increase diversity | Campus Safe Words

TERM: increase diversity
RISK LEVEL: extreme

Definition

“Increase diversity” refers to efforts aimed at expanding the representation of individuals from varied racial, ethnic, gender, socioeconomic, or cultural backgrounds within an institution. In higher education, the phrase is commonly used in strategic plans, faculty hiring goals, admissions policies, and grant proposals to signal a commitment to demographic inclusion.

Why It’s Risky

The phrase “increase diversity” is under heightened scrutiny in states that have enacted laws limiting the consideration of race, gender, or other identity factors in public education, such as Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act, Texas Senate Bill 17, and Oklahoma Executive Order 2023-31. Critics argue that the goal of increasing diversity often results in identity-based preferences that conflict with principles of equal treatment. When used in official documents, this phrase may be seen as endorsing race-conscious decision-making or aligning the institution with progressive ideologies. In politically regulated environments, references to “increasing diversity” can expose institutions to legal risk, including audits, funding restrictions, or accusations of violating nondiscrimination statutes. Conservative policymakers often frame the phrase as evidence of reverse discrimination or ideological gatekeeping, especially when linked to hiring or admissions practices.

Common Critiques

Critics contend that efforts to “increase diversity” frequently elevate demographic characteristics over individual merit, academic qualifications, or institutional fit. The phrase is often associated with quota-like practices that undermine fairness and may conflict with recent legal standards, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against race-conscious admissions. Lawmakers and trustees argue that such language introduces political activism into hiring and admissions, and erodes public trust in the neutrality of academic institutions. There is also concern that the emphasis on demographic diversity can marginalize ideological, religious, or geographic diversity, reinforcing a narrow cultural perspective. Opponents claim that “increasing diversity” has become a coded mandate for identity-based social engineering rather than a neutral educational goal. In states with active legislative oversight, institutions using this phrase risk investigation or reputational damage, particularly when it appears in strategic goals, HR policies, or public statements by leadership.

Suggested Substitutes

Expand outreach to qualified applicants from varied backgrounds (in hiring plans);
Support student success across all communities (in academic programs);
Broaden participation in campus initiatives (in student affairs);
Ensure fair access to opportunities (in admissions materials);
Maintain a welcoming environment for all (in public messaging)

These alternatives maintain a focus on fairness, access, and inclusion without signaling identity-based selection criteria.

When It May Still Be Appropriate

The phrase “increase diversity” may be appropriate in federally funded grants, accreditation documents, or academic research where it is clearly defined and required by the funder. It may also appear in elective programs or scholarly work focused on the study of diversity, provided it does not imply policy enforcement. In general communications or policy documents, substitute neutral, outcome-focused language to remain compliant with legal standards and political expectations.

NOTES: Avoid using “increase diversity” as a stated goal in hiring, admissions, or strategic planning documents unless mandated by a grant or agency. Emphasize open access, fairness, and mission-aligned excellence to reduce political risk and preserve compliance.