Commentary

The Chronicle of Higher Education Admits it’s Easy to Hate DEI Training—and They’re Right

  • By Do No Harm Staff
  • June 12, 2024

The Chronicle of Higher Education is at it again. Its new report, “The Future of Diversity Training: Better Ways to Make Your College More Inclusive,” is in line with its webpage dedicated to combatting “The Assault on DEI” complete with a “DEI Legislation Tracker”.

Of course, the new report features all the usual talking points: DEI is good. Microaggressions are bad. Implicit bias training is necessary. And so on.

But there’s a twist this time. Buried in the report is an implicit – and occasionally explicit – admission that DEI training is not well-liked.

The Chronicle’s own data suggest that 47 percent of survey participants find it, at best “neither helpful nor unhelpful” or, at worst, “very/somewhat unhelpful”.

Figure 1. From the Chronicle of Higher Education’s “The Future of Diversity Training: Better Ways to Make Your College More Inclusive” report.

The authors of the report state that DEI training is good as long as no one speaks out against it or dares to express their concerns, which could “prompt people to avoid it, or even cause it to backfire.”

So, to recap, half of folks will either hate it or won’t get anything out of it. But you need to be trained. And it will be good – as long as nobody pushes back.

For their $8 billion per-year investment, the pro-DEI crowd isn’t getting much bang for their buck.

Another classic from the report: “Bad diversity training is worse than none at all.”

Really? Did the copy editor fall asleep?

At least good training makes a real difference though, right? Nope. Even the report acknowledges that the jury is out on DEI trainings, stating in clear terms that “A large body of research on the effectiveness of diversity training is inconclusive,” and “Some studies show that diversity training may actually backfire.”

The report goes on:

Diversity-training programs are now practically a rite of passage for college faculty and staff members, yet the evidence that they are effective is underwhelming…While there is a significant body of research on diversity training dating back decades, many studies rely on surveys that ask how participants felt about the training or assess what they’ve learned, while relatively few try to determine whether the training changed how people behave…The studies that do exist have found mixed results. Some show that participants learn about people from other backgrounds and that training can have an effect on beliefs and behaviors (although the latter fades over time). Others show that diversity-training programs can trigger negative feelings in participants and even harm the very groups they’re intended to help.

The Chronicle of Higher Education’s “The Future of Diversity Training: Better Ways to Make Your College More Inclusive” report

Critics of DEI could not have put it any better. Put simply, the report acknowledges the blatant failures of DEI up to this point, admits the lack of statistical rigor in many DEI evaluations, and showcases lackluster support for DEI.

One chart from the report even suggests that certain DEI trainings actually decrease diversity, with a 13.9 percent drop in black female managers following diversity trainings—a sharper decline than any other subgroup.

Figure 2. From the Chronicle of Higher Education’s “The Future of Diversity Training: Better Ways to Make Your College More Inclusive” report.

Yet, the report concludes that more DEI – even “bad” DEI – is the solution.

It is long-past time for the DEI industrial complex and higher education to take a long, hard look in the mirror.