The Impact of Diversity Statements in the Course Syllabus on Students’ Perceptions of the Instructor and Course
Keywords:
diversity, syllabus, college teachingAbstract
This study assessed how the inclusion of a syllabus diversity statement affects student perceptions of the instructor and course. Undergraduates (N = 555) evaluated one of six randomly assigned course syllabi that differed by the presence/position of the diversity statement and the instructor’s gender. The authors found that the presence of a diversity statement led to more positive evaluations of the course climate and instructor character and impartiality. However, it also led to perceptions of the instructor as being more politically liberal. These results were present even after controlling for key demographic factors. The findings draw attention to the opportunity that syllabus diversity statements offer in fostering effective teaching and learning.
Downloads
References
References
Armstrong, M. A. (2011). Small world: crafting an inclusive classroom (no matter what you teach). Thought & Action: The NEA Higher Education Journal, 51–61 https://hanson.lafayette.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/457/2021/02/Armstrong-ThoughtandAction-2011.pdf
Asch, S. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 41, 258–90. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000179
Beck, S. L. (2018). Developing and writing a diversity statement. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/developing-and-writing-a-diversity-statement.
Bjorklund, W. L., & Rehling, D. L. (2009). Student perceptions of classroom incivility. College Teaching, 58(1), 15–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550903252801
Bombaci, S. P., & Pejchar, L. (2022). Advancing equity in faculty hiring with diversity statements. BioScience, 72(4), 365–37, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab136
Boring, A. (2017). Gender biases in student evaluations of teaching. Journal of Public Economics, 145, 27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.006
Clayson, D. E. (2012). initial impressions and the student evaluation of teaching. Journal of Education for Business, 88(1), 26–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.633580
Clayson, D. E. (2019). Student perception of instructors: The effect of age, gender and political leaning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 607–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1679715
Cook, A., & Callister, R. R. (2010). Increasing positive perceptions of diversity for religious conservative students. Creative Education, 1(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2010.12014
Feldmann, L. J. (2001). Classroom civility is another of our instructor responsibilities. College Teaching, 49(4), 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2001.10844595
Garvey, J. C., Taylor, J. L., & Rankin, S. (2014). An examination of campus climate for LGBTQ community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 39(6), 527–541. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2013.861374
Good, J. J., Bourne, K. A., & Drake, R. G. (2020). The impact of classroom diversity philosophies on the STEM performance of undergraduate students of color. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 91, Article 104026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104026
Haleta, L. L. (1996). Student perceptions of teachers' use of language: The effects of powerful and powerless language on impression formation and uncertainty. Communication Education, 45(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529609379029
Harnish, R. J., & Bridges, K. R. (2011). Effect of syllabus tone: Students’ perceptions of instructor and course. Social Psychology of Education, 14(3), 319-330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-011-9152-4
Harrington, C. M., & Gabert-Quillen, C. A. (2015). Syllabus length and use of images: An empirical investigation of student perceptions. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(3), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000040
Honeycutt, N., & Freberg, L. (2017). The liberal and conservative experience across academic disciplines: An extension of Inbar and Lammers. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(2), 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616667617
Honeycutt, N., Stevens, S.T., & Kaufmann, E. (2023). The academic mind in 2022: What faculty think about free expression and academic freedom on campus. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Available online: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/academic-mind-2022-what-faculty-think-about-free-expression-and-academic-freedom
Jenkins, J. S., Bugeja, A. D., & Barber, L. K. (2014). More content or more policy? A closer look at syllabus detail, instructor gender, and perceptions of instructor effectiveness. College Teaching, 62(4), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2014.935700
Johnson, M. D., Narayanan, A., & Sawaya, W. J. (2013). Effects of course and instructor characteristics on student evaluation of teaching across a college of engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(2), 289–318. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20013
Kelly-Woessner, A., & Woessner, M. C. (2006). My professor is a partisan hack: How perceptions of a professor's political views affect student course evaluations. PS: Political Science & Politics, 39(3), 495–501. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650606080X
Kizilcec, R. F., & Saltarelli, A. J. (2019). Can a diversity statement increase diversity in MOOCs? Proceedings of ACM Learning at Scale, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab136
Linville, D. L., & Mazer, J. P. (2011). Perceived ideological bias in the college classroom and the role of student reflective thinking: A proposed model. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(4), 90–101, Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/1839
Merritt, D. J. (2007) Bias, the brain, and student evaluations of teaching. St John’s Law Review, 82(6), 235–288, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.963196
Moreu, G., Isenberg, N., & Brauer, M. (2021). How to promote diversity and inclusion in educational settings: behavior change, climate surveys, and effective pro-diversity initiatives. Frontiers in Education, 6(668250), https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.668250
Nusbaum, A. T., Swindell, S., & Plemons, A. (2021). Kindness at first sight: The role of syllabi in impression formation. Teaching of Psychology, 48(2), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320959953
Perrine, R. M. (1998). Students' views of the characteristics of instructors' approachability. Psychological Reports, 82(2), 519–525. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1998.82.2.519
Perrine, R. M., Lisle, J., & Tucker, D. L. (1995). Effects of a syllabus offer of help, student age, and class size on college students' willingness to seek support from faculty. The Journal of Experimental Education, 64(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1995.9943794
Peters, M. L. (2013). Examining the relationships among classroom climate, self-efficacy, and achievement in undergraduate mathematics: a multi-level analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 459–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9347-y
Philips, A. (2019). The quest for diversity in higher education. Pepperdine Policy Review, 11(4), https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/ppr/vol11/iss1/4
Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Brown, A. R., & Marchuk, K. A. (2010). Syllabus detail and students' perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Teaching of Psychology, 37(3), 186–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986283.2010.488523
Schmaling, K. B., Trevino, A. Y., Lind, J. R., Blume, A. W., & Baker, D. L. (2015). Diversity statements: How faculty applicants address diversity. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 8(4), 213. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038549
Sullivan, J. (2019). The primacy effect in impression formation: Some replications and extensions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 432-439. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618771003
Torregosa, M. B., Ynalvez, M. A., & Morin, K. H. (2016). Perceptions matter: Faculty caring, campus racial climate and academic performance. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(4), 864–877. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12877
Wilson, J. L., Meyer, K. A., & McNeal, L. (2012). Mission and diversity statements: What they do and do not say. Innovative Higher Education, 37(2), 125-139.
Wilton, L. S., Good, J. J., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Sanchez, D. T. (2015). Communicating more than diversity: The effect of institutional diversity statements on expectations and performance as a function of race and gender. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(3), 315–325. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037883
Woessner, M., & Kelly-Woessner, A. (2015). Reflections on academic liberalism and conservative criticism. Society, 52(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-014-9864-0
Young-Jones, A., Levesque, C., Fursa, S., & McCain, J. (2021). Autonomy-supportive language in the syllabus: Supporting students from the first day. Teaching in Higher Education, 26(4), 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1661375
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
Data are available upon request from the corresponding author.
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Access Agreement Journal on Excellence in College Teaching
Before proceeding you must agree to the terms and conditions of usage as outlined below by clicking on the Accept button and/or by both parties’ signatures below. You will have to do this only once. After agreement, you will be redirected back to the main Journal page. A pdf copy of the terms is available for download.
This Access Agreement (the "Agreement") is effective upon processing of payment ("Effective Date") and is entered into by and between the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching (“JECT”) and the Customer (“Customer").
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes and voids all prior communications, understandings, and agreements relating to the Product(s), including any terms of use displayed to Authorized Users via the online site of the Product(s). Alterations to the Agreement and to any Addendum to the Agreement are only valid and binding if they are recorded in writing and signed by both parties
. I. Definitions
"Authorized Users" shall mean individuals who are authorized by the Customer (which shall include those individuals authorized by the Institutions hereunder) to access the Customer's information services whether on-site or off-site via secure authentication and who are affiliated with the Customer as a student (undergraduates and postgraduates), employee (whether on a permanent or temporary basis), or a contractor of the Customer. Individuals who are not a current student, employee, or a contractor of the Customer, but who are permitted to access the Customer's information services from computer terminals within the physical premises of the Customer ("Walk-In Users"), are also deemed to be Authorized Users, but only for the time they are within the physical premises of the Customer. Walk-In Users may not be given means to access the Product(s) when they are not within the physical premises of the Customer.
"Commercial Use" shall mean use for the purpose of monetary reward (whether by or for the Customer or an Authorized User) by means of the sale, resale, loan, transfer, hire, or other form of exploitation of the Product(s). For the avoidance of doubt, neither recovery of direct cost by the Customer from Authorized Users, nor use by the Customer or Authorized Users of the Product(s) in the course of research funded by a commercial organization, shall be deemed to constitute Commercial Use.
"Educational Purposes" shall mean for the purpose of education, teaching, distance learning, private study and/or research as described in Section II below.
"Institutions" shall mean the Customer's participating institutions, if applicable.
"License" shall mean the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and use the Product(s) pursuant to the specific terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
"Product(s)" shall mean the products, materials and/or information contained therein that are subject to this Agreement. Product(s) include the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching and the archive of the Learning Communities Journal.
"Reasonable Amount" shall be determined based on guidelines set forth by 17 U.S. Code § 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights, Fair use).
"Secure Authentication" shall mean access to the Product(s) by Internet Protocol ("IP") ranges or by another means of authentication agreed between the Publisher and Customer or Institutions (if applicable) from time to time.
II. Authorized Use of Product(s)
Customer, the Institutions (if applicable), and Authorized Users may use the Product(s) for Educational Purposes as follows:
Analysis. Authorized Users shall be permitted to extract or use information contained in the Product(s) for Educational Purposes, including, but not limited to, text and data mining, extraction and manipulation of information for the purposes of illustration, explanation, example, comment, criticism, teaching, research, or analysis.
Course Packs. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s) in the preparation of course packs or other educational materials.
Digital Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may download and digitally copy a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Display. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users shall have the right to electronically display the Product(s) to the extent necessary to further the intent and purpose of this Agreement.
Electronic Reserve. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of each of the Product(s) in connection with specific courses of instruction offered by Customer.
Interlibrary Loan. The Customer and the Institutions shall be permitted to use Reasonable Amounts of the Content to fulfill occasional requests from other, non-participating institutions, a practice commonly called Interlibrary Loan ("ILL"). Customer and the Institutions shall fulfill such requests in compliance with Section 108 of the United States Copyright Law (17 USC S108, "Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives") and the Guidelines for the Proviso of Subsection 108(2g)(2) prepared by the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU).
The electronic form of the Product(s) may be used as a source for ILL. Customer and the Institutions shall include copyright notices on all ILL transmissions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in no event shall any non-secure electronic transmission of files be permitted.
Print Copy. Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may print a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).
Recover Copying Costs. Customer and the Institutions may charge a reasonable fee to cover costs of copying or printing portions of Product(s) for Authorized Users.
Scholarly Sharing. Authorized Users may transmit to a third party colleague in hard copy or electronically, Reasonable Amounts of the Product(s) for personal use, professional use, or Educational Purposes but in no event for Commercial Use. In addition, Authorized Users have the right to use, with appropriate credit, figures, tables, and brief excerpts from the Product(s) in the Authorized User's own scientific, scholarly, and educational works.
Text Mining. Authorized Users may use the licensed material to perform and engage in text mining/data mining activities for legitimate academic research and other Educational Purposes. Those uses beyond educational use shall require permission from the Publisher.
III. Restrictions
Except as provided herein, the institution shall make reasonable efforts to inform its authorized users not to use, alter, decompile, modify, display, or distribute the Product(s) as follows:
Alter Identification. Remove, obscure, or modify copyright notices, text acknowledging, attributions, or other means of identification or disclaimers as they appear. Alter Product(s).
Alter, decompile, adapt, or modify the Product(s), except to the extent necessary to make it perceptible on a computer screen, or as otherwise permitted in this Agreement. Alteration of words or their order is strictly prohibited.
Commercial Use. No Commercial Use of the Product(s) shall be permitted unless the Customer or an Authorized User has been granted prior written consent by an authorized representative of the Product(s). Use of all or any part of the Product(s) for any Commercial Use or for any purpose other than Educational Purposes.
Distribution. Display or distribute any part of the Product(s) on any electronic network, including without limitation, the Internet, and any other distribution medium now in existence or hereinafter created, other than by a Secure Authentication; print and distribute any portion(s) of the Product(s)s to persons or entities other than the Customer or Authorized Users, except as provided in Section II.
JECT acknowledges that the Customer cannot police or control the actions of its students, faculty, and other Authorized Users with respect to their use of the Product(s). In the event of abuse, the institution shall make prompt and reasonable efforts to heal the breach and notify the publisher.
IV. Term and Termination
This agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall remain in effect unless and until terminated as permitted herein (the "Term"). There is no perpetual electronic access to content made available during the term of the agreement.
JECT may terminate this Agreement if Customer violates any of the terms and conditions set forth herein. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer of the basis for termination.
The Customer may terminate this Agreement if sufficient funds are not provided or allotted in future government-approved budgets of the Customer (or reasonably available or expected to become available from other sources at the time the Customer’s payment obligation attaches) to permit the Subscriber, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue this Agreement.
In the event of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) by an Authorized User, Customer shall cooperate with JECT in the investigation of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) of which it is made aware and shall use reasonable efforts to remedy such unauthorized use and prevent its recurrence. JECT may terminate such Authorized User's access to the Product(s) after first providing reasonable notice to the Customer (in no event less than two (2) weeks) and cooperating with the Customer to avoid recurrence of any unauthorized use. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer
. V. Refunds
In the event that a subscription is canceled by the Customer prior to the subscription end date, the following will be used as guidelines for refunds.
Electronic subscriptions. The Customer shall be entitled to a full refund within 14 days of the start of the most recent subscription term. Refunds requested after 14 days but no later than 60 days from the start of the most recent subscription term will be allowed, minus a 30% processing fee. Refunds will not be granted if requested more than 60 days after the start of the most recent subscription term.
