inclusion | Campus Safe Words

TERM: inclusion
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

“Inclusion” refers to efforts aimed at creating environments where individuals of all backgrounds feel welcomed, respected, and able to participate fully. In higher education, the term is widely used in mission statements, hiring materials, faculty development, curriculum goals, and student affairs to promote access and belonging for historically underrepresented groups.

Why It’s Risky

“Inclusion” is a high-risk term in states that have passed laws prohibiting DEI frameworks or programs—such as Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act or Texas Senate Bill 17. While the concept appears positive and neutral on its face, its institutional use often implies or accompanies race-conscious or identity-based programming. In such environments, “inclusion” is interpreted by lawmakers and watchdog groups as a proxy for progressive ideological agendas that treat demographic identity as a basis for differential treatment, resource allocation, or policy development. Risk is especially high when the term appears in job postings, strategic plans, or required trainings.

Common Critiques

Critics argue that “inclusion” in practice often leads to compelled speech, ideological conformity, or the suppression of dissenting views. From a legal perspective, its appearance in faculty hiring, admissions rubrics, or campus policy can signal preference for certain identity groups, which may conflict with equal protection principles. Opponents also contend that inclusion initiatives can undermine academic rigor or free expression by enforcing subjective standards of emotional comfort or belonging. In legislative hearings, inclusion language has been cited as justification for dismantling DEI offices, freezing funding, or imposing oversight on public colleges and universities. Even when framed as welcoming, the term is seen by critics as inseparable from the broader DEI infrastructure now under political challenge.

Suggested Substitutes

Respectful campus climate (in student services or conduct language)
Support for all students (in advising or housing contexts)
Equitable access to resources (in academic support or HR policies)
Open and professional environment (in workplace or faculty settings)
Encouraging participation from diverse perspectives (in classroom or events)

These alternatives focus on outcomes and institutional mission while avoiding ideological framing.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Inclusion” may still be used in elective student programming, academic research, or scholarly discussions where the term is defined and context-specific. It may also appear in federal grant language or accreditation documents where required. In public-facing materials, job descriptions, or compliance documents, use legally neutral substitutes to avoid triggering policy violations or political pushback.

NOTES: Avoid using “inclusion” as a policy goal or performance metric unless mandated. Replace with language that emphasizes professionalism, fairness, and academic participation. Frame all goals in terms of institutional effectiveness and student success—not group identity or emotional validation.