Whiteness, Hierarchy, and Information Hoarding: Examining a University Bias Response Process from the Frontline

IF 2.2 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Innovative Higher Education Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI:10.1007/s10755-024-09708-6
Ashley N. Robinson
{"title":"Whiteness, Hierarchy, and Information Hoarding: Examining a University Bias Response Process from the Frontline","authors":"Ashley N. Robinson","doi":"10.1007/s10755-024-09708-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Striving antiracist frontline student affairs educators work from commitments to racial equity and racial justice. Yet, when responding to racist harms, they must navigate institutional investigative practices. In this institutional ethnographic study of a Predominantly and Historically White Institution (PHWI), despite frontline educators’ aims, responses resulted in limited change or adequate support for students harmed by racist incidents. Rather, investigative practices drew on white interpretations, emphasized individual responsibility, and excluded frontline educators from meaningful involvement. The findings of this study suggest that the social organization of who gets to be involved in institutional bias response processes may be racialized in ways that further harm both racially minoritized students and staff. However, the ways the educators in this study recognized the tensions and challenges in their work and actively worked to center students’ needs provide important insights for policies and practices that re-center the knowledge and aims of those at the frontline educators.</p>","PeriodicalId":47065,"journal":{"name":"Innovative Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Innovative Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-024-09708-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Striving antiracist frontline student affairs educators work from commitments to racial equity and racial justice. Yet, when responding to racist harms, they must navigate institutional investigative practices. In this institutional ethnographic study of a Predominantly and Historically White Institution (PHWI), despite frontline educators’ aims, responses resulted in limited change or adequate support for students harmed by racist incidents. Rather, investigative practices drew on white interpretations, emphasized individual responsibility, and excluded frontline educators from meaningful involvement. The findings of this study suggest that the social organization of who gets to be involved in institutional bias response processes may be racialized in ways that further harm both racially minoritized students and staff. However, the ways the educators in this study recognized the tensions and challenges in their work and actively worked to center students’ needs provide important insights for policies and practices that re-center the knowledge and aims of those at the frontline educators.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
白人、等级制度和信息囤积:从第一线考察大学偏见应对过程
努力反种族主义的一线学生事务教育工作者致力于种族公平和种族正义。然而,在应对种族主义伤害时,他们必须驾驭机构调查实践。在对一所历史上以白人为主的院校(PHWI)进行的院校人种学研究中,尽管一线教育工作者的目标是反种族主义,但对受到种族主义事件伤害的学生而言,应对措施带来的改变或充分的支持是有限的。相反,调查实践借鉴了白人的解释,强调个人责任,并将一线教育工作者排除在有意义的参与之外。本研究的结果表明,谁能参与到机构偏见应对过程中的社会组织可能会被种族化,从而进一步伤害少数种族的学生和教职员工。然而,本研究中的教育工作者认识到了他们工作中的紧张关系和挑战,并积极努力以学生的需求为中心,这为重新以一线教育工作者的知识和目标为中心的政策和实践提供了重要的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Innovative Higher Education
Innovative Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Innovative Higher Education is a refereed scholarly journal that strives to package fresh ideas in higher education in a straightforward and readable fashion. The four main purposes of Innovative Higher Education are: (1) to present descriptions and evaluations of current innovations and provocative new ideas with relevance for action beyond the immediate context in higher education; (2) to focus on the effect of such innovations on teaching and students; (3) to be open to diverse forms of scholarship and research methods by maintaining flexibility in the selection of topics deemed appropriate for the journal; and (4) to strike a balance between practice and theory by presenting manuscripts in a readable and scholarly manner to both faculty and administrators in the academic community.
期刊最新文献
Investigating Belonging as a Mediator between Culturally Engaging Campus Environments and Satisfaction Improving Implementation of a Large-Scale Curriculum Redesign: An Innovative Approach to Balancing Fidelity and Agency Postdoctoral Scholars’ Emancipatory Strategies to Socialization through Agency Are Scientists Changing their Research Productivity Classes When They Move Up the Academic Ladder? Leading with Trust: How University Leaders can Foster Innovation with Educational Technology through Organizational Trust
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1