What They Say vs. What They Do: A Qualitative Analysis of Failed Racial Redress at Historically White Institutions

Abstract

Historically white institutions (HWIs) across the country are, in some way or another, working to address racial disparities within their organizations. As a part of campus diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts, DEI advocates work to examine ways to increase faculty and student recruitment and boost the retention of marginalized groups. At the same time, leaders continue to implement ineffective color evasive approaches that do nothing to change the institutional culture or dismantle its hegemonic systems (Wagner & Yee, 2011; Annamma et al., 2017). Instead, these efforts actively work to uphold and perpetuate white supremacy (Wagner & Yee, 2011). Despite attempts to remedy historical wrongs, institutions tend only to address racial inequities when white society feels those issues need confrontation (Bell, 1980). Often DEI in higher education consists of surface advancements while failing to delve deeper into the root cause of the racial disparities within these organizations (Tichavkunda, 2021). Using the scholarship of Derrick Bell from a CRT praxis, this research addresses the racial aspect of DEI work and how interest convergence (Bell, 1980) is the primary source of institutional DEI pushes. It will also examine how what Bell (1992) calls racial symbols limit progress by serving as a temporary salve intended to placate the masses while doing little to impact DEI efforts significantly. This work asks institutions and DEI advocates to examine how interest convergence operates in higher education. The main objective being for them to abolish racial symbolism, address institutional inequities (retention rates of Black and Latin@ faculty, staff, and students), and begin to center their marginalized voices. This work hopes to foster the creation of realistic programs and policies intended to promote tangible equitable outcomes actively aimed at disrupting white supremacist systems.