Intersectionality, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Access (3)

This resource examines five interrelated concepts that underpin equal opportunity policies and practices in higher education and research industries: intersectionality, equity, diversity, inclusion and access.

You are on Chapter 3 of 5: Diversity

Table of Contents

1. Introduction and intersectionality
2. Equity
3. Diversity (current page)
   1. Workplace culture and bullying
      • Text Box 8: How to create a culture that welcomes diversity
   2. Exploitation of precariously employed workers
      • Text Box 9: Eliminate the exploitation of precarious workers
   3. Support for early-to-mid-career scholars
      • Text Box 10: Retaining early-to-mid career workers
4. Inclusion
5. Access
6. Notes
   • Learn more

3. Diversity

Diversity is, at its core, a concept that explains the differences, divisions and categorisations of any given phenomena, including the very people who carry out research, policy and other work about diversity.

Diversity is a common organising principle within and across all scientific disciplines. Diversity studies refers to the categorisation and theoretical interpretations of variety, balance and disparities across the natural, physical and social sciences. The study of diversity is not simply about acknowledging differences. It is also the critical reflection of how we come to understand and value these differences

In a workplace context, diversity emcompasses older notions of Equal Employment Opportunity, though it is now more explicitly about protecting and supporting difference, including gender, age, language, disability, ethnicity, culture, sexuality, religious beliefs and other characteristics that need special protections, such as marital status and caring responsibilities (AHRC 2014).

More specifically in higher education workplaces, the concept of diversity allows the systematic exploration of how differences challenge existing modes of knowledge and what we take for granted, as well as how knowledge is in turn responded to, resisted and transformed through understandings of difference.

Diversity impacts the choices educators make in the classroom about what to teach, and what to leave out of their lessons (Sonia Netto and Patty Bode 2011). Training on diversity will affect the images, examples and types of knowledge presented to students. A critical understanding of diversity makes the difference between an educator discussing how the history of racism shapes learning, to ignoring the power of racism in the classroom.

Feminist research has shown that having a critical understanding of diversity will positively impact on how we teach, train and carry out research methods (Shulamit Reinharz 1992). Diversity knowledge impacts how we approach scientific problems in a study; the types of questions we ask; and those we ignore. A deep understanding of diversity shapes our writing about science and its “subjects,” and it helps us develop a more profound understanding of how people are impacted by research conclusions. In particular, a feminist understanding of diversity in research means having the ability to see that the people we study and those who are impacted by research are not homogeneous.

3.1 Workplace culture and bullying

Workplace bullying costs the Australian workforce $6 billion annually in missed work and health impacts (Anne O’Rourke and Sarah Kathryn Antioch 2016). Research shows that the adversarial culture within academia affects people of different backgrounds in different ways. The percentage of people who have experienced bullying within academic settings is twice as high as national averages (Sam Farley and Christine Sprigg 2014). Harassment and bullying is highest for Aboriginal employees (DCA 2017; Skinner et. al. 2015), other women of colour (Clancy et. al. 2017) and LGBTQIA+ people,* especially bisexual and transgender women (Atherton et. al. 2016; Davidson 2016; Pride in Diversity 2016). Disabled people also disproportionately experience workplace bullying, with the additional strain of being pathologised as a problem to be managed by the institution when coming forward (Duncan Lewis, Ria Deakin and Frances-Louise McGregor 2018).

Furthermore, while the academy promotes values of collegiality, the competitive nature of funding and other aspects of academia can create a “toxic environment” where negative stress becomes the norm.

More academics, especially at minority people and men at junior levels, are speaking up about bullying and other unhealthy dynamics of academia, and supporting the benefits of gender equity for all genders.

Sociologist Dr Eric Anthony Grollman (2014) writes about how being a Black, queer man, academia had forced him to work even harder to prove his place, and that this pattern of working long hours and feeling competitive about boosting his CV had a negative impact on his health, leading to increased anxiety. He made the decision to move away from a research-intensive university, even though his peers effectively saw that his choice was a sign of weakness:

“Beyond my health, the lure of academic stardom detracts from what is most important to me: making a difference in the world… When I die, I do not want one of my regrets to be that I worked too hard, or did not live authentically, or did not prioritize my health and happiness as much as I did my job.”

Grollman and an increasing number of academics want to be able to work in an environment that nurtures their love of research and teaching, without detracting from their health and family lives.

3.2 Exploitation of precariously employed workers

Work/life balance is negatively impacted by quality of employment and job insecurity. Abuse of short-term contracts, such as an over-reliance on casual labour and other precarious work arrangements, have made academia untenable for many graduates. This exploitation of labour especially impacts the opportunities for early-to-mid-career workers.

Around half of Australia’s academic workforce is classified as ‘contingent labour’ (49% of academics and 54% of teaching and research staff) (Kristin Natalier et al. 2016). This is twice the rate of the rest of the Australian labour market (24%). They must ‘fish’ around from one contract to the next; their pay is sometimes delayed; they are often ineligible for grants, funding and other benefits; they miss out on opportunities to contribute to campus life as they rarely have decision-making roles; and many do not have sick leave and other benefits. Job uncertainty impacts family planning, securing a mortgage, savings, and the ability to plan holidays.

This is a gender equity issue as, ‘Women are more likely to be sequestered in precarious employment’ (Veronica Sheen 2017). Academia has changed so rapidly that positive reversal of current trends may seem insurmountable. It isn’t! Start by pledging to change at least one thing to improve the work/life balance of precarious workers (CASA 2014).

3.3 Support for early-to-mid-career scholars

The so-called “leaky pipeline” is a phrase that implies we lose talent through the education and recruitment process. The solution to date has been to blame the market, as if by producing more graduates and employing them in junior roles will assure the “leak” is plugged up. This is not the case. We have multiple cultural issues that inhibit retention of hardworking early-to-mid-career staff.

Reflecting on the “leaky pipeline” of academia, Professor Mason and colleagues say:

At its core, this is a values issue. We should support all the talent in our academic pipeline through allowing them to enjoy both satisfying academic careers and family lives.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction and intersectionality
2. Equity
3. Diversity
4. Inclusion
5. Access

Citation

To cite this article:

Zevallos, Z. (2020) ‘Equity, Diversity, Intersectionality, Inclusion and Access,’ The Other Sociologist, 16 February. Online resource: https://othersociologist.com/intersectionality-equity-diversity