The Equity Paradox Typology: An Application of Critical Race Methodology to Redress Racial Harm Against Faculty of Color

Critiquing Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is often favored among many faculty of color, for on the surface, it appears to offer ample opportunity to explore the complex experiences of marginalized and disenfranchised people. Yet, many researchers have grown frustrated with the limits of qualitative research; specifically, Malagon et al. (2009) assert “any endeavor to (re)construct a more critical approach within qualitative research requires an unwavering commitment to the pursuit of social justice as a guiding methodological principle” (p. 253). For this article, critical race theory (CRT) and methodology served as a guiding framework to help us negotiate a balance between methodological rigor (DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2018; Delgado & Stefancic, 2012), justice centeredness and relevance.

CRT highlights the intercentricity of race, class, gender, and immigration as layers of marginalization in education. CRT develops theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and pedagogical frameworks toward ending racial discrimination and oppression (Russell, 1992; Yosso, 2005). CRT highlights the centrality of experiential knowledge and recognizes the experiences of People of Color as a source of critical and legitimate knowledge to understand and dismantle forms of racial subordination (Solorzano & Yosso, 2001). This methodological framework connects well with the Truth Racial Healing & Transformation lens of narrative change (Pasquerella et al., 2019), which uses storytelling to speak the truth about shared histories, hidden hurts, and racial harms.

Moreover, we use counterstorytelling to examine the different forms of racial discrimination (individual, communal, and systemic) experienced by faculty of color. Counterstory or counternarratives challenge the dominant story that perpetuates ideologies of racism through mainstream mono-vocal stories (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012; Solorzano & Yosso, 2001). One of the primary purposes of counternarratives is to share the lived realities, ways of knowing, and experiences that originate from confronting common forms of oppression (Solorzano & Yosso, 2001). In addition, counternarratives also aim to create different realities and imagine other richer possibilities than the ones shared in a single story (Solorzano & Yosso, 2001). Thus, the equity paradox typology is a guide for critical storytelling, a system for talking back and being heard. We applied these methodological principles, not in traditional interviews or focus groups, but to fashion, a fictional equity case study weaved together from our collective experiences and the racial harm we have witnessed enacted in higher education over our combined 70 years as faculty.

Equity Cases as Counterstorytelling

This article utilizes CRT’s counterstorytelling to generate what we label “equity case study” to guide and cultivate productive conversations among faculty and administrators within colleges and departments. Case studies are commonly employed during training for business leaders, the military, and the medical industry to expose professionals to real-life dilemmas requiring critical analysis and solutions. By way of definition, we consider equity cases to be concise but complex dilemmas that detail how interactions, conversations, and professional environments can dehumanize and facilitate discrimination targeting faculty of color (Marshall & Parker, 2009). In addition, the construction of equity cases requires critical self-reflection, a careful articulation of personal commitments to equity, and fashioning various practices and policy alternatives to redress dehumanization and discrimination within departmental cultures and systems. Marshall and Parker (2009) applied a case study instructional methodology to assist P-12 education leaders in clarifying social justice issues. Yet, applied to academic departments in higher education, equity case studies provide faculty the opportunity to “discuss the realities of their own policy processes, their own power, and their own values stances, and they can critique a range of policy solutions/alternatives” (p. 223). However, as Marshall and Parker (2009) further noted, “the tendency is to submerge such controversial yet important talk . . . to sweep social justice issues under the rug. When they really need to be shaking the dirt out of the rug. What is needed is a safe yet challenging way to move . . ., professors to work toward a comfort level with social justice dilemmas” (p. 221). Such work must advance equity or a specific and unapologetic focus on improving the daily professional environments and experiences of faculty of color.

To produce the equity case study, we employed the CRT tenet (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995) counterstorytelling to illustrate the utility of an emergent typology, the equity paradox. CRT informs a methodology “. . . for considering difference and inequity using multiple methodologies— story, voice, metaphor, analogy, critical social science, feminism, and postmodernism” (Ladson-Billings & Donnor, 2005, p. 290). In this light, the equity paradox is a storytelling framework to describe the web of reprisals and racial harm endured by equity-centered faculty of color who support and advocate for the authentic actualization of university-sponsored equity and diversity goals. But they, more often than not, do so within the context of academic departments and with faculty and administrators of varying levels of understanding and commitments to equity and diversity with little -if any- protective measures (Griffin et al., 2011). Thus, the equity case is a collage of counterstories created by the co-authors and informed by actual events personally experienced or directly witnessed by co-authors. However, the equity case study is fictional such that it will not detail actual events, institutions, positions, or real names. This approach allowed ample complexity, authenticity, and utility. Many faculty members will relate to various aspects of the situations, conversations, controversies, and characters developed in the equity case, and productive conversations build empathy and understanding (Christopher, 2016, 2017).

Furthermore, we are hopeful that institutions will use the equity case study presented herein to spur meaningful conversations and increase collective action to redress systemic racism among faculty and decision-makers. Most importantly, this equity case study is designed to help leaders crafting policies and initiatives that can transform faculty relations as a critical input to achieving the university’s diversity and inclusion goals. To contextualize the storyline, we begin by overviewing the critical elements of the equity paradox typology, provide a character matrix demonstrating how individual actors enact or encounter racial harm, and introduce the university context of the equity case.

Diversity and Curriculum Clashes

Most institutions of higher education have some form of an institutional statement or strategic plan espousing commitments to DEI with varying levels of quality and complexity. These statements are often sought out and studied by potential faculty members of color, particularly those committed to DEI. Racial harm in many cases emanates from the disconnect between the ideals and goals articulated in these public statements and the daily behaviors and decisions of faculty and administrators. Wilton et al. (2020) coined the term “diversity dishonesty” to describe this disconnect and correlated awareness of “diversity dishonesty” with increased perceptions of dissatisfaction and marginalization among faculty of color. Likewise, diversity clashes arise when equity-centered faculty of color try to actualize stated DEI goals and initiatives only to encounter individual, communal, and institutional resistance. Similarly, curriculum clashes emanate from a similar disconnect between stated commitments to diversity education and academic programs focusing on equity and justice and the lack of institutional investments to grow and stabilize these program offerings. Ultimately, we theorize that diversity and curriculum clashes promote social and professional marginalization or hyper-isolation, leading to hyper-distress.

Relational and Power Dynamics

Furthermore, equity paradoxes exist within academic departments as relational and power dynamics, enacted by individuals and small groups to manipulate the power structures within higher learning institutions. These networks are most often segregated by race and leverage their positions, academic ranks, racial solidarity, and professional networks to control the decision-making process, allocate resources, organize retaliations, and manipulate policies and procedures for their benefit. Relational dynamics are born out of racially exclusive faculty networks, often with personal connections beyond the academy. These relationships are so valued that conformity to group norms supersedes adherence to the university, College, or department’s mission, vision, strategic goals, or even federal Civil Right Legislation. Moreover, power dynamics animates the protective and punitive functions of these faculty networks allowing clusters of faculty members to control the flow of resources, conflict resolutions, and interpretation, augmentation, and selective enforcement of policies and procedures to maximizing resource shares and positions of power controlled by their faculty network. Unfortunately, these arrangements are racially exclusive and often passively mirror or actively support wider societal racial, gender, and social class inequities and ideologies. Thus, social groups like women who face discrimination in society can find exclusionary networks of faculty arrayed against them. Finally, power dynamics are also a type of protective mechanism when enacted to control the DEI advocacy or organize a retaliation program against faculty of color perceived as a threat to ingroup stability and solidarity.

Setting the Stage: Background and Overview

Pinecrest University is a large, highly ranked Liberal Arts university located in a culturally diverse, vibrant metropolitan city in the Midwestern region of the United States. Despite being surrounded by cultural enclaves, Pinecrest’s student body is 91% White, and 73% of the undergraduates’ families average over $93,000 in annual household income. The former Provost’s recent resignation for several incidents of racial hostility on campus prompted a new Provost’s hiring. Dr. Christina Daws is a Jewish American and a Distinguished Professor in Women’s Studies. Bolstered by the results of an external equity review, Provost Daws initiated a robust Diversity Plan highlighted by a Diversity Hiring Initiative that would centrally fund 10 new faculty members from underrepresented backgrounds over the next 2 years. Unfortunately, this plan was not well received by alumni, the faculty senate, nor the student body. More troubling were the Anti-Semitic online posts directed at her in the replies to an article from the largest local newspaper. Determined to make the Diversity Hiring Initiative a success, Provost Daws pinpointed the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences because the external equity review revealed that only 3 out of 75 faculty members were of color. Thus, she directed the new Dean of the College, Dr. Long, to initiate a diversity search for two positions of the faculty’s choosing. If not, the Provost would resend the five approved searches scheduled for this coming academic year.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Faculty Roles in the Equity Case Study Matrix.

Faculty Names	Academic appointment	Assigned character behaviors for case	Identity markers	Racial harm enactments	Racial harm encounters
Rachel Kelly	Assistant Professor—Classical Studies	Assigned to search committee by her former Dissertation Chair Dr. Ross. Close friends with Dr. Jackson.	Canadian (Female)
Jessica Jackson	Assistant Professor—Cultural Studies	Assigned to the diversity search committee by Dr. Ross and experiencing retaliation for advocating for diversity hiring.	Black(Female)
Lucia Flores	Associate Professor & Program Coordinator—Cultural Studies	Advocating for a fair diversity search and protecting junior faculty from retaliation.	LatinX(Female)
Christina Daws	Provost at Pinecrest University	Created the Diversity Hiring Initiative	Jewish American (Female)
Kari Long	Dean of the College of Liberal Arts	Pushed Diversity Hiring Initiative, stood in support of diverse faculty.	White American (Female)
Lawrence Simms	Chair Social Sciences (Only Administrator of Color)	Strategizes to protect diversity search as faculty lines for Cultural Studies.	Black(Male)
Stephanie Ross	Chair Department of Humanities	Supports diversity when her interests converge, uses power dynamics to subvert DEI otherwise.	White American(Female)
Douglas McClindon	Chair of Philosophy	Openly opposes diversity hires, history of racism against faculty of color.	White American(Male)

Note. Readers can use the blank space in the last two columns for reflective notes about the characters featured in the equity case. DEI = Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

It Never Ends: Diversity Clashes, Relational Dynamics, Hyper-Isolation, and the Daily Grind of Racism

With the Provost’s mandate fresh in her mind, Dr. Long called a meeting with her department chairs and met fierce opposition to the idea of hosting the diversity hire searches, most notably from Dr. McClindon, a Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Philosophy. He did not mince words voicing his outright rejection of the idea and his plan to “not participate, vote in affirmation of any hires, nor tenure any faculty hired through this mockery of justice.” To this, Dean Long asserted, “we have no choice but to hire two faculty members this year through this program, or the Provost will halt our other searches.”

Dr. Stephanie Ross, a Professor and Chair of the Humanities Department, lamented this approach because she fully expected to complete the two searches awarded to the Classical Studies program area. Yet, after nodding with approval to her former dissertation chair Dr. McClindon’s tirade, Dr. Ross reversed course and offered to chair the committee to find scholars for the Cultural Studies Program. Confused, Dr. Lawrence Simms, Chair of the Social Sciences Department and the only administrator of color in the College, objected fearing that the searches would be compromised. But, he felt resigned to support the search because Cultural Studies only had two faculty members, and he had tried for years with no success to secure additional faculty lines.

A week later, however, Dr. Simms learned that Dr. Ross had already selected the committee and issued public descriptions for the positions without his insight. He had also learned that Dr. Jessica Jackson, a new assistant professor in Cultural Studies, was appointed to the committee as the only person of color along with Dr. Ross as Chair, her former graduate student Dr. Rachel Kelly, and Dr. McClindon. He further learned from Dr. Jackson that “a plan was put in place to have a search in name only during the first committee meeting!” Moreover, Jessica also shared that she spoke out against this plan and was told by Dr. McClindon, “to remember her place, or she may lose what little hope of achieving tenure that she has!” Deeply concerned, Dr. Simms met with the Dean, who thought it was wise to appoint Dr. Lucia Flores to the committee to protect the integrity of the search and Dr. Jackson from further reprisal.

The Best-Laid Plans: Power Dynamics, Hyper-Cognition, and Plotting for Justice

The following morning, the crew of Lucia, Jessica, and Lawrence met at their spot, the Taco Truck. Home of the best breakfast tacos in the city, and during the workweek, it’s tucked in the far corner of the grocery store parking lot. “She will come, I trust her!” However, an hour passed, no Rachel, no calls, no texts. Lucia asked, “Did you tell her anything that can be used against us?” Jessica replied, “I do not think so. No, I just told her that if she wanted to help, there is a meeting at the Taco Truck.”

Jessica is young but wise for her age. She lost both parents in a car crash when she was only 13. Instead of falling apart, she committed to being the best at everything she tried. In fact, this situation is her first taste of being excluded or facing discrimination professionally. She felt protected by her parents and grandparents, and when Lucia came into her life, she saw the person she hoped to become. Dr. Simms took a great interest in her as well and held sacred their weekly check-in meetings. His family and hers are members of Mount Calvary, the oldest and most active Black Church in the community. So, Jessica did not expect to be here at this moment, questioning her judgment and doubting her future. She was further puzzled because Rachel is always on time, and she has always been down for a fight. They even marched in the local Black Lives Matter rally last summer and talked openly and honestly about justice and privilege issues.

As time passed, the realization set in that Rachel was not coming, and they needed a new plan to secure the diversity searches. Their initial plan relied on Jessica and Lucia securing Rachel’s support and vote, but she was a no show. So, they agreed to reconvene later that day and headed to their cars. Jessica had to park closer to a large grocery store since all the spots were taken near the Taco Truck. When she got into her car, she received a text, “OMG, I can’t make it!” Apparently, her phone had just connected to the Wi-Fi network in the store, and she started receiving old texts, lots of them, and it is Rachel.

A new text notification, “Meeting at Dr. Ross’ home, with all of THEM.” Jessica rushes from her car but realizes she cannot leave the area, or her phone will stop receiving texts. So she leaves the phone and sprints across the parking lot to get Dr. Simms and Lucia’s attention. Dr. Simms slams on his breaks, Lucia is shaken by Jessica’s knocks on her window. Gasping for breath and waving at Lucia to lower her window, she blurted out, “didn’t you see me running across the lot?” Lucia replied, “No, I was thinking about what to do next!” Lawrence and Lucia parked on either side of Jessica’s electric car. Then squeezed inside and peered at her phone as text after text came through. Each new text was greeted with collective gasps, and then they stopped for a moment. And started again. Rachel was spilling the beans.

A new text notification read, “McClendon has some students complaining against you!” Another swoosh, the next text read, “His name is Edward Duncan.” Two seconds later, “swoosh,” “They plan to go straight to the Dean.” And again, “They want you off the committee and asked me to write a grievance letter for the student to give to the Dean!” Text notification again, “Gotta get back to the meeting! Tell Lucia!”

Power Dynamics, Hyper-Distress, Hyper-Reactivity and the Making of Good Trouble

“Damn,” said Lawrence. “This is the same thing they pulled against Lucia during her tenure review!” he exclaimed. Stunned, Lucia shouted, “What? You never told me what they were using against me!” Lawrence replied, “Yes, I know. You were dealing with enough at the time.” Two years ago, the same faculty group manufactured some student complaints and authored an open letter opposing Lucia’s tenure. Lawrence continued,

Although the complaints lacked substance, they used them to paint you as too adversarial towards our students. They wanted to create the perception of a problem, knowing that only a few voting faculty members would even bother to read the positive comments on your student evaluations. For you both and me, just a negative perception is taken as fact, even after it is disproved.

Lucia frowned with pain and disapproval and said, “We have to stop this before it is made public!” Jessica asked Lawrence, “How did you stop it last time?” Lawrence stated in a determined voice, “I handed the former Dean two envelopes, one affirming to the faculty the policy on how we process student complaints and violations of that policy, and another with my letter of resignation. I asked him to choose one.” Lucia hugged Lawrence exclaiming, “You risked your career to help me!” Lawrence, with a warm smile, replied, “You are worth it. But now, they have seen me play that card before, so that won’t work again.”

Lucia and Jessica continued to exchange ideas on how to proceed. But Lawrence sat quietly in the back seat, realizing that he had not shared that story with anyone. Lucia’s reaction took him back into repressed memories, and they started flooding back to him in vivid color. Then his memories flashed even further back, and his nostrils flared as he recalled the discord and personal attacks he endured as he sought promotion to full professor more than two decades ago. He recalled the most memorable line in a memo circulated among tenured faculty stating, “His claim to fame is being a Black man who does research on Black people. How is that noteworthy?” However, after the letter was leaked, and they learned he had retained the best Civil Rights lawyer in the city, Lawrence became the first African American full professor in the College’s history. But he wondered back then and even now, was it all worth it, for not much has changed over that past two decades at Pinecrest.

More time passes as Lawrence remains trapped in his memories of weekly therapy sessions, unexplained weight loss and weight gain, and years of insomnia. Worse of all, the horror of two trips to the ER for what his wife Tiffany thought were heart attacks. After the last scare, she practically completed the faculty leave paperwork herself. Still, during his two-year absence, three diverse junior faculty members were not retained following their third-year reviews. Of course, they were invited back for one additional year, but they each opted to leave and thankfully have all earned tenure at other institutions.

Nevertheless, Lawrence could not help but feel that he had won his battle for promotion, at the costs of the war. Lawrence felt puzzled, and he thought that he had processed all of this. But he felt all the pain, self-doubt, and regrets all over again, and all at once. His chest tightened; his breath swallowed. Steadying himself, Lawrence closed his eyes and sighed slowly to release the tension that had taken him. Almost a textbook cleansing breath, his therapist would be proud. Now back in the moment, he pronounced, “We can do this! It seems Rachel is with us, and now we need to make Lucia’s membership on the committee official. Then find some good trouble to start!”

Adelante: Fighting Back Together, Redressing Racial Harm, and How Not to Be a Total Racist

The following week Lucia was begrudgingly welcomed onto the committee, so the work began screening 40 applicants, and 5 rose to the top. However, to secure her plans, Dr. Ross all but guaranteed Rachel’s tenure and promised her a Co-PI designation on a federal grant. Rachel pondered the offer but agreed to terms by authoring the student complaint letter. And with her supportive vote to end the diversity search, she would secure her position in Dr. Ross’ very powerful inner circle. Rachel felt that she had no choice if she were to be successful at Pinecrest, but later that day, she met up with Jessica and told her everything. Jessica pleaded with her to reconsider but ultimately understood the politics of it all.

The following morning Lucia walked a distraught Jessica to her office, delivered her most inspiring exhortation, and then continued down the hall to meet with Dr. Simms. When he saw her, Lawrence ushered her into his office and closed the door. “I thought we agreed that you would keep a low profile until the meeting, Lucia?” he exclaimed. Lucia shrugged her shoulders and said, “Jess needed to talk today.” Lawrence hurriedly asked, “Is she ok? We need her for this to work!” Jessica calmly replied, “Yes, sir, she’s good to go.” Lawrence took his seat and exhaled slowly, and noted, “My two letters are almost done! They just need the Dean’s signature.” Lucia looked around his office and asked, “So this is it?” Lawrence contemplated for a moment, then stood adjusting his tie and cufflinks, “It’s time for my meeting with the Dean. Don’t worry, Lucia. This will work. The Queen’s Gambit in Chess requires a pawn to be sacrificed but yields a dominant central position.”

That evening Lucia gave Jessica specific instructions to be on time for the Diversity Search Committee the next day and keep her phone on. Jessica complied but got nervous when Lucia nor Rachel was present, and the meeting was set to start in minutes. Dr. McClendon and Dr. Ross huddled together, seemingly making last minute plans. After receiving a text from Jessica about Rachel not being in the meeting, Lucia went straight to a hidden window nook where she often found Rachel and Jessica. “There you are!” said Lucia.

Rachel cried, “I can’t choose. Dr. Ross wants me to choose between my friendship with Jess, my career, and being a racist!” But Lucia replied with a smile, “I think you have a few more choices.” Just then, Dr. Simms’s graduate assistant approached and handed Lucia two envelopes, offered a warm smile, and walked away. Lucia turned her gaze back to Rachel and said: “I have two letters here, both provide you a choice, but you have to pick one or the other, not both!”

Lucia handed Rachel the first envelope, which Rachel ripped open only to find a white sheet of blank paper. Baffled, she looked at Lucia and exclaimed, “What does this mean?” Lucia explained, “You can do nothing today, say nothing today. Just be white, like this paper, and you will be successful here! Racism only requires your quiet participation to persist!” Still sitting in the corner of the window, Rachel ripped the paper into pieces and pushed the remains into the envelope. Then Rachel said, “I am not a racist!” Lucia exclaimed with a hand extended toward Rachel, “Then stand with me, in the light, and speak your truth today!” Rachel took Lucia’s hand and stood with determination and accepted the second letter in her left hand. She opened and read the letter, then looked at Lucia with amazement and asked, “Ok, what’s next?” Lucia offered her an ink pen and said, “You need to sign the letter at the bottom, then follow me!”

Lucia and Rachel stood silently in the elevator, then exited on the 2nd floor. Turning right, they entered the main office, where Dr. Simms and Dean Long greeted them. Lawrence welcomed them and stated, “Dr. Flores and Dr. Kelly, let me introduce you both to Dr. Christina Daws, Provost of Pinecrest.” Dean Long asked, “Lucia, will Jessica be joining us?” Lucia replied, “No, mam, but here is her signed statement. I asked her to keep them busy so that we won’t be interrupted!” Racheal then reported all that she had witnessed on the search committee, Dr. Ross and Dr. McClendon’s plans to derail Jessica’s career and their strategy to declare the diversity search failed due to a falsified claim that there was a lack of qualified candidates. Rachel concluded, “I also have notes from all the meetings, emails, and texts to corroborate everything!”

Dean Long stood and stated, “Very well, thank you all for bringing this matter to our attention, we will take it from here!” Dean Long added, “Rachel, here is your reappointment letter to Cultural Studies. Lucia believes that you can offer much in terms of Whiteness and Anti-racism research.” Dean Long nodded toward Lawrence, who stood adjusted his tie and cufflinks, and stated, “Lucia, you and Rachel have a meeting to attend, yes? As the new search chair, I expect you to deliver three highly qualified candidates who we can invite to campus by the end of business today!” Accepting her marching orders, Lucia stood with strength, nodding in Rachel’s direction. Before they could depart, the Provost interjected, “Oh Yes, Lucia dear! If it’s not too much trouble, could convey in the most urgent terms my pressing desire to meet immediately with Dr. Ross and Dr. McClendon?” Lucia gestured in affirmation. As they left the office, Jessica was waiting outside with an equally determined look on her face. Lucia grabbed both of their hands, peering into their souls, then simply said, “Adelante!”