-racism
initiatives. (self-
efficacy).
Asset High self-efficacy
increases an
individual’s
motivation (Bandura,
1993).
Universities should
continue to support
faculty leaders by
helping to establish
lateral mentorships or
working groups for
support.
Faculty leaders need
to have goals to
create and
implement an EDI
Action Plan (goals).
Asset Goals positively
influence motivation
(Ambrose et al, 2010).
Universities should
continue to support
faculty leaders by
helping to establish
lateral mentorships or
working groups for
support.

Faculty leaders must believe there is value in creating and implementing an EDI Action
Plan, believe they can successfully implement EDI or Anti-racism initiatives, and have goals to
create and implement the plan. These three influences of task value, self-efficacy, and goals have
been shown to positively impact motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). The single context-specific
recommendation is that universities continue to support faculty leaders by helping to establish
lateral mentorships or working groups for support. This recommendation addresses all three
motivation assets. Lateral mentorships or working groups for theater leaders provide
opportunities for them to see the results of similar EDI and anti-racism work done at other

143

institutions, increasing their task value (Bandura, 1993). The lateral mentorships or working
groups will also help theater leaders build self-efficacy in their ability to institute successful EDI
or anti-racism initiatives as the models provided through these partnerships can lead to
empowerment (Bandura, 1993). Finally, faculty leaders can observe the ways in which their
peers established the goals necessary to achieve the larger task and gain the support necessary to
set their own goals. The act of setting these goals can increase their motivation (Ambrose et al,
2010) as they work toward completing the larger task of creating and implementing their EDI
Action Plan.
This recommendation is supported by the findings, as eight of the participants
emphasized the need for discipline-specific EDI working groups. In addition, four participants
expressed a desire for more collaboration and peer support around implementation of anti-racism
in theater and leadership in general. These four participants shared that they had enjoyed
previous EDI training sessions but needed continued help.
Organizational Influence Recommendations
As shown in Table 10, validation of the three assumed organizational influences was
split. Gaps were validated in the areas of appropriate resource allocation and acknowledgement
within the organizational culture of systemic racism in the institution, while acknowledgement
within the organizational culture of the need for anti-racism initiatives was identified as an asset.
Evidence-based principles have been identified to guide context-based recommendations for
improving performance in the areas identified as gaps and for maintaining the areas identified as
assets. Table 10 lists each of the assumed organizational influences, gap finding, principles, and
recommendations. A detailed discussion of the recommendations and supporting literature is
provided after the table.

144

Table 10
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Validated organizational
influence need
Gap / Asset Principle Context-specific
recommendation
The organizational
culture must
acknowledge that
systemic racism is
present in the
institution (cultural
model).
Gap Effective change
efforts require a
commitment to
ensuring stakeholders
understand the reason
change is necessary
(Kotter, 1998).
Universities must
foster an
organizational culture
that acknowledges
systemic racism by
giving students,
faculty, and staff
regular opportunities
to share their lived
experiences and to
raise concerns by
hosting departmental
or school-wide
listening sessions.
The organizational
culture must
acknowledge that
anti-racism initiatives
are necessary (cultural
model).
Asset Effective change
efforts require a
commitment to
ensuring stakeholders
understand the reason
change is necessary
(Kotter, 1998).
Universities should
continue to encourage
and support
stakeholders in
fostering an
organizational culture
that acknowledges the
need for anti-racism
initiatives.
The organization must
allocate the resources
necessary to create
and implement
discipline-specific
EDI Action Plans
(cultural setting).
Gap Effective change
efforts require a
commitment to
providing employees
with the resources
necessary. When there
are resource shortages,
resource allocation
decisions must be
aligned with the
organization’s
expressed mission and
values (Clark and
Estes, 2008).
Universities must
provide adequate,
continuing funding for
discipline-specific EDI
initiatives.

145

Cultural Models
Universities that want to support the institution of discipline-specific EDI Action Plans
should work toward building an organizational culture that acknowledges systemic racism in the
institution and the need for anti-racism initiatives. Effective change efforts require a commitment
to ensuring stakeholders understand the reason change is necessary (Kotter, 1998), so addressing
these influences is vital to the ongoing work. The context-specific recommendation for building
an organizational culture that acknowledges systemic racism in the institution is that universities
must foster an organizational culture that acknowledges systemic racism by giving students,
faculty, and staff regular opportunities to share their lived experiences and to raise concerns by
hosting departmental or school-wide listening sessions. The context-specific recommendation for
maintaining an organizational culture that acknowledges the need for anti-racism initiatives is
that universities should continue to encourage and support stakeholders in fostering an
organizational culture that acknowledges the need for anti-racism initiatives. These
recommendations are supported by the findings as 10 participants described that their EDI efforts
were spearheaded by student demands for change. Three participants had already begun hosting
regular listening sessions to ensure continued community discussions centered on the lived
experiences of BIPOC stakeholders and to help foster an organizational culture that
acknowledges systemic racism in the institution.
Cultural Setting
Theater leaders working to create and implement a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan
must have adequate and continued financial support from their institution. Clark and Estes
(2008) stated that effective change efforts require a commitment to providing employees with the
resources necessary. They also emphasized the importance of ensuring the resource allocation

146

decisions align with organizational goals and values. Out of 12 participants, 11 shared that upper
administration in their institution had expressed an aspirational desire to promote EDI, while
only four participants perceived their department or school had been given adequate resources to
complete discipline-specific EDI initiatives. In addition, 10 participants emphasized the
importance of discipline-specific action and noted that the initiatives are in alignment with
university EDI goals. As such, university administration must include funding for discipline-
specific EDI initiatives as part of their commitment to the university-wide change efforts. The
scholarship on anti-racism in theater (Community of BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020b)
demonstrates that universities that wish to combat racism in their theater departments or schools
must provide funding for the following:
• Ongoing discipline-specific trainings for stakeholders including students, faculty, and
staff
• Compensation of employee labor that goes beyond contractual obligations
• Creation of paid roles for leading discipline-specific EDI work (consultant, dean, or
director)
• Updated recruitment, hiring, and support of BIPOC faculty and staff
• Updated recruitment and support of BIPOC students
University administration must work to align the resource allocation with their expressed
priorities. The first steps are to work with theater leaders to assess the current need in their
department or school and then to create a plan for allocating the funds necessary.
Implementation and Evaluation Plan
An implementation plan which combines Kotter’s Eight Step Model for Change (1998)
and the Kellogg Foundation’s Elements of a Strategic Communication Plan (2004) is

147

recommended to ensure lasting change at the systemic level. In addition, a developmental
evaluation plan, as described by Patton (1994) is advised for continued evaluation of progress
toward the stakeholder goal of creating and implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
Four stakeholder groups should be included in this process. The first group is comprised of
faculty leaders in university theater departments and schools. This group was the primary
stakeholder group for the study as they are the change agents for whom the recommendations are
intended. These include Department Chairs, Program Directors, and Deans of theater schools.
The next two stakeholder groups include university administration (College Deans, Vice
Presidents, Provosts, Presidents, and Chancellors) and other university theater faculty. To
implement the recommendations, faculty leaders will need to engage university administration to
ensure adequate fund allocation for the change efforts. Once they have the support and financial
backing of administration, faculty leaders will need to engage with other theater faculty to
achieve the goal. The final stakeholder group is comprised of students in the theater programs.
Faculty leaders must engage with students through the change process to gain a more complete
understanding of how the department or school practices are impacting students. Descriptions of
how the identified change model, communication plan, and evaluation plan could be applied to
implement the study recommendations follows. The implementation recommendations are
illustrated in Figure 4.

148

Figure 4
Implementation of Recommendations

Note. This implementation plan was adapted from Kotter’s Eight Step Model of Change (1998).

In his Eight Step Model of Change, Kotter (1998) established a clear step-by-step process
to assist organizational leaders in their institution of major change efforts. The process offers
clear, easy to follow steps that encourage collaboration with key stakeholders to affect lasting
change. The primary focuses of the model are on preparing stakeholders for the change and
building their capacity to accept the change once made. Kotter’s focus here addresses the
probability of stakeholder resistance. This is important for change efforts in university theater
departments and schools as the findings demonstrated a gap in the organizational culture’s
acknowledgment of systemic racism in the institution.

149

Kotter (1998) emphasized that each step must be followed to achieve successful, long-
lasting change. The first three steps in his change model involve creating a climate for change.
The first step is establishing a sense of urgency. In this step, he describes identifying crises or
major opportunities for growth. In this case, it is important for theater leaders to help
stakeholders understand that systemic racism is present in the institution and that it is causing
harm. The recommendations for the study that fall under this step include the creation of a
working group, scheduling anti-racism trainings for that group, and beginning the regular
stakeholder listening sessions. The work in this step is designed to create opportunities for
discussions and community-based learning that will build an awareness of systemic racism and
establish a sense of the urgency for change efforts. It is important that representation from each
stakeholder group is included in the working group so that the discussions can include a broad
perspective of experiences. The second step in Kotter’s (1998) model is to form a powerful
coalition. In this case, theater leaders are encouraged to create lateral mentorships with other EDI
leaders. This may include leaders of the various theater programs in the school or department,
leaders of other disciplines on campus, or theater leaders from other institutions who are also
working to promote EDI. These lateral mentorships are meant to empower and support the
faculty leaders as they engage in the necessary change initiatives. The working groups
established in the first step will also add to the theater leader’s coalition. The third step in
Kotter’s (1998) model is to create a vision for change. This is the first step for the community of
practice as they work toward creating the discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.
As the group moves into the next phase of Kotter’s (1998) model, the focus shifts to
engaging and enabling the whole organization. In the fourth step, the working group will be
communicating the vision they created. Kotter describes this as a critical step because it involves

150

the teaching of new behaviors. Activation of the Kellogg Foundation’s (2004) Elements of a
Strategic Plan is strongly advised as the community of practice engages in step four. The steps in
the plan are as follows:
• Determine Goal
• Identify and Profile Audience
• Develop Messages
• Select Communication Channels
• Choose Activities and Materials
• Establish Partnerships
• Implement the Communication Plan
• Evaluate and Make Mid-Course Corrections
These steps establish an important framework for a successful communication plan. In
this case, the communication plan would be a vital part of the work done by the working group
as it will involve sharing progress and goals with the immediate stakeholders and the larger
campus community. Effective communication could lead to the creation of a larger coalition,
more support, and increased funding. Perhaps most importantly, the successful communication
of work being done could lead to BIPOC stakeholders increased perception of belonging.
Kotter’s (1998) fifth step is empowering others in the organization to act. In his
description of this step, he discusses the importance of removing obstacles to change and
updating systems or structures that undermine the established vision. Kotter emphasized the
importance of risk taking and the use of nontraditional ideas during this step so stakeholders can
fully engage in the process of finding new solutions. Continued interaction between stakeholders
during the working group meetings and listening sessions plays a pivotal role in this step.

151

Another vital part of this step is working to remove the barriers identified in the gap analysis.
Theater leaders should begin by examining whether the gaps validated by the findings of this
study are also gaps in their theater department or school. The larger implementation framework
addresses all identified gaps except resource allocation, so securing necessary funding is the
primary recommendation for this step. The sixth step involves creating short-term wins. In this
case, publication and celebration of the new discipline-specific EDI Action Plan(s) is
recommended. Kotter (1998) emphasized the importance of recognizing and rewarding the work
of employees at this stage. The change efforts are not complete but celebrating this major
milestone is an important way to build motivation for the continued work.
The final phase of Kotter’s (1998) change model involves implementing and sustaining
the change. When dealing with equity and justice work, it is imperative that the changes be
embedded into the organizational systems to ensure the impact (Bell, 1980). Step seven is
building on the improvements made (Kotter, 1998) and includes implementation of the
Discipline-Specific EDI Action Plan(s) created by the working group. This step may take longer
than other steps depending on the specifics of the action plan. Kotter discusses the importance of
using increased credibility to change the systems, policies, and structures of the organization and
specifies the need for reinvigorating the process with new projects and change agents. This may
include hiring, training, and promoting employees who are able to implement the vision. The
final step is institutionalizing new approaches and involves articulating the alignment between
the new behaviors and success of the action plan. In this step, engaging in the developmental
evaluation process is recommended. Through this process, the community of practice will
evaluate the level of success in their change efforts and identify steps for future improvements. A
developmental evaluation plan is recommended as the purpose of the intervention is seeking

152

systemic change and the process must be developed by the stakeholders with their unique
organizational needs in mind (Patton, 1994). A developmental evaluation plan requires an
understanding of the context in which the change efforts are being made. It also involves
attention to the political, economic, social, and cultural context and implications of what is being
developed. The community of practice will need to continually assess the purpose, implications,
and basic format of the plan they are developing, so other evaluation methods would not allow
the flexibility necessary. Application of a developmental evaluation plan in this final step of
Kotter’s (1998) change model will allow stakeholders to reflect on the dynamic innovations they
are making.
Limitations and Delimitations
As with any qualitative inquiry, there was the possibility of limitations, including
participant variability that stems from self-reporting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This could
include potential bias, exaggeration, or even untrue responses. The effects of bias were
minimized by interviewing faculty leaders from multiple different institutions across the country.
Another possible limitation was researcher bias in the analysis of the findings. The impact of
personal bias on the study was reduced through extensive use of field notes and self-checks
throughout the coding and analysis processes. Another potential limitation of the study involved
the willingness of invited participants to join the study. Invitations to interview were sent to 30
theater leaders and 16 did not respond. Out of the 14 that did respond, one declined for personal
reasons, one agreed but then stopped responding to emails before an interview was confirmed,
and the remaining 12 ultimately completed the interview. Only three out of the 12 participants
shared previously generated materials that demonstrated work they had done toward promoting
EDI.

153

Two major delimitations that may have impacted the scope of the study involve the
participant group and the period. As mentioned in the previous section, the choice to focus on a
single stakeholder group limited the perspectives included in the steady. This decision was made
so that the findings collected would directly address the research questions for the study. As the
study aimed to elucidate faculty leaders’ lived experiences and perceptions about an
organizational change process, they were the only participants needed. Focusing on this highly
specialized participant group also increased the likelihood that participants may be experiencing
similar challenges. The limited scope will increase both saturation and transferability to other
practitioners in the same field. Studying varied responses to similar problems will aid in analysis
of the participants’ perception of how the KMO influences have impacted their work promoting
EDI in their departments or schools.
The second delimitation involved the methodology of the study. A qualitative approach
rather than a mixed-method or quantitative approach was chosen to center the faculty leader as
the subject authority. The study is not meant to assume success indicators and prove correlation.
Instead, the study’s goal is to identify what type of work is being done around EDI in theater
departments and schools and to examine which KMO influences faculty leaders perceive to be
impacting their efforts.
Recommendations for Future Research
The three most vital areas of need highlighted by the study findings were the conceptual
and procedural knowledge of anti-racism as applied to theater, the organizational culture’s
acknowledgment of systemic racism in the institution, and appropriate fund allocation at the
organizational level. Each of these three areas present avenues for future research that would be
beneficial to those working in the field.

154

The first recommendation is for continued scholarship in anti-racism in theater as a field.
As Professor Kepler pointed out, “There aren't a lot of go-to books about how to be an anti-racist
theater practitioner.” Indeed, current scholarship in this area is lacking. The only anti-racism in
theater scholarship participants cited in interviews were Brewer’s (2021a; 2021b) ART
workshops and the open letter, BIPOC Demands for White American Theatre (Community of
BIPOC Theatremakers, 2020b). Other notable scholarship in the field not mentioned by
participants includes Hartley (2020), Howe et al (2017), Lucket and Shaffer (2017), Ndounou
(2009), Pao (2010), and Wood (2017). The second recommendation is for continued research
into university anti-racism initiatives and, specifically, the efficacy of initiatives aimed at
increasing acknowledgment of systemic racism in the institution. There is a particular need for
more research around dismantling the use of merit-based ideology in university theater admitting
and casting practices. Finally, the third recommendation for future research is for continued
scholarship on cost and appropriate funding models for discipline-specific EDI initiatives.
Continued research on the efficacy of discipline-specific EDI initiatives would also be a helpful
contribution in this area as it could further legitimize and detail appropriate levels of resource
allocation.
Conclusion
This field study examined the work university theater leaders are doing to promote EDI
and assessed which KMO influences are impacting their efforts. The findings demonstrated that
only half of participants had met the assumed stakeholder goal of creating and beginning to
implement a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan by the end of the 2020-2021 academic year.
The findings in the KMO influence gap analysis demonstrated high need for improvement in
conceptual and procedural knowledge of anti-racism in theater, appropriate resource allocation,

155

and in the expectation that the organizational culture acknowledge that systemic racism is
present in the institution. In the area of knowledge, the findings demonstrated that all participants
were familiar with some principles of anti-racism in theater, but that seven participants conveyed
a limited understanding of conceptual and procedural knowledge in the area. These participants
demonstrated a lack of understanding around the concepts of colorblindness and meritocracy and
how to institute anti-racism in theater training and practice. In the area of motivation, the
findings indicated that each of the three assumed influences of task value, self-efficacy, and
goals was an asset for most of the participants. In the area of organizational influences, eight
participants noted appropriate allocation of resources as a high priority need as they described
the lack of adequate financial support for discipline-specific EDI initiatives in their organization.
Findings also showed high need associated with one other organizational influence. None of the
12 participants reported that their organizational culture completely acknowledged the presence
of systemic racism in the institution. However, eight participants shared evidence that their
organizational culture acknowledged the necessity of anti-racism initiatives. These findings
suggested that some stakeholders may feel anti-racism initiatives are necessary despite not seeing
racism in the institution. While this study did not seek to find causation or even correlation,
findings point toward two considerations in this area. All 12 participants noted that they felt the
murder of George Floyd and the ensuing calls for justice acted as a catalyst for recent
stakeholder interest in EDI initiatives. In addition, 10 participants described student demands for
change as a driving force behind current initiatives. These findings could be described as an
example of the CRT concept of interest-convergence (Bell, 1980).
The work of implementing anti-racism in theater is immense and theater leaders need
support to institute appropriate, lasting change initiatives. Given the validated gaps in conceptual

156

and procedural knowledge of anti-racism in theater, appropriate resource allocation, and the
expectation that the organizational culture acknowledge that systemic racism is present in the
institution, a detailed implementation plan has been recommended for university administrators
who wish to support theater faculty leaders in EDI or anti-racism change efforts. The plan
combines Kotter’s Eight Step Model for Change (1998) and the Kellogg Foundation’s Elements
of a Strategic Communication Plan (2004). In addition, a developmental evaluation plan, as
described by Patton (1994) is advised for continued evaluation of progress toward the
stakeholder goal of creating and implementing a discipline-specific EDI Action Plan.

157

References
Alvarez, N. (2015). How can theatre and performance studies thrive in the corporatized
university? Canadian Theatre Review, 161, 74-75. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/567443
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. F. (2007). Sociology: Understanding a diverse society, updated
(4th ed.). Wadsworth Publishing.
Associated Press. (2021, June). Key events since George Floyd's arrest and death. Associated
Press News https://apnews.com/article/derek-chauvin-trial-timeline-
ad67932d2bf727dd4c23e17e63a97224
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and
functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith, & M. A. Hitt
(Eds.), Great minds in management (pp. 9-34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bartlett, T. (2021). The antiracist college: This may be a watershed moment in the history of
higher education and race. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-antiracist-college
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press.
Bates, K. G., & Meraji, S. M. (2019, Mar 22,). The student strike that changed higher ed
forever. National Public
Radio https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2019/03/21/704930088/the-student-
strike-that-changed-higher-ed-forever

158

Belay, K. (2020). What has higher education promised on anti-racism in 2020 and is it
enough? Eab, https://eab.com/research/expert-insight/strategy/higher-education-promise-
anti-racism/
Bell, D. A. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest-convergence
dilemma. Harvard Law Review, 93(3), 518–533. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340546
Bell, D. A. (2005). Silent covenants: Brown v. board of education and the unfulfilled hopes for
racial reform. Oxford University Press USA - OSO.
Bell, D. A. (2008). Race, racism, and American law (6th ed.). Aspen Publishers.
Bensimon, E. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 99-111.
Bensimon, E., & Malcom, L. (2012). Confronting equity issues on campus. ERIC Institute of
Education Sciences: ERIC—Education Resources Information Center. https://eric.
ed.gov/?id-ED530596
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2005). Racism without racists. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bonnett, A. (2005). Anti-racism. Routledge.
Brewer, N. (2018). Training with a difference. American Theatre, 54-58.
Brewer, N. (2019, September). Why ‘Equity, diversity, and inclusion’ is obsolete. American
Theatre.
Brewer, N. (2021a, February 15). Creating an Anti-Racist Theatre ethos & access needs.
Workshop presented at the virtual 2021 Kennedy Center American College Theater
Festival, Region VII.
Brewer, N. (2021b, February 16). Anti-Racist Theatre guiding principles: Folding A.R.T. into

159

your practice now. Workshop presented at the virtual 2021 Kennedy Center American
College Theater Festival, Region VII.
Brown, F. W., & Moshavi, D. (2002). Herding academic cats: Faculty reactions to
transformational and contingent reward leadership by department chairs. The Journal of
Leadership Studies, 8(3), 79-93.
Browning, Matthew H. E. M., Larson, L. R., Sharaievska, I., Rigolon, A., McAnirlin, O.,
Mullenbach, L., Cloutier, S., Vu, T. M., Thomsen, J., Reigner, N., Metcalf, E. C.,
Antonio, A., Helbich, M., Bratman, G. N., & Alvarez, H. O. (2021). Psychological
impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in
the United States. PLoS ONE, 16(1), e0245327.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245327
Buchanan, L., Bui, Q., & Patel, J. K. (2020). Black Lives Matter may be the largest movement in
U.S. history. The New York Times.
Burki, T. K. (2020). COVID-19: Consequences for higher education. The Lancet
Oncology, 21(6), 758. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30287-4
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership (1st ed.). Harper & Row.
Cahill, J. F. (2020, August). HSU theater students and alumni call out equity issues. North Coast
Journal of Politics, People & Art.
https://www.northcoastjournal.com/NewsBlog/archives/2020/08/25/hsu-theater-students-
and-alumni-call-out-equity-issues
Carbado, D. (2011). Critical what what? Connecticut Law Review, 43(5), 1593–1643.

160

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). CDC COVID data tracker. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention. https///covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-
tracker/#cases_casesper100klast7days
Chaka, C. (2020). Higher education institutions and the use of online instruction and online tools
and resources during the COVID-19 outbreak—an online review of selected U.S. and
SA's universities. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-61482/v1
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Clayton, T. B. (2021). Refocusing on diversity, equity, and inclusion during the pandemic and
beyond: Lessons from a community of practice. American Council on Education.
https://www.higheredtoday.org/2021/01/13/refocusing-diversity-equity-inclusion-
pandemic-beyond-lessons-community-practice/
Community of BIPOC Theatremakers. (2020a). We see you White America.
Community of BIPOC Theatremakers. (2020b). BIPOC demands for White American theatre.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique
of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of
Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139-167.
Crenshaw, K. (2011). Twenty Years of Critical Race Theory: Looking back to move forward.
Connecticut Law Review, 43(5), 1253-1354.
Crenshaw, K. (2017). Kimberlé Crenshaw on intersectionality, more than two decades
later. Columbia Law School. https://www.law.columbia.edu/news/archive/kimberle-
crenshaw-intersectionality-more-two-decades-later

161

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
D'Amico, M. M., Friedel, J. N., Katsinas, S. G., & Thornton, Z. M. (2014). Current
developments in community college performance funding. Taylor & Francis Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2014.851971
Data USA. (2019). General drama & theatre arts.
https://datausa.io/profile/cip/general-drama-theater-arts#about
Delgado, R. (1989). Storytelling for oppositionists and others: A plea for narrative. Michigan
Law Review, 87(8), 2411–2441. https://doi.org/10.2307/1289308
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction (3rd ed.). New York
University Press.
Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpiński, Z., & Mazza, J. (2020). The likely impact of
COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent
international
datasets. https://op.europa.eu/publication/manifestation_identifier/PUB_KJNA30275EN
N
Dickeson, R. C. (2010). Prioritizing academic programs and services. Jossey-Bass.
Dixson, A. D., & Rousseau Anderson, C. (2018). Where are we? Critical race theory in
education 20 years later. Peabody Journal of Education, 93(1), 121-
131. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2017.1403194
drama. 2021. In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved August 5, 2021, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drama
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). The Souls of Black Folk. A. C. McClurg & Co.

162

Dudziak, M. (2000). Cold War civil rights: Race and the image of American democracy.
Princeton University Press.
Durkee, A. (2020). Broadway shutdown extended through May 2021. Forbes.
Eckel, P. D. (2002). Decision rules used in academic program closure: Where the rubber meets
the road. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(2), 237-262.
Emeka, J. (2017). Seeing Shakespeare through brown eyes. In S. D. Lucket, & T. M. Shaffer
(Eds.), Black acting methods: Critical approaches (p. 89-105)
Espinosa, L. L., Turk, J. M., Taylor, M., & Chessman, H. M. (2018). Race and ethnicity in
higher education: A status report. American Council on
Education. https://www.equityinhighered.org/indicators/u-s-population-trends-and-
educational-attainment/race-and-ethnicity-of-the-u-s-population/
Exec. Order No. 13985 (January 20, 2021). Advancing racial equity and support for underserved
communities through Federal Government.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-
equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government
Foster, W. (1989). Toward a critical practice of leadership. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Critical
perspectives on education leadership (pp. 27-42). Falmer Press.
Gibbs, G. R. (2018). Analyzing qualitative data (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment
with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
Harper, S. R. (2020). Editorial COVID-19 and the racial equity implications of reopening college
and university campuses. American Journal of Education, 127, 153-162.

163

Harper, S. & Hurtado, S. 2007. Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for
institutional transformations. New Directions for Student Services, 120: 7–24.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.254.
Hartley, J. (2020). Vulnerability in a crisis: Pedagogy, critical reflection and positionality in
actor training. Fusion Journal, (17), 6-
9. https://search.informit.org/documentSummary;dn=127822201457704;res=IELHSS
Herrera, B. E. (2017). "But do we have the actors for that?": Some principles of practice for
staging Latinx plays in a university theatre context. Theatre Topics, 27(1), 23-35.
Howe, K., Dolan, J., Galella, D., Jones, Omi Osun Joni L., Portes, L., Sandahl, C., & Kottner, L.
(2017). Archiving ATHE's thirtieth anniversary conference plenaries. Paper presented at
the Association for Theatre in Higher Education, 27(1) 1-22.
https://doi.org/10.1353/tt.2017.0002
Hubler, S. (2020, Oct 26,). Colleges slash budgets in the pandemic, with 'nothing off-limits'. New
York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/26/us/colleges-coronavirus-budget-
cuts.html
Iyengar, S., & Hudson, A. (2014). Who knew? arts education fuels the economy. The Chronicle
of Higher Education, 60(26) https://search.proquest.com/docview/1508131731
Jaschik, S. (2017). Harvard suspends graduate program in theater. Inside Higher
Ed, https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/07/17/harvard-suspends-graduate-
program-theater
Juliano, C., Castrucci, B., & Fraser, M. R. (2021). COVID-19 and public health: Looking back,
moving forward. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 27(1), S1-S4.
https://doi.org/10.1097/PHH.0000000000001300

164

Kellogg Foundation (2004). Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and
Action: Logic model development guide. Kellogg Foundation.
https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/LogicModel.pdf
Kezar, A., Bertram Gallant, T., & Lester, J. (2011). Everyday people making a difference on
college campuses: The tempered grassroots leadership tactics of faculty and staff. Studies
in Higher Education, 36(2), 129-151.
King, R. M. (2017). Rethinking leadership in higher education—vision, models, expansion,
inclusion, development, and transformations. The ECCSSA Journal, 16(1), 4-33.
Kotter, J.P. (1998). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business School
Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
Practice, 41(4)
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163320
Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). The evolving role of critical race theory in educational
scholarship. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 115-119.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341024
Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers
College Record, 97(1), 47–68.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: a.k.a. the remix. Harvard
Educational Review, 84(1), 74-84.
Liu, A. (2011). Unraveling the myth of meritocracy within the context of US higher education.
Higher Education, 62(4), 383-397.

165

Ludwig, F. (2019). Is now when we panic? the metrics of program sustainability. Unpublished
manuscript.
Matsuda, M. J., Lawrence, C. R., Delgado, R., Crenshaw, K. W., & Reitz, C. (Eds.). (1993).
Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech, and the First Amendment.
Westview Press.
Mazzocco, P. J. (2017). The psychology of racial colorblindness: A critical review. Palgrave
Macmillan.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, D. (2021, February,). We see you, White American theater delivers progress
report. Playbill, https://www.playbill.com/article/we-see-you-white-american-theater-
delivers-progress-report
Miles, M. (2014). Courageous leadership in higher education: A call to action. Journal of
Performing Arts Leadership in Higher Education, 5, 6-19.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Table 322.30. Bachelor's degrees conferred by
postsecondary institutions, by race/ethnicity and field of study: 2016-17 and 2017-18.
National Center for Education
Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_322.30.asp
National Endowment for the Arts. (2019). Latest data shows increase to U.S. economy from arts
and cultural sector. https://www.arts.gov/news/2019/latest-data-shows-increase-us-
economy-arts-and-cultural-sector
Ndounou, M. W. (2009). Encountering Black culture in acting classrooms and beyond. Theatre
Topics, 19(1), 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1353/tt.0.0056

166

Ngai, M. M. (2004). Impossible subjects: Illegal aliens and the making of modern America –
Updated edition (REV-Revised). Princeton University Press.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hhr9r
Nichols, A. H., & Anthony Jr., M. (2020). Graduation rates don't tell the full story: Racial gaps
in college success are larger than we think. The Education
Trust, https://edtrust.org/resource/graduation-rates-dont-tell-the-full-story-racial-gaps-in-
college-success-are-larger-than-we-think/
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States from the
1960s to the 1990s. (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (2014). Racial formation in the United States (3rd ed.). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203076804
Oxtoby, D. W. (2012). The place of the arts in a liberal education. Association of American
Colleges & Universities, 98(2).
Pao, A. C. (2010). No safe spaces: Re-casting race, ethnicity, and nationality in American
theater. University of Michigan Press.
Patton, L. D. (2006). The voice of reason: A qualitative examination of Black student
perceptions of Black culture centers. Journal of College Student Development, 47(6),
628–646.
Patton, L.D., Sánchez, B., Mac, J., & Stewart, D. (2019). An inconvenient truth about
“progress”: An analysis of the promises and perils of research on campus diversity
initiatives. The Review of Higher Education 42(5), 173-198.
https://doi:10.1353/rhe.2019.0049.

167

Patton, M.Q. (1994). Developmental evaluation. Utilization-Focused information and Training,
15(3), 311-319.
Quantz, R. A., Rogers, J., & Dantley, M. (1991). Rethinking transformative leadership: Toward
democratic reform of schools. Journal of Education, 173(3), 96-118.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002205749117300307
Rabaka, R. (2021). Du Bois: A critical introduction. Polity.
Robertson, R.V., Bravo, A. & Chaney, C. 2014. Racism and the experiences of Latino/a college
students at a PWI. Critical Sociology, 40(5): 1–21.
Roms, H. (2020). Training for performance art and live art. Theatre, Dance and Performance
Training, 11(2), 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443927.2020.1769377
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Teachers College Press.
Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
SchWeber, C. (2008). Determined to learn: Accessing education despite life-threatening
disasters. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1), 37-43.
Shields, C. M. (2018). Transformative leadership in education: Equitably and socially just
change in an uncertain and complex world (2nd ed.). Routledge.
St. Amour, M. (2020, October 15,). Report: Enrollment continues to trend downward. Inside
Higher Ed https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/10/15/worrying-enrollment-
trends-continue-clearinghouse-report-shows
Stewart, K., Connelly, D., & Robinson, J. (2020). Everything you should know about the
coronavirus outbreak. The Pharmaceutical
Journal, https://doi.org/10.1211/PJ.2020.20207629

168

Stewart, T. J. (2020). Capitalism and the (il)logics of higher education's COVID-19 response: A
Black feminist critique. Leisure Sciences, 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2020.1774011
theater. 2021. In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved August 5, 2021, from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/theater
Tillis, S. (2007). Remapping theatre history. Theatre Topics, 17(1), 1-19.
https://doi.org/10.1353/tt.2007.0012
Traffis, C. (2021). Theater and Theatre—How is it
spelled? https://www.grammarly.com/blog/theater-or-theatre/
UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 impact on education. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and
Cultural Organization. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
USC Center for Urban Education. Equity and student success. https://cue.usc.edu/about/equity/
Weltsek, G. J. (2018). Theatre programs in community colleges: A policy for equity. Arts
Education Policy Review, 1-9. 10.1080/10632913.2018.1423594
Weiner, E. J. (2003). Secretary Paulo Freire and the democratization of power: Toward a theory
of transformative leadership. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 35(1), 89-106.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-5812.00007
Williamson, J. A. (1999). In defense of themselves: The Black student struggle for success and
recognition at predominantly White colleges and universities. Journal of Negro
Education, 68 (1), 92–105.
Wilson, J.L., Meyer, K.A. & McNeal, L. 2012. Mission and diversity statements: What they do
and do not say. Innovative Higher Education, 37: 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10755-011-9194-8.

169

Wood, K. H. (2017). Curative pedagogy in the undergraduate theatre historiography
classroom. Theatre Topics, 27(3), 187-196. https://doi.org/10.1353/tt.2017.0035
Wood, S. (2020). Universities plan Fall initiatives to address systemic racism and police
brutality. Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 37(10),
7+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A632276269/GPS?u=usocal_main&sid=bookmark-
GPS&xid=386ee01e
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91.
Young, G. (2018). Creative interdisciplinarity in the arts. Exploring, experiencing, and
envisioning integration in US arts education (pp. 15-26). Palgrave Macmillan.
Young, L. W. (1986). The role minority student centers play on predominantly White campuses.
In C. A. Taylor (Ed.), Handbook of minority student services (pp. 14–22). Madison, WI:
NMCC Inc.

170

Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix
Instrument Research Question Theoretical
Framework
Target A Priori
Parent Code
Interview Question:

11, 12

Public-Facing and Internal
Documents Showing EDI
Initiatives
RQ1: In what ways, if
any, are university
theater departments and
schools working to
increase EDI?

CRT
(Crenshaw, 2011)

Current
Discipline-
Specific EDI
Initiatives
Interview Questions:

1, 2, 4, 5, 6
RQ2: What knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational
influences are
impacting the
promotion of EDI in
university theater
departments and
schools?
CRT
(Crenshaw, 2011)

Dimensions of
Knowledge
Krathwohl (2002)
Knowledge
Influences
Interview Questions:

6, 7, 8, 9

RQ2: What knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational
influences are
impacting the
promotion of EDI in
university theater
departments and
schools?
CRT
(Crenshaw, 2011)

Social Cognitive
Theory
(Bandura, 1993)
Motivation
Influences
Interview Questions:

3, 7, 10
RQ2: What knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational
influences are
impacting the
promotion of EDI in
university theater
departments and
schools?
CRT
(Crenshaw, 2011)

Organizational
Culture
(Schein, 2017)
Organizational
Influences

171

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Institution: _______________________________________________________________
Interviewee (Title and Name): ________________________________________________
Interviewer: Ashley DeMoville
Consent to Record: [ ] Yes [ ] No
Informed Consent for Interview: [ ] Yes [ ] No
Documents Obtained: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Consent to Follow Up by Email: [ ] Yes [ ] No
Post Interview Comments or Leads:
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________

Instructions
Good morning (afternoon). Thank you for coming. It’s really nice to see you/meet you face to
face. Our interview today involves two parts. The first part is our discussion, during which time
I’ll ask you about your experiences as a faculty leader and about equity, diversity, and inclusion
in your department/school. The purpose is to learn about your experiences inside and outside of
the classroom. There are no right or wrong or desirable or undesirable answers. I hope you will
feel comfortable with saying what you really think and how you really feel. Once we’ve finished
our discussion, I will ask whether you have any documents you would like to share that can be
used to demonstrate your department’s/school’s work in equity, diversity, and inclusion.
Recording Instructions
If it is okay with you, I will be recording our zoom meeting today. I like to record so I can get all
the details, but at the same time be able to carry on a nice conversation. I can assure you that all
your comments will remain confidential. I’ll be the only person who will have access to the
recording, and it will eventually be destroyed after it is transcribed. Do I have your consent to
record?
Informed Consent
Before we get started, I want to confirm that you have been able to review the information sheet I
sent you. Essentially, this document states that: (1) all information will be held confidential, (2)
your participation is voluntary, and you may stop at any time if you feel uncomfortable, and (3)
we do not intend to inflict any harm. Do you agree to proceeding with the interview? Thank you!
Introduction
The purpose of my study is to look at what types of efforts are being made by theater
departments/schools in the area of equity, diversity, and inclusion and then to examine the
influences that are impacting that. I have planned this interview to last about an hour.
A. Interviewee Background
I’d love to start by getting to know a bit about you and what brought you to where you are today
in your career. Can you please tell me a bit about your background?
Follow up Questions:

172

a. I know you are currently (department chair/program director/committee chair),
but how long have you served in that capacity?
b. How long have you been teaching in higher education?
c. How old are you?
d. I’m also really interested in identity and how our identity impacts the work we do.
If you feel comfortable, could you speak about what aspects of your identity most
impact your work?

B. Interview Questions

Thank you for sharing all that, I really appreciate it. Let’s chat a bit now about where your
department/school stands in terms of equity, diversity, and inclusion.

1. How would you describe equity, diversity, and inclusion to a new faculty member?
2. How would you describe the equity, diversity, and inclusion issues that are unique to
theater?
3. How well do you think faculty in your department/school understand EDI issues and the
way they relate specifically to theater?
4. How familiar are you with anti-racist theatre practices?
5. How would you describe the actual level of diversity among students in your theater
department/school? What about among the faculty and staff?
6. How would you describe the experience of students, faculty, and staff in your
department/school in terms of equity and inclusion?
7. How important is increased EDI to your department/school?
8. How do you feel about your ability to lead theater-specific EDI initiatives?
9. How would you describe your department’s/school’s current goals in this area?
10. How would you describe your university’s support of EDI efforts? Have there been
financial support of trainings, research, or curriculum updates?
11. Can you describe any efforts faculty in your department/school may have made over the
past couple years to address equity, diversity, and inclusion issues or to embrace Anti-
Racist Theatre practice?
12. How would you describe the level of success of those initiatives?
13. Is there anything else you’d like to share that hasn’t come up yet?
CONCLUSION
That was the final question I had for you today. Thank you again for sharing your time and
insights with me.
Before we finish, do you have any additional documents you’d like to share that can be used to
demonstrate your department’s/school’s EDI work? Are you comfortable emailing them to me at
demovill@usc.edu?
Also, should I have any points of clarification over the next two months while I am reviewing
what you’ve shared, may I contact you via email?

173

Appendix C: A Priori Code Hierarchy
Interviews and documents will be analyzed using a combination of a priori and open
codes. A priori codes have been developed using the conceptual framework and organized into a
hierarchy with the child codes being categories of the parent codes (Gibbs, 2018). The hierarchy
is illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5
A Priori Code Hierarchy

174

Appendix D: IRB Approved Information Sheet for Exempt Research
STUDY TITLE: Struggle of a Lifetime: The Pursuit of Anti-Racism in University Theater

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Ashley DeMoville

FACULTY ADVISOR: Patricia Tobey, Ph.D.

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to investigate what work is currently being done to increase equity,
diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in university theater departments/schools and to identify which
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences are impacting that work. We hope to learn
what institutions can do to support individual faculty members and departments/schools in their
EDI initiatives. You are invited as a possible participant because you are a faculty leader in a
theater department or school.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you decide to take part, you will be asked to attend a one-on-one interview with the principal
investigator to answer questions about your experiences with EDI initiatives at work. The
interview will be conducted remotely over the Zoom platform and will be scheduled at your
convenience. You can expect the interview to last between 60-90 minutes. If you agree, the
interview will be recorded so that the principal investigator can access the interview transcript
through Zoom and review the video while checking the transcript for accuracy. If you decline to
be recorded, you may continue with the interview. Although preferable, the use of a camera
during the meeting is not required.

You will also be asked whether you can provide any additional documentation that shows
evidence of your recent EDI efforts. This documentation may include, but is not limited to, anti-
racism statements, syllabi, or depictions of departmental goals/timelines. You are not required to
provide additional documentation.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $10 gift card for your time. You do not have to answer all the questions to
receive the card. The card will be emailed to you no more than 24 hours after the interview is
completed.

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

175

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used. You have the right to review the videorecording and/or transcript of
your interview upon request. The interview recording will be deleted once the transcription is
complete (approximately one week after the interview). All identifying information will be
removed from the transcript and both you and your institution will be given pseudonyms to
protect your confidentiality. Any identifying information on additional documents you share will
be obscured or deleted, as appropriate. The transcripts and any additional documents you share
will be saved in a password protected cloud service.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact the principal investigator, Ashley
DeMoville at demovill@usc.edu. You may also contact the faculty adviser, Patricia Tobey,
Ph.D. at tobey@usc.edu.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

176

Appendix E: Initial E-mail Invitation Sent to Participants
SUBJECT: Seeking Theatre Dept. Chairs for My Dissertation Study

Dear [Potential Participant],
I am the Department Chair and Director of Drama at Spokane Falls Community College
and am also working on an Ed.D. at USC. I'm studying recent discipline-specific EDI initiatives
in university theater departments for my dissertation, and I think you would be a great addition to
the study. The study is examining what type of work is going on across the country at the
moment and how university administration is supporting that work. The study is completely
confidential, so I’d use a pseudonym for your name/school in all the documents and in the study
results.
Would you be willing to be a study participant and chat with me over zoom for about an
hour sometime in the next week or so? Participation is completely voluntary, but I’ll be sending
$10 gift cards as a small gesture of thanks.

Let me know if you are interested and, if so, what your availability is.

Thanks so much for considering!

Ashley DeMoville
Chair of Communication Arts and Modern Languages & Director of Drama,
Spokane Falls Community College
Cell: (808) 499-4153

177

Appendix F: IRB Approval Notice
SUBJECT: Study Approval Notice Sent

istar-DoNotReply@usc.edu

University of Southern California Institutional Review Board
1640 Marengo Street, Suite 700
Los Angeles, California 90033-9269
Telephone: (323) 442-0114
Fax: (323) 224-8389
Email: irb@usc.edu

Date: Aug 04, 2021, 09:51am
Action Taken: Approve
Principal
Investigator:
Ashley DeMoville
ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
Faculty Advisor: Patricia Tobey
OFFICE OF THE PROVOST
Co-Investigator(s):

Project Title: The Pursuit of Anti-Racist Theater Training in Higher Education
Study ID: UP-21-00522
Funding:

The University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB) designee reviewed your iStar application and attachments on
8/4/2021.

Based on the information submitted for review, this study is determined to be exempt from 45 CFR 46 according to §46.104(d) as
category (2, 4).

As research which is considered exempt according to §46.104(d), this project is not subject to requirements for continuing review. You
are authorized to conduct this research as approved.

If there are significant changes that increase the risk to subjects or if the funding has changed, you must submit an amendment
to the IRB for review and approval. For other revisions to the application, use the “Send Message to IRB” link.

The materials submitted and considered for review of this project included:
1. iStar application UP-21-00522, dated 6/10/2021
2. IRB Social-Behavioral Protocol A DeMoville
3. Protocol for Previously Generated Materials A DeMoville
4. Ashley DeMoville Interview Protocol

NOTES to PI: Per USC Policy, someone may not collect data about people he or she oversees in a professional capacity. Please ensure
that someone on the study (represented in 2.1, with the required human subjects certification) is able to serve as an independent data
collector. Further, data must be stripped of any identifying information before being provided to people who have the supervisory
relationship in order to protect the confidentiality of the participant responses.

INFORMATION SHEET AND RECRUITMENT

178

It is the responsibility of the principal investigator to follow the principles of the Belmont Report, which requires all potential
participants to be informed of the research study, their rights as a participant, confidentiality of their data, etc. per USC IRB policy.
Please utilize the attached Information Sheet For Exempt Research and Guidance for Recruitment materials. The documents should
include information specific to your study. These documents will not be reviewed by the IRB; however, it is the responsibility of the
researcher to make sure the documents are consistent with the study procedures listed in the IRB application. NOTE: In the event that
this study is audited by the IRB, you are required to provide the Information Sheet and recruitment documents used for this study.

DATA COLLECTION FORM

You must use the data collection form submitted.

STUDY PERSONNEL

Individuals who are knowledgeable about the protocol must obtain consent from subjects for participation in a study. Specifically, they
must be able to describe the purpose, procedures, benefits, risks, and alternatives to participation in the study. They must be able to
answer subjects’ questions about the protocol and about risks of the research procedures and alternatives. The PI must identify all
individuals who will obtain consent and attest that they fit the above criteria. The PI is ultimately responsible for ensuring that ethically
and legally valid consent is obtained from all research subjects.

Funding source(s): N/A – no funding source listed
Attachments:
Information-Sheet-for-Exempt-Studies-07-27-2019.doc
2019-10-31_guidance-for-recruitment-tool-final.pdf

Social-behavioral health-related interventions or health-outcome studies must register with clinicaltrials.gov or other International
Community of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) approved registries in order to be published in an ICJME journal. The ICMJE will not
accept studies for publication unless the studies are registered prior to enrollment, despite the fact that these studies are not applicable
“clinical trials” as defined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For support with registration, go to www.clinicaltrials.gov or
contact Jean Chan ( jeanbcha@usc.edu, 323-442-2825).
Important
The principal investigator for this study is responsible for obtaining all necessary approvals before
commencing research. Please be sure that you have satisfied applicable requirements, for example conflicts of
interest, bio safety, radiation safety, biorepositories, credentialing, data security, sponsor
approval, clinicaltrials.gov or school approval. IRB approval does not convey approval to commence research
in the event that other requirements have not been satisfied.
This is an auto-generated email. Please do not respond directly to this message using the "reply" address. A
response sent in this manner cannot be answered. If you have further questions, please contact iStar Support at (323)
276-2238 or istar@usc.edu.
The contents of this email are confidential and intended for the specified recipients
only. If you have received this email in error, please notify istar@usc.edu and delete this
message.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success

PDF

Where are they? The underrepresentation of African or Black American senior executives in the Department of Defense

PDF

Retaining and supporting BIPOC professionals in PWIs: addressing PWIs equity gap

PDF

Racial and gender gaps in executive management: a retrospective examination of the problem cause and strategies to address disparities

PDF

Somebody ought to say something: the role of the church in facilitating dialogue about race, racism, and diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts

PDF

Promoting DEI to increase business performance: an evaluation of hiring practices

PDF

Gender role beliefs of male senior leaders in retail and the impact on women’s advancement

PDF

Black premedical student retention: exploring campus support programming through the eyes of the student

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

Anti-bias training in community colleges: an exploratory study

PDF

Understanding burnout in non-denominational clergy: a social cognitive approach

PDF

The lack of gender diversity in executive leadership ranks within higher education

PDF

The shared experience of veteran transition and its impact on veteran suicide

PDF

Knowledge sharing among student affairs professionals at a small faith-based higher education institution

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Elevating mentees leads to organizational success

PDF

The significance of investigating the absence of Black decision-makers in television and feature films

PDF

Analyzing systemic socioeconomic challenges to improve educational training for families seeking self-sufficiency

PDF

A study of diversification In the outdoor recreation industry and its connection to the Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) urban health equity gap

Asset Metadata

Creator DeMoville, Ashley Dawn (author)

Core Title The pursuit of anti-racism in university theater

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 12/09/2021

Defense Date 11/19/2021

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

Tag anti-racism,anti-racist,diversity,EDI,Education,equity,inclusion,KMO,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,theater,Theatre,University

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Heinrich, Rena M. (committee member), Phillips, Jennifer L. (committee member)

Creator Email ademoville@gmail.com,demovill@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC18367059

Unique identifier UC18367059

Legacy Identifier etd-DeMovilleA-10293

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights DeMoville, Ashley Dawn

Type texts

Source 20211216-wayne-usctheses-batch-904-nissen (batch), 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 author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

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

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu