inclusive | Campus Safe Words

TERM: inclusive
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

“Inclusive” describes an approach, environment, or policy that actively welcomes and supports individuals from a variety of backgrounds, identities, and perspectives. In higher education, the term is commonly used in hiring rubrics, course syllabi, mission statements, and student programming to signal openness to cultural, racial, gender, or ideological diversity.

Why It’s Risky

“Inclusive” is a high-risk term under legislation that restricts DEI initiatives or identity-based programming, such as Texas Senate Bill 17 and Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act. Although often presented as neutral or positive, the term “inclusive” has become closely associated with institutional efforts that prioritize demographic diversity or require viewpoint affirmation. When used in hiring practices, evaluation rubrics, or strategic plans, “inclusive” may be seen as code for political or ideological preference. In conservative-led states, such language is increasingly flagged as noncompliant with state mandates for viewpoint neutrality, equal treatment, and constitutional protections in public education.

Common Critiques

Critics argue that “inclusive” often masks a preference for progressive viewpoints and identity-based policies, leading to indirect exclusion of dissenting or traditionally held perspectives. In hiring or promotion contexts, the term may suggest that candidates must affirm or embody particular values unrelated to academic merit. In course syllabi or student programming, “inclusive” language is sometimes viewed as a mechanism for promoting ideological conformity or suppressing open debate. Lawmakers have expressed concern that “inclusive” environments—when not clearly defined—are used to justify compelled speech, preferential treatment, or programs that violate laws requiring race- and sex-neutral administration of public resources. When attached to institutional goals, “inclusive” may draw political scrutiny, audits, or legal challenges.

Suggested Substitutes

Welcoming and professional environment (in HR or hiring language)
Open to diverse viewpoints (in classroom or curriculum settings)
Supportive of student success (in advising or housing communications)
Fair and respectful interactions (in conduct codes or community standards)
Access for all participants (in program descriptions or outreach efforts)

These alternatives preserve intent while avoiding identity-based or ideological framing.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

“Inclusive” may still be used in academic research or scholarly writing where the term is defined and contextually appropriate. It may also be acceptable in grant language if directly required by the funder. In institutional policies, training materials, or hiring criteria—particularly in conservative states—substitute terms should be used to reduce legal and political risk.

NOTES: Do not use “inclusive” as a hiring requirement, training outcome, or policy benchmark unless clearly defined and legally justified. Focus institutional messaging on fairness, professionalism, and open academic dialogue rather than ideological or identity-based goals.