How to [Re-]Create Equity Committees in the Anti-Equity Era
The Case for Culturally Responsive Organizing
It is easy to see that the incoming Trump administration will actively treat equity-related activities as one of the fundamental causes of many social problems in the country. If popular supporters and members of the incoming administration are already comfortable blaming equity, diversity, and inclusion for the multiple wildfires in California and the horrendous damages that stem from the disaster, then it is hard to predict a situation where EDI will not be framed as the source of harm for adults and children in the country.
How should teachers, administrators, and staff prepare for the rise of the anti-equity culture? I am worried that many school leaders will promote the idea that “neutrality” is the correct path forward, which suggests that EDI activities were actually harmful all along and that no one should really care about the supporters of EDI activities. I would not want my children to attend a school where EDI activities are treated as necessary only when it is politically convenient for the most powerful and well-paid individuals in the school district. I am also worried that some school leaders will try to reinforce their commitment to EDI activities by doubling down on the out-dated and ineffective practice of mandatory anti-bias training. School leaders and their supporters may feel like they are taking a forceful stand against oppression on behalf of students from marginalized backgrounds, but the research is pretty clear: supporters of mandatory anti-bias training does not change behavior and it may lead to an increase in the negative treatment of people of color and other folks with historically-marginalized categories. Both paths will probably help to sustain the anti-equity movement and do little to ensure progress on a school’s EDI goals—if those goals are even defined.
There is a better path forward: win the popularity contest by designing or re-designing equity committees to implement a method I call culturally responsive organizing—when a team uses the tools of a culturally responsive teacher to obtain active support for a campaign from people who do not already agree with them.
The “Wildly Important Goal” of Culturally Responsive Organizing
Simply put, equity committees need to have a goal that is related to the popularity of EDI activities. The higher the number of supporters for EDI activities, the lower the chance that anti-activists will successfully eradicate EDI activities. When anti-equity activists claim that EDI activities harm children, they may not convince all employees to become anti-equity activists too. Yet the messaging from anti-equity activists can significantly decrease the chances that employees would see any social, emotional, or intellectual benefit of being associated with EDI activities. If there was a vote by all staff to determine whether EDI activities should even exist, the anti-equity activists wouldn’t need to convince everyone to vote “no.” Instead, they simply need to convince as many potential supporters of EDI activities to either opt-out of voting or vote “no” on the ballot. The equity committee needs to organize active supporters of EDI activities so that they increase the chances that the vast majority of employees would proudly vote “yes” at the end of the year.
One way to measure the success of the equity committee is to keep track of the amount of employees they convince to be proud and public supporters of EDI activities. For example, imagine that an equity committee defined an equity supporter as someone who works to address instructional inequities. Members of that committee could tell individuals that they are an equity supporter if they are someone who “proudly and publicly commits to work with other staff to study, identify, and develop methods to remove barriers to the learning of the groups of students who disproportionately struggle to learn in our school’s classes.” To keep track of their success, the equity committee could work to increase the amount of people who choose to support that commitment on a monthly basis. The “end in mind” is to get the vast majority of employees to proudly share and act on that commitment.
Primary Strategies for Success
To reach success on the organizing goal, an equity committee needs to clearly identify plans for action that are tied to learning and behavioral change. If equity committee members have a clear vision that they know is beneficial for all employees and students, then the work of an equity committee does not have to seem like the team is “selling” ideas in a problematic way. Instead, the equity committee’s job is to develop strategies that can bridge the gap between their ideal and the people who do not already agree with them.
What are the resources that an equity committee could offer to someone who doesn’t already want to publicly identify as an equity supporter? An equity committee should re-read books that provide clear definitions and illustrations of pedagogy that is mindful of the relationship between culture, the science of learning, and social context. For example, in Culturally Responsive Teaching and the Brain, the brilliant Zaretta Hammond reminds educators that our brains are hardwired to pursue safety and happiness in social settings. Educators know that a student does not learn when that student finds reasons to be defensive or upset—especially if they are forced to be there or they are subjected to guilt-tripping. The same is true with adults: adult learners are more likely to learn from someone who has developed a rapport with them and connected the new information to their learners’ interests. Therefore, equity committees need to identify strategies to 1) understand the different worldviews of the potential equity supporters, 2) specify what counts as safety and happiness for potential equity supporters, and 3) increase the likelihood that the new information about equity is processed.
One phenomenal resource that a team could offer, which could reduce the stress and negative attitudes of potential equity supporters, is to provide advice on the dilemmas that make it hard for individuals to pursue the school’s equity goals. Even if a committee has only 2 or 3 people, that small committee could use a protocol that involves research and consultation to address a puzzling situation for the potential EDI supporter. By serving as learning partners for someone who isn’t already an EDI supporter, the equity committee includes that potential supporter in a problem-solving process that benefits everyone involved. As a consequence, that potential supporter will see the benefits that stem from the existence of EDI committees (and other activities).
To take a practical example, imagine that the members of an equity committee have one on one conversations with potential EDI supporters. In those conversations, they would include a question like, “when you think about our definition of equity, what are some of the dilemmas or barriers that arise (or could arise) for someone trying to be an equity champion in our school?” The potential supporter may not want to publicly commit to be an EDI supporter, but that person may feel comfortable talking about why they may struggle to identify with the equity committee’s ideal. If the potential supporter is a white teacher, they may say something like “I feel like there is no way for me to connect with students of color because I am not a person of color. I want to help but I can’t change the fact that I’m white and I shouldn’t have to feel bad for being who I am.” It would be easy for the equity committee member to want to start a debate with that person about structural racism and white privilege, but a culturally responsive organizer could see that there is a dilemma that they can help to address: the fear that it is impossible for a white teacher to develop a rapport with students of color.
Once the equity committee member has the dilemma, there are five steps that they could take (with the other members of the equity committee) to provide a resource for the teacher and, consequently, the students in their classes:
Dilemma Identification: After they have found the obstacle or dilemma, they should make sure that the dilemma lives at the intersection of their definition of equity and the strategic goals of the school. Otherwise, the equity committee makes themselves vulnerable to be labeled as a group of people doing “political work” that is unrelated to the primary functions of the school. As a remedy, one of the equity committee members should seek verification from the principal or the school improvement team/shared decision making team that recommendations on ways to resolve the dilemma would be aligned with the strategic goals of the school.
Research on the problem: The equity committee members should collect some additional information to better understand the dilemma from different perspectives. That research could include focus groups and interviews with people who struggle with the dilemma and/or some of the students of color who have struggled to learn in the teacher’s classroom. They could conduct a few phone interviews with equity committee members at another school to see if they have encountered a similar issue. They could also look at existing scholarly research on this topic or ask the chief executive officer for equity (i.e. an Assistant Superintendent for Equity or a Director for Equity) for additional guidance.
Research on remedies: The committee should then collect information so they can develop a list of potential remedies for the dilemma. They could reach out to the same stakeholders they interviewed during Stage 2. They could also reach out to people who have previously struggled with the dilemma and found success.
Quality control: All ideas about remedies are not created equal, nor would it be helpful for the equity committee to give a list of 20 recommendations to someone. Therefore, the equity committee should use a protocol to determine which recommendations can withstand the scrutiny of a variety of critical thinkers. Role playing can be helpful here. Questions based on the basic critical thinking topics (like purpose, supporting evidence, who benefits, implications, definitions, assumptions, etc.) would also be helpful. Ideally, they would end up with a maximum of 3 recommendations.
Education about the remedies: The team would then use their knowledge of high quality, culturally responsive pedagogy to share remedies for teachers struggling with the aforementioned dilemma.
If education about those recommendations—or any other resources the committee offers to people—can exceed the benefits of “neutrality” or supporting the anti-equity activists, then that equity committee is more likely to be successful in the anti-equity era.
Who Benefits from Blind Optimism?
My friends know that I identify as a “skeptic” of EDI policies, practices, and other activities in schools. I often come off as a pessimist, in part, because so many individuals have chosen unflinching optimism as a response to anti-equity activists. After more than 10 years of studying EDI activities from a sociological perspective, I believe that members of EDI committees (and other supporters) should be “skeptics” because leaders often promote strategies that are rarely effective—unless their goal is to treat EDI activities mainly as public relations exercises for an audience of fellow professionals and managers. In other words, we should begin with the premise that it is reasonable to look at EDI activities with a little bit of side-eye. Viewed from the perspective of an EDI skeptic, the purpose of an equity committee is to provide clear pieces of evidence that their participation in EDI activities would not be in vain.
Although I am a skeptic, I am not a supporter of the anti-equity agenda because I know that students benefit from the existence of effective EDI activities. I want my future children to attend a school where a group of staff use critical thinking, research, and good pedagogical methods to address the barriers to their vision for equity. I want my future children to attend a school that actively seeks to disrupt the tradition of window-dressing by leaders who promise to support EDI. I want my future children to know that their school’s teachers, administrators, and staff are humble enough to recognize that they need to help each other address the imperfections that exist on an institutional level. I want my children to know that there are people who want to continue the progress of the civil rights movement, albeit in less radical ways than the organizers of the civil rights movement. And I want to know that my future children can attend schools where equity, diversity, and inclusion are viewed as ideals that are worth our time and money.
If leaders do not allocate resources to help equity committee members serve as culturally responsive organizers for equity, I fear that my future children will be forced to look at EDI activities as a “thing of the past.”