Handling Whiteness with Kid Gloves: The Experiences of White Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Cocurricular Educators
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This critical narrative inquiry study examined how whiteness functioned in cocurricular diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) education by exploring the experiences of white DEI educators who facilitate these learning opportunities in their campus communities. Although there has been a focus on white educators who facilitate conversations in the classroom about race, racism, and antiracism, research on the experiences and applications of white educators who lead these conversations outside the classroom has remained insufficient. There also have been a number of studies on higher education practitioners that have engaged whiteness, but these analyses typically have examined the relationship between students and student affairs practitioners. By focusing on the experiences of white DEI educators, this research study sought to address empirical gaps in the literature on whiteness, white educators, and DEI work(ers). Informed by the work of four critical race and whiteness theorists, I used a thinking with theory approach to unearth how technologies of whiteness operated through participants’ experiences. Fifteen white DEI educators located at historically and/or predominantly white institutions from across the country participated in the study. Data collection included three interviews with each participant conducted between October 2023 and February 2024 and two optional focus groups with participants conducted in May 2024. Findings highlighted how participants understood and described the function of DEI education as a corrective whiteness project focused on addressing learner harm and institutional image management. In response to the research questions guiding the study, participants’ narratives illuminated the role of racial anxieties in their work; the social rules around embodiment, emotion, and discourse informing their praxis; and the challenges of being answerable and accountable in ways that did not reify participants’ white exceptionalism. The study’s implications provided considerations for DEI educators to better attend to how whiteness informs and influences their praxis and the overall project of DEI education. Although these implications may be relevant to all practitioners and researchers engaged in the DEI enterprise, these implications have utility for white DEI educators and educational researchers who study whiteness and white people. The final assertion for the study invites those invested in the DEI enterprise to reconsider and reconceptualize their commitments to DEI in education by interrogating technologies of whiteness in their work.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».