I started my career in the classroom in 2003 in a privileged upper east side private school. Majority of my students were white and wealthy. There were a few “token” kids of color in our classrooms and us educators were very concerned about their wellbeing. This concern came out of true love and nothing more than a sincere goal to support under represented students.
Many positive initiatives came out of these concerns.
Increased scholarship funds earmarked for diversity. This increased the numbers of minority students at these prestigious schools.
Active recruitment of teachers of color so students could see themselves represented at the school. So they too can dream to be the “teacher.” We have seen a tremendous rise in diversity in faculties around the world (not just in US).
And the last one was the creation of an entirely new position in schools to show our commitment to diversity and inclusion. We were so serious about it, we created a department with their own mission statements and everything.
The title of this role was the Director of Diversity , Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and it was decided that this person should report directly to the head of school. It was unclear where else this role would fall in the organization as the role was not division specific (elementary, middle, school of engineering, etc) and it did not fall under an academic department (mathematics, arts, language). Up until this point only division heads/ deans and the director of admissions/alumni relations reported to head of school, roles that oversee dozens of faculty/staff members and have years of leadership experience. This placement next to the decision makers will have consequences later as they will have direct access over all other departments.
But we were all for it including the academic chairs that this position leaped over. We were doing the right thing. As educators we will bring more equity to our minority students by creating a department devoted to this work. It seemed the best and most logical step for school communities to grow and combat bias and make the world safe for our students.
The position was first envisioned as a support role to help faculty understand implicit bias that they may bring into the classroom. Quickly our professional development sessions moved away from cognition, theory, and practice to looking at our identities, not as teachers or practitioners, but as races/ethnicities/sexual orientation etc. We were told that only if we understood our own biases could we support students.
I recall one DEI session where the faculty was asked to make a large circle in the gym. The DEI coordinator would say a statement. If the statement was something that was true for you, you would enter the circle. Once people entered the middle, the coordinator would say. “Look out, look in. See who is in, and who is out.”
It started off simple enough. “I am an athlete” and eagerly the PE team would jump into the circle along with other health conscious teachers. When we cheered them on, we were admonished. This is not fun and games. We are talking about peoples identities. This is sensitive. No talking, just “notice who is in and who is out.” With all eyes clearly on that inner circle.
But quickly the exercise ramped up. “I am gay” was a turning point for sure. This was an all boys school in 2006 there weren’t a lot of openly gay faculty members. I was only aware of one faculty member who was openly gay at the time. He reluctantly walked into the circle, but became very upset once there as there were others that he expected to join him, but did not. This caused so much pain. Teachers did not speak for weeks. Some mad that they did not support their fellow queer teachers, and others mad that they had been outed by the one gay teacher that they left alone.
Weeks after this exercise you could feel the fall out. Teachers instead of all being one faculty on a mission to serve our diverse student needs, became grouped off. We now knew things about each other we hadn’t known before, but instead of bringing us closer, wedges were driven between us. Our directions were clear “stop and notice.” There was no place to discuss, the exercise was just about noticing. Our differences now seemed greater now than our similarities.
Personally I felt it. I was no longer Ms. Levin the third grade teacher who hung with all, but I was now the “Jewish” “rich” teacher as those were the identifiers that I went into the circle for (Jewish and then rich). The rich part I was not happy about as I literally got nudged by my neighbor teacher who knew me well. “Get in there Abby.” And soon, I started to get comments at the faculty lunch table where I felt shamed for coming from money. People told me I could not understand what it was like to teach and be poor. And they were right. I felt I was less of a teacher then them. That I didn’t belong. I felt ashamed. I started sharing less with my peers afraid to offend someone. It had never been like that the four years before. Instead of walking away with empathy…it felt like we all walked away angry.
Fast forward 10 years. 2010s.
At this point DEI coordinators are not just common, but expected, and as a school you could be seen as racist not to have one. Trust me on this, I was working at a school without one and boy did we feel the HEAT. And for the record (all truth here) I was one of the people giving the heat. And the DEI role in school kept expanding. Some schools having not just coordinators but dozens of committees devoted to support the coordinator. In addition, DEI coordinators were now not just working to support faculty, but were now, working directly with students and parents.
The world also changed and everyone was more sensitive with their language during these years. While I don’t think it is fair that the DEI school movement caused this, I do think it is fair to say, it didn’t help. Everyone was scared of offending someone. Heads of schools were (rightfully so) in constant fear of offending. Therefore, the DEI coordinator joined the communications team as editor on school statements and an “approver” on curriculum choices to ensure we were being sensitive and inclusive.
Students also became active participants. DEI coordinators all seem to have the same interventions to supporting minority groups, “launch an affinity group.” Affinity groups always are the answer. And boy did these grow in the last decade. For perspective Harvard has over 450 identity affinity groups. 450. How is that even possible?
But at the time, it made all the sense to me. I was 100% for it. The theory made logical sense. Put like people around each other for support. But what I loved in theory, I did not find in practice, nor have we seen the fruits of any of this work. In practice from my observations students seemed more angry walking out of these groups than in. These groups became echo chambers leaving other perspectives out that may have explained some of the concerns.
But even worse…DEI coordinators became untouchable. They became the “morality police” of the school. Instead of supporting faculty, they often spent their time coming down on them for missteps. I recall my own moment when I got a nasty letter from the DEI coordinator accusing me of using language “that was not mine” and not understanding the “power of my words.” Calling my words insensitive and implying that my white bias was the reason why. This was in response to a new curriculum unit I was overseeing in the Spanish department called “Sin Fronteras,” which translates to “without borders.”
DEI informed me that my choice of words were poor and offensive. When I told her that I did not title the curriculum, but rather the Spanish department, which represents 13 different Spanish speaking countries, she got quiet. However, the high alert emails never stopped. And questioning DEI, even from my leadership position was unthinkable (and there was no denying my seniority overseeing 100 faculty members over her zero). Any questioning of this person made you seem racist. If anything dialogue was not encouraged, but discouraged.
But my aha moment, when I finally realized that my attempts to bring inclusion into our school were backfiring was in 2017. It was after Charlottesville when white men with torches marched down a street chanting “Jews will not replace us,” along with other racist chants of Neo-Nazi rhetoric. It happened right before the start of a school year. I among others in the leadership team wanted to make a statement condemning this violent rhetoric. But we were told that we can’t even understand it enough to even write it. That we can’t fathom the pain of certain faculty (inferring our faculty of color). Important context to know: the division heads were made of four people who also come from marginalized groups. We had 1 Asian, 2 Jews, 1 gay. When she said this to the group, not ONE person from the leadership team corrected her. Not one. Not even the head of school stepped in. We had all been so conditioned to this role representing the “truth” and were fearful to come off as racist to even question. Conditioned to think: “We can’t discount their pain. We are in no place to understand.”
But I decided to talk to her privately about it. I went to her office and told her that by not allowing us to join her mission, she is only hurting her ability to make change. That we wanted to support her, but if she made every argument about “us” versus “them” (white/black, faculty/leadership), she leaved us no place to jump in to support, which I wanted to so badly. I believed in this work and I was shaken by Charlottesville. I wanted to issue a statement too and join her in crafting one to get green lit by headquarters. But she was quick to push off my help even questioning my support. I reminded her that they were chanting “Jews will not replace us” and that I am Jewish. Her response was “Is this when you tell me about the ‘holocaust?’” which was in air quotes.
Turns out that Jews don’t count in inclusion or equity. That we don’t count. Our pain not real.
Shit, Houston we have a problem.
If one of the most marginalized groups in human history does not fall under equity and inclusion…what is this work about again? I’m so confused. Where did this go so wrong?!
I knew we had a problem on our hands that day. A problem that I made along with other well intentioned school leaders. Instead of creating inclusion, we created division. We are creating a divisive culture of “us” vs. “them” where no one can understand the other groups pain and therefore can have no place in it. We had created a culture of “oppressor” vs. “Oppressed” and that the world can be seen only truly by that lens and it has real consequences. We are now seeing those consequences.
And I have no idea how to fix it. Seriously. That is why it has taken me so long to write about it.
I tend to be a solver, not a complainer, but I’m stuck. I come with my tail between my legs.
And I’m just going to say the truth about the situation as many will say dismantle it. Easier said than done. Firing a most likely minority who heads up diversity…good luck there and that is where many schools are finding themselves. Captive to these roles and the people in them as they are untouchable .
And captive to a DEI strategy that has no data to prove that it has worked over the last 25 years. And that is absurd in our field. No department in academia would continue teaching a curriculum with that poor results.
We educators all know the DEI strategy currently in place in schools across America is causing more harm than good, but we also know we are unable to change anything without looking morally corrupt.
We are stuck and it is just getting worse.
I own up to my role in this mess.
This is my confession.
コメント