Approaching Diversity Like Technology in Higher Ed

I graduated from high school and started college in 1996, when the internet and email were just gaining popularity among mainstream audiences. All the universities I considered attending proudly touted their technology resources, and I was very excited to get a university email address and have internet access in my dorm room. I had no intention of studying anything related to technology, but knew that learning how to use it was important. When I told my kids this, they laughed and rolled their eyes. Learning how to utilize technology has been baked into their entire educational experience, and they’re not even in college yet.

So when I read a passage in Daryl G. Smith’s (2020) book, Diversity’s Promise for Higher Education: Making It Work, where she says higher education ought to approach diversity as it has technology, I immediately understood.

Diversity is a reality, just like technology. Not only are our local communities increasingly diverse, but globalization is also shrinking the divide between people in different parts of the world.

Like technology, diversity presents challenges, but also opportunities. Diversity is necessary for innovation and creativity, although diversity alone doesn’t produce these outcomes. For that to happen, we need to develop our capacity to navigate differences effectively, appropriately, and authentically, which is the definition of intercultural competence.

The challenge for institutions of higher education, according to Smith, is “to achieve the benefits of diversity for our institutions and our society” (p. viii), just as we’ve been doing for the past several decades with technology.

Smith explains that technology was accepted as a necessary change in higher education. Colleges and universities promoted student learning in this area, but also—and perhaps more importantly—changed their infrastructures to incorporate technological changes. One thing that became evident in the process was the importance of developing faculty and staff’s capacity to work in the new context.

“In an important way, technology was no longer the sole domain of science and technical fields; it quickly touched all aspects of the institution. The curriculum in virtually all fields was changed to engage technological advances” (p. 56). While many of the necessary changes were difficult and costly, Smith explains, “there was virtually no question about the imperative to build institutional capacity for technology into every campus in the country” (p. 57). Furthermore, most institutions and individuals recognize that technological advances are not “done,” but will forever continue to change and evolve, and therefore building capacity needs to be ongoing.

Smith argues—and I strongly agree—that it’s time for a similar mindset and approach to diversity. She writes, “These opportunities and challenges can no longer be framed in terms of pursuing diversity or not pursuing it. Diversity is. Rather, we must establish the conditions under which diversity works” (p. ix).

As Smith summarizes:

Diversity, like technology, represents a powerful change in our environment. Like technology, it is an imperative that must be engaged if institutions are to be successful in a society that is ever more pluralistic and in a world that is both interconnected and challenged by diversity. Diversity, like technology, introduces significant strategic opportunities to fulfill the mission of higher education and to serve institutional excellence. And, as with technology, the challenges and changes keep coming at the same time that the institution must continue to function. This understanding of diversity begins at the institutional and societal levels. Nonetheless, diversity is far more contested than technology with respect to questions about the strategies for achieving change—or even whether it must be addressed at all. (pp. 57-58)

Diversity, like technology, is here to stay. Nobody will legislate it away, no matter how hard they may try. All students must develop the capacity to engage effectively, appropriately, and authentically across cultural differences, at home as well as abroad, in order to thrive in this diverse, complex world (I’ve written previously about how developing intercultural competence can help us better navigate VUCA—volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity). The deep polarization we’re currently experiencing in society, particularly in the United States, only underscores that need. Institutions of higher education must lead the way in demonstrating that diversity is an asset, and integrate intercultural learning into their infrastructure, just as they’ve done with technology.

As a parent of two teens who will start college in the next few years, it’s incredibly important to me that whatever schools they attend are committed to helping them develop in this way (even if they choose to major in, say, computer science). Not just through a one-off experience, required course, or possible major, but as something that’s baked into their educational experience. As an intercultural educator who works with colleges and universities, I know that this is still far from the norm.

I hope that by the time my kids may be helping their kids explore college and university options, they’ll take for granted that developing intercultural competence is integrated into all aspects of higher education. I want my grandchildren roll their eyes at their parents—like my kids did at me—because they can’t fathom education any other way.

Photo credit: NASA, Unsplash