Inside the University of Alberta’s move away from equity, diversity and inclusion

On Jan. 2, the University of Alberta became the first Canadian institution to publicly announce a shift from equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) to a new framework of “access, community and belonging.” University leadership described the plan as a more authentic and hopeful vision for what the U of A wants to achieve, while critics argue administrators are placating a provincial government that is targeting EDI initiatives in the public sector.  

President Bill Flanagan announced the change in an op-ed in the Edmonton Journal, catching some faculty and union groups off-guard. The administration said the new language is the product of consultations consisting of more than 1,000 “touchpoints” with the university which started more than a year ago.  

“These are the words of our community that describe the kind of university we’re trying to build,” said Mr. Flanagan.

The move from EDI to access, community and belonging (ACB) is not an abrupt shift or change, but an evolution of the university’s commitment to the principles of inclusion and removing barriers to access for students and staff, according to administration.

The language of EDI has been viewed by some as polarizing and divisive. “It’s not about dividing us into groups and so forth, and in that regard, I think [ACB] is perhaps a more inclusive term and one that will ensure broader support within and beyond the university community,” added Mr. Flanagan.  

Whether the president personally views the terms as polarizing, he wouldn’t say. “My views are not so important – my job is to [lead] a university that is welcoming for all community members.  

“Why continue to use words that might be polarizing? This is not going to assist us in building a community where there’s a sense of belonging.” 

The consultation process  

Carrie Smith, vice-provost of access, community and belonging (formerly EDI), said the shift began with efforts to renew the university’s 2019 inaugural EDI strategic plan. In 2023, her office assessed EDI progress through consultations, personal accounts collected from faculty, departments and individuals, and two diversity surveys sent to staff and students. 

The university’s 2023 report highlighted cultural shifts and successes in EDI policies, such as a push to embed EDI into teaching, research and service – as well as the leadership’s commitment to EDI goals. However, it also revealed several structural and institutional barriers to EDI. Faculty and staff discussed a lack of financial resources and human capacity, contradictory policies and processes (e.g., collective agreements, hiring policies), and resistance from others – ranging from unsupportive leadership to bullying by other faculty members, according to the document. 

The census data from that year shows scant progress in creating a more diverse workforce. The workforce diversity survey released in August 2023 revealed that those who identified as a visible minority increased by 2.5 per cent since 2019. Other demographics, such as those who identified as Indigenous, gender non-conforming, or persons with a disability changed by less than one per cent over four years.  

Dr. Smith said that it is more important for the university to focus on “accountability, rather than countability.” 

“We know that many diverse opinions, experiences, disciplines, knowledges all benefit the university community and make us stronger,” she said. “Data around demographic diversity, data around how retention efforts are succeeding matter completely.”  

The vice-provost said the university needs to add to its approach to ensure accountability and respond to critiques from some that EDI initiatives have become performative. 

“We need to move forward in the equity space when we think about really making sustainable and lasting change that goes beyond the performative or the checkbox.” 

The university’s ACB approach is detailed in Changing the Story: An Integrated Action Plan for transforming our vibrant and connected community. The document states the U of A will integrate its institutional commitments to EDI into all university plans, rather than having EDI stand alone. 

The plan, made public on Jan. 8, admits the university made “mistakes and missteps” in fostering EDI, which have “alienated and excluded people of all disciplines and within all social locations.”  

Gordon Swaters, president of the U of A association of academic staff, noted his group wasn’t formally consulted before the document’s release and that he hasn’t heard any EDI critiques from the association’s approximately 4,000 members. “Our understanding is that new principles are not being introduced, that this is effectively a rebranding exercise,” he said. “We will of course wait to see how it all unfolds before we know for sure.” 

However, Jacqueline Leighton, vice-dean, faculty development and faculty affairs, sees the move to ACB as neither superficial nor regressive. EDI has been transformative for campus culture, she said, but the way it’s been implemented has led to self-censorship for students and faculty.  

Dr. Leighton has observed a growing reluctance to question EDI efforts because people fear their commitment to its principles will be cast into doubt. She uses hiring committees as an example. 

“Somebody might say, ‘well, it’s racist not to consider these other applicants,’ and from the moment that language is used, I can assure you nobody will say anything else,” she said. “Nobody wants to be labeled as racist, sexist, transphobic, homophobic – anything like that.” 

From her perspective, Mr. Flanagan is reading the writing on the wall. “The operationalization of EDI in corporations, in higher ed and in other industries hasn’t landed the way it was intended.” 

Timing ‘unconvincing’ 

Critics argue that the university’s decision has been influenced by the political climate surrounding EDI and aimed specifically at appeasing Alberta’s United Conservative Party.  

Banning or limiting “DEI” programs has become a large part of the “anti-woke” movement in the U.S., which started in Florida in 2021. (Notably, at least three southern U.S. universities have adopted variations of the language “access, belonging and community,” such as the University of Southern Mississippi.) On Jan. 22, DEI programs were the target of an aggressive attack from the White House with President Donald Trump dismantling diversity and inclusion initiatives in the federal government by executive order. 

Fears that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith may pass similar legislation are not unwarranted. The province has proposed a bill that would give it power to veto federal research funding, which Premier Smith believes prioritizes ideologically left-leaning projects. And, at the UCP’s general meeting last November, the party unanimously adopted a motion to eliminate EDI programs within the public service and end the use of public funds to support EDI training.  

However, that same month, the U of A appeared strong in its commitment to EDI. At a general faculties council meeting, the student union and graduate student association put forward a motion to have the university reaffirm its EDI commitments. (The council is responsible for academic and student affairs at the university and is chaired by the university president.) The motion passed. 

Shortly after, on Dec. 13, the ACB plan was presented to the U of A’s board of governors. According to two people who attended the meeting, board member Janice MacKinnon proposed that the EDI office at the U of A should be eliminated entirely. She also requested that a reference in the plan’s land acknowledgement to Canada as a “settler colonist society” be removed, arguing it presents only one side of Canadian history. The board approved the motion to amend the language. 

To Laurie Adkin, a professor emerita of political science at U of A, these factors make the explanation that ACB was the outcome of internal consultation unconvincing. “When you look at the bigger picture, it seems quite clear that it came from pressures from the Alberta government and from people on the board of governors,” said Dr. Adkin. “That, to me, confirms that the autonomy of the university is under threat and has been for a long time, particularly under the UCP government.” 

This view is shared by Amy Kaler, a sociology professor at the university, who said she has yet to hear a “coherent explanation” for the decision. “This is an attempt to appease our extremely polarizing and divisive premier who’s pretty vocal about this stuff. That’s not really what a university president ought to be doing,” she said.  

The Alberta government, added Dr. Adkin, has also “used its power to completely stack our board of governors” with people sympathetic to the UCP or from the private sector who tend to see the university as a “branch of big business.” 

The U of A board of governors has 27 members, 10 of which are representatives of students, staff, alumni or university administration, including the president. Of the 17 members appointed from the public, 14 come from non-academic and corporate backgrounds and at least four have worked, in some capacity, for the provincial government. One member, Ryan Hastman, served as chief of staff for the current minister of advanced education and, up to 2023, as the director of policy coordination for the office of Premier Smith. 

Both professors say over the past two decades they have witnessed the university either refuse to publicly disagree with the government or capitulate to provincial demands, only to be met with budget cuts and interference. “They’ve basically handed the game over,” said Dr. Adkin.  

While the debate continues at the U of A, other universities in the province are tracking a similar course. The University of Calgary recently announced that it would fold its EDI and accessibility office into a new “office of institutional commitments”, while the University of Lethbridge has replaced its EDI website with one on accessibility, belonging and community.