Required DEI Statements

At Heterodox Academy, we oppose the requirement of DEI statements in faculty hiring because they undermine the core academic principle of open inquiry, while filtering out viewpoint diversity.

DEI statements—often one- to two-page essays detailing a candidate's commitment to advancing diversity—have increasingly become key filters in faculty hiring. This requirement pressures applicants to align with specific ideological views, regardless of their personal beliefs, effectively functioning as compelled political speech.

While many support the ideals of inclusion and racial justice, there is no consensus on how these goals should be achieved. For example, the concept of equity—often defined as proportional representation by identity group—is a contested approach. Other legitimate perspectives, like the civil rights ideal emphasizing equal opportunity and individual merit, are frequently marginalized in this process. When universities adopt DEI statements as litmus tests, they risk excluding those who hold reasonable, alternative views.

Moreover, there is little evidence that requiring DEI statements has made faculty hiring more fair or improved student experiences. Given the competitive nature of academic hiring, candidates are incentivized to tell committees what they want to hear, rather than offering genuine reflections. This disadvantages applicants who may not excel at ideological signaling, including international, working-class, and neurodivergent scholars—many of whom have meaningfully contributed to supporting underrepresented students.

By pressuring candidates to conform to a singular narrative, DEI statements erode academic integrity—the foundation of honest scholarship. Integrity means saying what you believe and believing what you say. When scholars are forced to compromise this, the ideal of scholarship itself is compromised.

At Heterodox Academy, we stand against practices that constrain open dialogue. True diversity in academia includes diversity of thought, and maintaining academic freedom means creating space for honest, varied perspectives—without coercion or ideological litmus tests.

HxA members and Campus Community Co-Chairs at CU Boulder, Matthew Burgess (now at U. Wyoming) and Peter Newton wanted to improve practices in their own department. But instead of simply spotlighting the problems with current practices, they also proposed a new idea.

In early 2024, the faculty of the Department of Environmental Studies at CU Boulder voted unanimously that all future faculty job advertisements will no longer require diversity statements and will instead ask candidates to submit a service statement in addition to the usual research and teaching statements. Burgess and Newton explain that service statements are a progressive, legal, ethical, and constructive alternative to diversity statements for multiple reasons:

1. Service statements align with what’s expected of a successful faculty member.

2. Requiring service statements signals the value of service.

3. Service statements allow applicants to discuss DEI if they want to but do not require them to.

The policy change was narrowly defeated by faculty vote the first time it was proposed. But working collaboratively with a faculty group who initially opposed the policy change, a revised version was worked on together. At the second attempt, the policy proposal passed with little discussion. “We consider it a small but significant shift of the needle toward a more fair, ethical, legal, and liberal hiring process,” said Burgess and Newton.