The Ripple Effect: Rethinking Approaches to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Presented by Nicole Lounsbery, PhD, South Dakota State University

Reported by Amanda Selby, EdD, A.T. Still University

Dr. Lounsbery set the tone for this engaging and thoughtprovoking conversation with a land acknowledgment statement. We then discussed potential reasons that hinder DEI initiatives, such as policies, government mandates, a lack of standard rules and regulations, and resistance from organizational cultures and practices. Dr. Lounsbery shared her goals for improving DEI outcomes at South Dakota State University. These goals included increased recruitment and retention of Indigenous graduate students, increased access to graduate education in the state of South Dakota, and providing culturally relevant professional development and training sessions for faculty and staff.

Dr. Lounsbery explained the concept of a Journey Map, which can help programs visualize challenges that applicants face during their journey through the application process all the way through to supporting them as students. Distinct challenges are identified at each stage of the process, and solutions are presented to help mitigate the challenges. Dr. Lounsbery detailed some of her initiatives to increase access to and the appeal of graduate education to Indigenous people. Initiatives included providing tech support, increasing access to programs for faculty at tribal colleges, evaluating course

Are You Student Ready?

Presented syllabi, and improving cultural intelligence among faculty and staff. She also shared her process for evaluating the effectiveness and appeal of these initiatives. She uses tools such as focus groups, interviews, event surveys, and other information-gathering methods to measure the impact of activities. Her initiatives increased the retention of Indigenous graduate students and led to the creation of a new degree program.

Dr. Lounsbery also introduced Ripple Effect Mapping. This tool demonstrates how a change in thinking leads to a change in action, leading to a change in engagement and policies. She advocates for combining top-down and bottom-up approaches to effect real institutional change. Systemic change requires relationship-based models, interactive training and programs, and a focus on “changing ourselves” rather than “fixing others.” She cautioned that initiatives should avoid deficit-based approaches or simply be put in place to check a box. Assumptions about others and the expectation for faculty/ staff to be DEI experts should be avoided. She ended the session by emphasizing the need to invest in initiatives that support the change you seek. n

by Art Munin, PhD, Liaison, and Ann Marie Klotz, PhD, Naropa University

Reported by Chad Baker, Millersville University

Art Munin and Ann Maria Klotz provided this overview on whether or not your campus is actually prepared to welcome students both physically and mentally to your institution.

They first asked the question, is your campus radically welcoming? Basically, they were asking whether or not campuses have the availability to be fluid or adaptable when necessary. Are tours of campus focused on specific areas on campus, including DEI resources. These aspects of campus may be of interest but are not always considered part of the traditional tour?

A key takeaway from this session was the reminder that commonality of students doesn’t mean all have everything in common. We must recognize and build around these pieces to provide a better experience and opportunity for success for each student on campus. Understanding a student’s individuality, instead of assuming you know the student, is key. We need to be aware of what we may take for granted.

Another point made is that access without success is a cruel joke. Our key responsibility as GEM professionals is to help ensure the success of our students. Just getting

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION

them into a program is not enough. We must nurture and support students during the entirety of their student lifecycle.

We must also be aware of our own internal language and use of acronyms. The easiest way to lose a student is to talk over their heads or to assume they know what you are talking about. Using simple language that is clear is important. In these scenarios, conciseness is not always the best method of communicating with students.

Once a student is at your institution, we must recognize that we never know what each person has going on in their lives. We need to focus on developing communities that embrace these unknowns and create doors, not barriers, to success.

At Naropa University, multiple steps have been taken to ensure student success in the admissions process including:

• Students with incomplete apps may still interview.

• Standardized tests became optional.

• Online interview days were created.

• An awareness to adjust time zones for international student populations was important.

• Recognition that recruitment and retention is the job of everyone, not just a few.

Naropa also recognized that just having a process or always doing something doesn’t mean it works. You need to go to the students to determine what their needs are and not vice versa.

Using a model that analyzes hindsight, insight, and foresight is the best way to review if you are student ready.

• Descriptive Analytics – What happened?

• Diagnostic Analytics – Why did it happen?

• Predictive Analytics – What will happen?

• Prescriptive Analytics – How can we make it happen? n