How Universities Gaslight EDI&I Initiatives: Mapping Institutional Resistance to Structural Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the visibility of equity, diversity, inclusion, and Indigenization (EDI&I) discourses within large institutions, such as post-secondary institutions, research has chronicled only modest advancements on these stated values. Blocks to advancements in EDI&I stem, in part, from the structural nature of racist and sexist domination, and especially its embeddedness in both formal and informal norms of institutions. Based on a close examination of two EDI&I initiatives in university contexts, and direct experiences of “pushback” against these initiatives, this article conceptualizes institutional gaslighting, whereby universities paradoxically both embrace EDI&I discourse, on the one hand, while simultaneously deploying strategies that prevent dismantling systemic inequalities, on the other. A conceptualization of this dynamic is designed to help others identify and address forms of resistance, especially in settings of high stated value, and ultimately advance these values within large institutions. Résumé Malgré la visibilité de discours sur l’équité, la diversité, l’inclusion et l’indigénisation (EDII) dans de grandes institutions telles que les établissements postsecondaires, la recherche n’a relevé que des progrès modestes dans l’instauration de ces valeurs pourtant prisées. Les entraves à ces progrès ont pour cause le caractère structurel de la domination raciste et sexiste et surtout la persistance de cette domination dans les normes formelles et informelles des institutions. Cet article, en se fondant sur un examen attentif de deux initiatives EDII dans un contexte universitaire ainsi que sur un témoignage direct de résistance contre ces initiatives, décrit le détournement cognitif paradoxal par lequel les universités appuient d’une part les discours sur EDIItout en employant d’autre part des stratégies qui perpétuent les inégalités systémiques. Cet article présente une conceptualisation de cette dynamique afin d’aider les personnes impliquées à identifier et appliquer des moyens de résistance, surtout dans des contextes reconnus comme étant importants, et, au bout du compte, à promouvoir EDII au sein de grandes institutions. Keywords / Mots clés : equity, diversity, inclusion, Indigenization, higher education policy / équité, diversité, inclusion, indigénisation, politiques en enseignement supérieur
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".