Enhancing Self-Efficacy for Engagement With Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives: Evaluation of a Seven-Day Immersive Pilot Program in a College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences
Jennifer M. Jabson Tree, Stefanie Benjamin, Dorian L. McCoy
{"title":"Enhancing Self-Efficacy for Engagement With Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives: Evaluation of a Seven-Day Immersive Pilot Program in a College of Education, Health, and Human Sciences","authors":"Jennifer M. Jabson Tree, Stefanie Benjamin, Dorian L. McCoy","doi":"10.1002/dvr2.70021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Colleges of health, human sciences, and education are often administratively organized to include a diverse array of human sciences departments that share roots in social justice and a commitment to advancing equity and inclusion. Despite espoused commitments to equity and inclusion, they frequently struggle to achieve the changes necessary for advancing equity, and inclusion principles across policies, practices, procedures, and units. We implemented and evaluated a 7-day, total immersion, 56-h, educational program entitled the “Social Justice Institute” (SJI) for two cohorts of faculty, staff, and administrators to develop self-efficacy to intervene in systemic oppression in their academic units. SJI delivered focused content and exercises on structural oppression. A one-group, pre-, and post-survey no comparison process evaluation design was used to estimate the change in participants' quantitative self-efficacy. Cohort 1 included 14 and Cohort 2 included 15 participants (<i>N</i> = 29). Before attending SJI, participants' average self-efficacy score was 5.84 (SD = 0.76; Cohort 1) and 5.83 (SD = 0.37; Cohort 2), respectively. After attending the SJI, the self-efficacy average increased to 6.49 (SD = 1.19) and 6.46 (SD = 0.18) respectively. This is a 9%–10% average improvement in self-efficacy each year. Each cohort rated the quality of the SJI. Day 2 had the highest quality rating (mean = 4.75, SD = 0.45) (topic: sex, gender, sexism, and cissexism), with Day 3 receiving the lowest quality rating (mean = 3.75, SD = 0.97) (topic: race, racism, and whiteness). This evaluation provides preliminary evidence that an SJI may be one possible contribution to advancing self-efficacy for intervening in bias in higher education. Rigorous educational programs and evaluations must be implemented and conducted to advance strategies that support inclusion and diversity in higher education.</p>","PeriodicalId":100379,"journal":{"name":"Diversity & Inclusion Research","volume":"2 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dvr2.70021","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diversity & Inclusion Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dvr2.70021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Colleges of health, human sciences, and education are often administratively organized to include a diverse array of human sciences departments that share roots in social justice and a commitment to advancing equity and inclusion. Despite espoused commitments to equity and inclusion, they frequently struggle to achieve the changes necessary for advancing equity, and inclusion principles across policies, practices, procedures, and units. We implemented and evaluated a 7-day, total immersion, 56-h, educational program entitled the “Social Justice Institute” (SJI) for two cohorts of faculty, staff, and administrators to develop self-efficacy to intervene in systemic oppression in their academic units. SJI delivered focused content and exercises on structural oppression. A one-group, pre-, and post-survey no comparison process evaluation design was used to estimate the change in participants' quantitative self-efficacy. Cohort 1 included 14 and Cohort 2 included 15 participants (N = 29). Before attending SJI, participants' average self-efficacy score was 5.84 (SD = 0.76; Cohort 1) and 5.83 (SD = 0.37; Cohort 2), respectively. After attending the SJI, the self-efficacy average increased to 6.49 (SD = 1.19) and 6.46 (SD = 0.18) respectively. This is a 9%–10% average improvement in self-efficacy each year. Each cohort rated the quality of the SJI. Day 2 had the highest quality rating (mean = 4.75, SD = 0.45) (topic: sex, gender, sexism, and cissexism), with Day 3 receiving the lowest quality rating (mean = 3.75, SD = 0.97) (topic: race, racism, and whiteness). This evaluation provides preliminary evidence that an SJI may be one possible contribution to advancing self-efficacy for intervening in bias in higher education. Rigorous educational programs and evaluations must be implemented and conducted to advance strategies that support inclusion and diversity in higher education.