Edited by Professor Shaun Harper, University of Southern California
Books that include LGBTQ+ persons and families have been banned in many K-12 school districts across the United States. Toni Morrison classics have been pulled from library shelves – so too have other texts penned by influential authors of color and indigenous writers. Teachers have been forced to discard lessons on various diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) topics from the curriculum. Despite far too little evidence that Critical Race Theory (CRT) is being taught to K-12 schoolchildren, Education Week reports that 44 states have introduced bills since January 2021 that aimed to ban CRT or otherwise suppress teaching about America’s racial past and present. Anti-DEI laws have been passed in 18 of those states. Even conservative school districts within progressive states like California have implemented policies to ban DEI-related books and lessons. Many states also have placed restrictions on the expenditure of public funds on DEI-focused professional development experiences for employees of K-12 schools and higher education institutions.
Governors and legislators in Florida, Alabama, Oklahoma, Utah, and other states have banned spending on DEI initiatives at public colleges and universities. Last year, the Texas legislature passed a bill that eliminated DEI offices, programs, and professional roles at public colleges and universities. Altogether, DEI initiatives have been outlawed or defunded at public higher education institutions in 10 states; higher education-focused bans are pending in 14 other states. Not well documented are the impacts these DEI elimination and suppression activities are having on students, educators, K-12 schools and postsecondary institutions, and communities, hence the purpose of this Peabody Journal of Education special issue.
Articles focusing explicitly on impact in K-12 and/or higher education contexts are welcome. These could include, but are not limited to policy analyses, autoethnographies, and systematic reviews of impact-focused news coverage and social media content. Some other possibilities include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies of the impact of anti-DEI policies on the following:
- Campus climate and interactions between people from different racial groups, sexual orientations, and/or political parties.
- Psychological safety and emotional wellness of students and/or employees.
- Application trends, decision making, and yield rates of prospective students and/or employees.
- Academic outcomes of students and/or occupational outcomes of educators and administrators.
- Attitudinal change among students and/or employees.
- Attrition of students and/or employees.
- Teaching, curriculum, textbook adoption considerations, and/or classroom engagement.
- Academic freedom, free speech, and/or educator surveillance.
- Budgets, resource allocation, and spending on DEI-related programming, offices, and professional development activities.
- Conflicts among K-12 school board members and/or college trustees, regents, and governing board members.
- Tensions between institutional leaders, public policymakers, and/or external constituents.
- Messaging and evolving communications from educational leaders.
- Philanthropic giving, fundraising outcomes, and/or alumni engagement.
- Internal and/or external appraisals of institutional reputations, quality, and commitments to DEI.
- Compliance with new state laws and/or institutional-level policies.
- State funding vulnerability among public HBCUs and other minority-serving institutions.
This list is not exhaustive. Other topics that focus explicitly on impact could be appropriate. To be considered, please submit abstracts up to 250 words by October 15, 2024. Decisions will be sent by November 15, 2024. Full manuscripts (5,000 to 6,000 words) will be due on April 15, 2025.