Advertisement

Campus Climate for Diversity as Dialogue: Using an Equity Lens to Center Students

  • Daniel W. Newhart
  • Emma L. Larkins
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, Newhart and Larkins highlight a study that explores a possible connection between elements of inclusivity and academic success. They outline several practices which were co-created with students in this initiative. Their chapter explores practices using an equity lens when engaging students in campus climate for diversity efforts which may go beyond a survey at a single point in time and turn into a productive, continual conversation between students and the institution.

References

  1. Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, V. L. (2011). Choosing a mixed methods design. Designing and conducting mixed methods research (pp. 53–106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Martinez-Aleman, A. M., Pusser, B., & Bensimon, E. M. (2015). Introduction. In A. M. Martinez-Aleman, B. Pusser, & E. M. Bensimon (Eds.), Critical approaches to the study of higher education: A practical introduction (pp. 1–6). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Mertens, D. M. (2007). Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 212–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Mertens, D. M. (2012). Transformative mixed methods: Addressing inequities. American Behavioral Scientist, 56, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mertens, D. M., Bazeley, P., Bowleg, L., Fielding, N., Maxwell, J., Molina-Azorin, J. F., et al. (2016). The future of mixed methods: A five year projection to 2020. Retrieved online: http://mmira.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/MMIRA%20task%20force%20report%20Jan2016%20final.pdf.
  8. Mertens, D. M., Bledsoe, K. L., Sullivan, M., & Wilson, A. (2010). Utilization of mixed methods for transformative purposes. In A. Tashakkoria & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 193–215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Newhart, D. W. (2013). When is a survey more than a survey? About Campus, 18, 30–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2013). R-words: Refusing research. In D. Paris & M. T. Winn (Eds.), Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities (pp. 223–249). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Wall, A. F., Hursh, D., & Rodgers, J. W. (2014). Assessment for whom: Repositioning higher education assessment as an ethical and value-focused social practice. Research and Practice in Assessment, 9, 5–17.Google Scholar
  12. Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel W. Newhart
    • 1
  • Emma L. Larkins
    • 1
  1. 1.Oregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations