Search results

Diversity education and training have been a standard in higher education for decades now. While it is widely accepted that they can have significant value and impact, there is much uncertainty in how to build programs that deliver in positive ways for increasingly diverse college campuses. The need for contextual application of diversity education makes it difficult to develop a general framework for building such a program. Still, research shows essential theoretical components of diversity education programs that can be critical to the success of these initiatives. How do we take these larger theoretical concepts and ground them within unique higher education environments in ways that meet specific campus needs – needs that exist in the context of the campus, as well as within the larger social, cultural, and political landscape? The model has to be agile enough to respond to both the internal and external factors that shape the campus climate while being true to its theoretical roots. This chapter presents a programmatic framework for building a diversity education certificate program to enhance progress toward achieving institutional change goals, as well as a case study snapshot that demonstrates the practical implications of implementing the framework. The program can drive campus change supporting diversity and inclusion – change that may have been dormant, not supported, or not articulated in ways that result in effective outcomes.

This chapter provides an exciting opportunity to advance our knowledge of equality and diversity of students in higher education (HE). My main reason for choosing this topic is personal interest.

Critical race theory (CRT) and the social identity theory were used as analytical tools in understanding equality and diversity of students in higher education.

Managing equality and diversity of students in higher education can be done through the tournament conception, trial conception, leveling conception, remedy conception, and job-interview conception. The primary intrinsic limit to equality of opportunity of students in higher education institutions (HEIs) is the persistence of irreducible differences between families in their economic, social, and cultural resources. Policy can partly compensate for economic differences but can scarcely eliminate the potency of the family in cultural capital and social networks. Students from advantaged social groups enjoy more access to elite universities through the influence of policies. Disadvantaged students from social groups are excluded from accessing top HEIs. Students in elite universities enjoy more advanced educational opportunities than those in nonelite universities, and they are more advantaged to be placed in the job market.

Student pedagogic (content knowledge) and formative (evaluation) opportunities in HEIs may not be achieved when equality and diversity is dissociated from its academic content and reduced to access for the sake of access. Universities are expected to develop a repertoire of lecturing methods to enable students to learn (Gudmundsdottir, 1990, p. 47). Students constrained by financial considerations, or not given a choice, are not in a position to achieve equality and diversity in their choices of the benefits offered by HEIs as the constrains may limit them from having the necessary resources. Differences between the students’ contexts of learning may also place limit to their performance ability because of the differentiated contextual background. Recruit of students to universities should include students from diverse contextual backgrounds. In addition, universities ought to integrate diversity management with their admission policies and other strategic choices. The chapter focuses only on equality and diversity for students in HEIs. Again, it is limited by relying on the researcher’s experiences and literature review only. In addition, interviews with students and staff at universities were not done because literature reviewed gave more information from researches based on findings of other scholars.

Higher education institutions (HEIs) should engage students and listen to their needs for equality and diversity to be realized. Debate continues about the best strategies for the management of discrimination that comes in many forms depending on the perceptions of the individuals affected.

This study aims to examine North American master's programs in higher education administration, leadership and student affairs; the extent to which these programs incorporate diversity coursework; and their reasons for doing so. Graduate programs must prepare practitioners who are able to work effectively with multiple groups of students, ameliorate persistence and graduation gaps, and create more socially just campuses.

Using an open-ended questionnaire and document analysis, the authors analyzed the extent to which and why these master's programs incorporate courses and course material on diversity.

Exactly half of higher education leadership (50%) and a small majority of student affairs (52%) programs require some type of diversity course, while only 42% of higher education administration programs do so. Reported reasons for including such coursework include students' demand for such courses, the centrality of diversity to university missions and standards in the field.

Research on faculty perceptions regarding the need for diversity courses with a focus on interest convergence may be productive.

Program directors should ensure that coursework on diversity is required, and that faculty teaching these courses are comfortable discussing these topics to prepare students to work with diverse groups in multiple contexts.

This study uses multiple methods (document analysis, open-ended questionnaire of program directors) to analyze programs and program design intentions. The authors use the critical race theory framework's tenet of interest convergence to understand program rationales.

This chapter proposes a sustainable trajectory for leadership and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) organizational change in higher education. Leadership practices and strategies necessary to construct and implement change and cultivate diverse, equitable, and inclusive educational environments are deliberated, with particular emphasis on transformational leadership theories and practices. These types of organization development practices produce concrete transformation in institutions that have long-established, inert, and deeply entrenched cultures in which discriminatory or even racist practices have been deeply embedded and accepted over time. The complex dynamics of transformation in higher education, brought on, in part, by the rigidity of its organizational structure coupled with its history and foundation in racism and racist practices, makes achieving sustainable change difficult in higher education. Transformational change requires the creation of new mental models through meaning making and perspective sharing that allow individuals in higher education to think differently about how higher education institutions should operate given the rapid shifts in our society. Organizational change leaders must engage in deep, purposeful, and critical reflection and examination of the organization's culture to lay the groundwork for significant change. The chapter explores topics such as leading change through transformational leadership and the styles, practices, and capabilities associated with it, leadership development, strategic diversity leadership, and the Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) as change leader in higher education. The internal and external environmental trends demanding substantive change in higher education continue to intensify over time. The demand for pervasive transformation in higher education is resounding, and institutional leaders must be open to and even drive new and innovative approaches to shifting its very core – its DNA, its culture – to meet those demands.

In this chapter, the authors interrogate the structures, natures, processes, and variables that shape globalized collegiate desegregation. The authors pay attention to the history of segregation in South African culture, then proceed to current efforts to dismantle and rebuild the country’s educational enterprise. Drawing parallels with segregation policy in the United States, the authors argue that both nations may draw from global lessons about systemic global anti-Black oppression and its structural forms (e.g., apartheid, inequities in higher education). More specifically, the authors ground arguments in an analysis of the linguistic hegemony that continues to inculcate the college-aspiring students of South Africa. Understanding fundamental desegregation characteristics of racial hegemonic nations (e.g., United States) vis-à-vis racial and linguistic hegemonic nations (e.g., South Africa) is imperative to increase understanding of democratization of educational systems throughout the world.

The purpose of this study is to address the research gap about the impact of board and audit committee diversity (gender, ethnicity, age and education) on audit fee by using a balanced panel of listed firms in four Asian markets – Hong Kong, India, Malaysia and Singapore. The authors argue that a more diverse board and audit committee with the inclusion of females, international directors and directors of different education levels may act as a more effective and innovative mechanism to monitor and regulate important managerial decision such as audit fee.

The authors use a two-stage framework to address the endogeneity issue and the random-effects panel model to control for firm heterogeneity on a balanced panel of 200 firms in four Asian regions over 2011–2013 to examine the hypotheses presented in this study.

The authors find that diversity is a factor determining the level of fees paid to audit firms. A more diverse board and audit committee may demand audit services involving differential effort. Firms with more international directors on board and in audit committee pay a higher fee. In addition, a more educationally diverse board and audit committee also pay a higher fee. In contrast, a significant negative relationship is found between audit committee gender diversity and audit fees, but not between board gender diversity and audit fees, suggesting that a more gender-diverse audit committee asks for less audit effort and pays a lower audit fee.

The findings of this study are based on three years of data from the largest 50 firms in four Asian regions, which limits the generalizability of the results. Like other cross-country studies, the analyses in this study also have problems in controlling for all unobservable factors related to cross-country differences in regulations or institutional environments. Diversity can take other forms, including experience, profession, tenure and marital status which are not a part of this study and lay the foundation for future research.

A firm with a more education-diverse board is more committed to quality monitoring and demands higher audit effort, and consequently, higher fees are paid to audit firms. More educationally diverse board and audit committee exercise more effective monitoring and prefer greater audit effort.

Firms with more ethnic-diverse boards and audit committees may demand greater assurance for investor protection and pay higher audit fees. The complementary view of internal and external governance systems suggests more effective monitors may prefer additional protection through the purchase of more audit effort. The findings on education diversity and ethnic diversity are consistent with the argument of the complementary view.

This study highlights the significant impacts of diversity (gender, education and ethnicity) in the financial reporting process.

In the wake of inconsistent findings between board diversity and firm performance, the purpose of this paper is to advance the research by examining the linear and non-linear nature of the relationship between board demographic diversity (gender, age, tenure, and education) and firm performance in Indian knowledge-intensive firms (KIFs).

This study uses a panel data set of top KIFs in India that is listed in National Stock Exchange’s Top-200 list for the period 2010-2014.

Results indicate that there exists a positive linear relationship between the overall board demographic diversity index (board gender, age, tenure, and education) and firm performance. Among the effects of individual board diversity variables, the authors have found that board age diversity positively whereas education diversity negatively influences firm performance. Furthermore, gender diversity and tenure diversity do not significantly influence the firm performance.

This study is based on the following demographic factors: gender, age, tenure, and level of education. The authors did not include other demographic variables such as nationality and language.

This research would help knowledge-intensive companies in designing their corporate boards. The results indicate that companies should have more diverse boards to enhance firm performance.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first research to examine the effect of the overall board diversity index and individual board demographic diversity indices (gender, age, education, and tenure) on firm performance in the context of KIFs in India.

This study examines the effect of working capital management and board diversity on firm profitability and firm value for a sample of Indonesian firms listed in the LQ45 index. The interaction of board diversity components with working capital management adds a comprehensive discussion to enhancing working capital management efficiency.

This study engages a panel multiple regression method. Data from a sample of LQ45 companies from 2010 to 2016 are analysed using a fixed and a common effect model. Board diversity is further analysed in interaction variables, whether it holds the moderating role in the relationship of working capital and firm performances. This study operates return on capital employed (ROCE) as the proxy of profitability performance and EVA-Spread for the firm's value performance. The simultaneous effect test is used for the robustness test.

The results indicate that working capital management and board diversity have no significant impact towards profitability. However, they significantly positively impact firm value, meaning that the market is attracted by effective working capital management and board diversity. However, the interaction variable analysis shows that gender diversity and education level diversity weaken the impact of working capital management towards firm value.

This study is not limited to one industry; therefore, future studies may focus on one industry and detect the pattern of working capital components in the particular industry. This study focuses on quantitative numbers to explain board diversity's interaction in working capital management to maximise shareholders' wealth. Future studies may consider a qualitative discussion to describe the quality of women's presence on the board, education level and educational background of board members.

Unlike most studies in which authors relate working capital and board diversity to firm performances separately, this study combines both components and analyses whether board diversity can act as a moderator effect. As part of corporate governance, it is expected that board diversity can enhance working capital management efficiency.

The purpose of this study is to examine the significance of incorporating diverse lived experiences and identities through culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) in promoting sustainability, cultural diversity and the integration of various perspectives and worldviews rooted in identity and lived experience in sustainability education at Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC).

A case study approach using Geneva Gay’s (2002) CRP framework was used to investigate the role of CRP in sustainability education at CCAC. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data collected from eight interviews and 67 survey respondents, who participated in a larger exploratory study focusing on education-related sustainable development goals objectives in technical and vocational education and trainings.

The findings indicate that implementing CRP in sustainability education fosters a culturally diverse learning environment, leading to enhanced cultural competence, critical thinking, global citizenship and academic achievement. Best practices and potential benefits of integrating diverse lived experiences and identities using CRP are also identified.

The small sample size may limit the generalizability of the findings. To address this limitation, future studies could use larger and more diverse samples to confirm the findings of this study. Additionally, the study was conducted at a single institution, which may limit the transferability of the findings to other institutions. Future studies could replicate this study at different institutions to determine the generalizability of the findings. Another limitation is the reliance on self-reported data, which may be subject to social desirability bias. To address this limitation, future studies could use a mixed-methods approach that includes both qualitative and quantitative data sources.

This study highlights the need for community colleges to prioritize diverse faculty and staff recruitment, provide CRP and diversity training and establish partnerships with community organizations. By implementing these recommendations, institutions can enhance sustainability education, promote cultural competence and foster critical thinking among students, ultimately contributing to a more inclusive and equitable learning environment.

The integration of diverse lived experiences and identities using CRP in sustainability education can lead to a more culturally diverse and socially inclusive society. By fostering cultural competence, global citizenship and critical thinking in students, community colleges can empower them to address global challenges and contribute to achieving a sustainable and equitable future for all.

This paper contributes to the understanding of the role of CRP in promoting sustainability and cultural diversity in CCAC and education. It highlights the significance of including diverse perspectives and worldviews rooted in identity and lived experience in sustainability education, offering practical recommendations for integrating CRP in educational institutions.