equity | Campus Safe Words

TERM: equity
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

“Equity” refers to the principle of fairness in process and outcome, often requiring differentiated treatment or resource allocation to address historical or structural disparities. In higher education, “equity” is widely used in admissions strategies, faculty hiring, curriculum design, student success initiatives, and institutional planning to signify intentional efforts to improve outcomes for specific demographic groups.

Why It’s Risky

“Equity” has become one of the most politically contested terms in public higher education. Under laws such as Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act and Texas Senate Bill 17, and through Executive Order 14173 at the federal level, public institutions are explicitly prohibited from advancing policies or practices that suggest individuals should receive different treatment based on race, gender, or other identity factors. In this context, “equity” is widely interpreted as a commitment to outcome-based interventions, often associated with critical race theory, DEI programs, and progressive activism. Its use in job postings, training materials, course objectives, or grant proposals may signal noncompliance with new legal frameworks and expose institutions to reputational, financial, or legal risk.

Common Critiques

Critics argue that “equity” undermines the principle of equal treatment by encouraging identity-based preferences or differential standards. In hiring and admissions, it is viewed by opponents as promoting soft quotas or reverse discrimination. In pedagogy, “equity-minded” teaching has been criticized for lowering academic rigor or suppressing dissenting viewpoints. Legislators and policy groups aligned with conservative governance argue that equity-based language reflects ideological bias and administrative overreach. Equity is often portrayed as a moral claim—rather than a legally enforceable standard—used to justify bureaucratic growth or social reengineering. Its inclusion in performance reviews, faculty criteria, or institutional benchmarks has triggered audits, trustee intervention, and legislative pushback in multiple states. In federal grant contexts, equity language now carries added risk due to the explicit removal of DEI-related considerations from funding priorities.

Suggested Substitutes

Equal opportunity (in admissions, hiring, and access policies)
Fair and consistent standards (in grading, evaluation, or training)
Support for all students (in advising or academic success programs)
Access to resources (in financial aid, housing, or service offices)
Institutional responsibility to remove barriers (in policy or planning language)

These substitutes focus on legality, fairness, and mission alignment without implying differential treatment based on identity.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Equity” may still be used in scholarly research, public health programming, or social work curricula where the term is academically defined and discipline-specific. In legacy grant reporting or quoting federal directives issued before Executive Order 14173, careful use may be required. However, in public-facing documents, new grant applications, job descriptions, and strategic plans, the term should be avoided unless explicitly mandated.

NOTES: Replace “equity” with terms grounded in equal treatment, transparency, and measurable outcomes. Avoid framing fairness as outcome-dependent unless required by academic discipline. Align all usage with legal compliance and politically defensible language to reduce exposure in states with anti-DEI laws or under federal oversight.