“I was Born to do This”: Faculty Experiences Teaching Graduate-Level Diversity Courses

Abstract

Background

Little research has focused on teaching graduate-level diversity courses, particularly from the faculty standpoint. Such pedagogy calls for unique skills and contains many challenges.

Objective

The purpose of the study was to better understand what works and what is needed to support instructors of graduate-level diversity courses, as well as common challenges that these instructors face.

Method

Using Charmaz’ Constructivist Grounded Theory approach, data from 20 qualitative interviews were analyzed for emergent themes.

Results

Four over-arching themes emerged: (a) Challenges in Teaching the Course, (b) Impact on the Instructor, (c) Coping with Course Challenges, and (d) Feelings about Teaching Multicultural Courses.

Conclusion

Findings suggest the unique nature of graduate-level diversity courses, and the need for resources and support for instructors of such courses.

Teaching Implications

Teaching diversity courses can take a personal and professional toll on the instructor. University systems should be aware of this and support structures and resources for such teaching.

Keywords

multicultural pedagogy graduate education qualitative diversity instructors

Societal attention to, and conflict over, diversity issues have long been present in U.S. society (Boysen, 2011; Prieto, 2018), with even greater relevance in recent times (Callaham, 2020). Our daily lives are becoming more diverse as we now can communicate with people across the globe, sharing wide-ranging ideas and ways of being and living. Nevertheless, in the United States, people struggle for and with pluralism. Exemplified by the “Me Too” movement, “Black Lives Matter,” and growing anti-Asian violence, recent racial injustices and protests due to police violence, immigration legislation, and the political divide in the United States have been in the spotlight. Similarly, views about how to co-exist with those different (or not that different) from us have been highlighted. In such a world it has become increasingly important to learn to have empathy for others, view issues through a social justice lens, and teach self-awareness and critical thinking. Multicultural and diversity courses¹ are often designed to meet such needs (Gloria et al., 2000).

Multicultural teaching, or the incorporation of diversity-related ideas and concepts into instruction, has long been called for in education (Banks, 1993; Flores, 2012; Sciame-Giesecke et al., 2009) and psychology (Boysen, 2011). This call includes the need for students to critically examine themselves and their identities, question power and privilege, and develop self-awareness (Prieto, 2018). Teaching multicultural competence (Sue, 2006) and cultural humility (Abbott et al., 2019; Tervalon & Murray-Garcia, 1998) is considered an ethical and necessary part of becoming a psychologist (Ahluwalia et al., 2019). Research studying diversity courses shows that a certain type of multicultural pedagogy, one which entails personal and professional exploration on the part of the instructor and students, is necessary for student growth. In fact, the instructor is a necessary tool in such learning (Prieto, 2018).

Some universities have centered diversity efforts and a commitment to diversity as an important learning goal. Faculty committed to diversity often attempt to address it in their courses (DeAngelo et al., 2009; Prieto, 2018; Sciame-Giesecke et al., 2009). However, those who teach diversity courses require a unique pedagogical skillset (Reynolds, 2011). This skillset includes using themselves as tools for relaying specific content, aiding students in increasing awareness, and having self-awareness about classroom interactions (Prieto, 2018).

Given the unique role of the instructor in multicultural courses, instructors may have a range of experiences personally (e.g., Ahluwalia et al., 2019; Gloria et al., 2000; Helms et al., 2003), including many challenges; in fact, teaching diversity courses has been compared to “dancing through a minefield” (Acosta et al., 2005, p. 26). Instructors who teach diversity courses are not always volunteers and may even be quite junior. Due to this extra workload, it is harder for them to complete required duties (such as research) for their promotion (Canton, 2013). Additionally, they may experience a heightened pull for self-disclosure, negative student reactions, and tensions with group dynamics (Reynolds, 2011). Experiences of faculty who teach diversity courses can also include meaningful conversations with students, engagement with issues of power, and “mutual influence of students and instructors” (Tummala-Narra, 2009, p. 332). While these experiences are shared by many such faculty, these problems are often compounded for minoritized faculty, who may be more likely to receive poor evaluations and accusations of course content being a personal agenda (Ahluwalia et al., 2019).

The diversity classroom may also take on particular emotional labor for an instructor of color or a female instructor (Acosta et al., 2005). This burden is compounded by the fact that instructors of multicultural courses are often doing more of the “hidden workload” at their universities (Bellas, 1999; Harlow, 2003). This idea of a hidden cost for minoritized faculty (for example, women and faculty of color), originally referred to as cultural taxation (Padilla, 1994), entails the extra work universities often place on minoritized faculty due to their identities (e.g., representation on committees, mentoring minoritized students), but that is not rewarded in the academic merit system. While scholars have explored the challenges and costs of diversity teaching, less has been written from the experiences and perspectives of instructors who teach diversity courses—those who decide to take on this challenge, particularly for graduate-level courses. Such courses may differ from undergraduate diversity teaching experiences in their specificity and depth, as well as how the students will use the information in their careers. Through further understanding the experiences of faculty who teach graduate-level diversity courses, we can better tailor pedagogy for teaching diversity courses and identify ways to prepare faculty to teach these courses and improve their overall experiences of this important contribution.

The current study utilizes qualitative research to explore the experiences and views of instructors who teach graduate-level diversity courses. Through semi-structured interviews, we sought a clearer picture of the instructors’ views of the experiences, challenges, and successes involved in such teaching. Specifically, we asked: What are the experiences of faculty who teach graduate-level diversity courses?

Method

Positionality

The first author identifies as a Mixed (Latina and European), cisgender female. She has been teaching diversity courses and conducting qualitative research for over two decades. Her research focuses on diversity-related topics including teaching diversity courses. The second author identifies as a cisgender Latina. She has been teaching diversity courses since she was a master’s degree student 30 years ago. Her research includes issues of diversity broadly, as well as graduate-level diversity courses specifically.

Prior to analysis, the researchers discussed their own positionalities related to their views on and experiences with teaching diversity courses. Both value diversity pedagogy and research and have devoted their careers to it; both believe there are inherent challenges in this type of pedagogy and that all instructors do not have the same experiences teaching these courses nor receive the same levels of support.

Participants

We recruited faculty through professional listservs (Etikan & Bala, 2017). Participation criteria included being a faculty member who teaches or has taught multicultural courses (as defined by each participant) in Education or Psychology at U.S. 4-year universities. Because of the political nature of teaching diversity courses and our view of this study as an exploratory one, we did not intentionally recruit faculty based on any particular identity other than their experience teaching multicultural graduate-level courses. We wanted to ensure faculty were willingly participating and felt safe doing so. Ultimately, 20 faculty members agreed to participate. Among the 20, 3 (15%) self-identified as male, 16 (80%) as female, and 1 (0.05%) as gender non-conforming. During interviews 9 (45%) were on the tenure track, 5 (25%) were tenured, 3 (15%) were adjunct faculty, and 3 (15%) were in other types of appointments (i.e., administrative or other teaching appointments). Participant disciplines included: 9 (45%) in Counseling Psychology, 9 (45%) in Education, 1 (5%) in general Psychology, and 1 (5%) in Humanities. Finally, 1 (5%) participant identified as Asian, 2 (10%) as Black or African American, 2 (10%) as mixed race (i.e., 1 Black/White and 1 non-specified), 14 (70%) as White, and 1 (5%) as White Jewish American.

Procedures

Eligible and consenting participants were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and a 1-hour, semi-structured interview via Zoom with either one or both researchers (depending on schedule match). Interviews explored teaching graduate-level diversity courses and were recorded with participant consent. The study was Institutional Review Board approved.

Instruments

Demographic Questionnaire

The demographic questionnaire collected information pertaining to professional title, gender, race/ethnicity, and multicultural courses taught.

Semi-structured Interview Protocol

A 9-question, semi-structured interview protocol, based on prior studies (Morgan Consoli & Marin, 2016), asked participants about their experiences teaching multicultural courses, their training for such teaching, their feelings about such teaching, successes and challenges, and ideal conditions for such teaching (see Appendix).

Delimitations

As is standard in qualitative research, there are choices we made that, while not limitations, are more accurately defined as delimitations (Leedy & Ormrod, 2010). For example, we engaged in wide-sweeping participant recruitment as our intention was not to focus on one particular type of faculty member (e.g., by race, gender, etc.). Instead, our focus, broadly, was on those who teach graduate-level multicultural courses. As a result, the current study does not attempt an in-depth analysis of differences in experiences by identity.

Design and Analysis

We utilized qualitative methodology to provide a platform for the voices of those not typically highlighted: instructors of multicultural graduate-level courses. Qualitative exploration has been highlighted by scholars as an effective method to explore less-defined areas of study (Morrow & Smith, 2000). Specifically, we employed Charmaz’ Constructivist Grounded Theory (2001) which is based in a social constructivist paradigm for understanding participants’ subjective experiences. Social constructivism purports multiple realities shaped by our contextualized experiences and affirms that meaning is co-constructed through researcher–participant interactions (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

For the analysis, each of the researchers/authors conducted line-by-line coding of the interview data, noting emergent themes pertinent to the research question and looking for participants’ own meaning-making in their words. Then, researchers discussed their respective line-by-line coding notes and grouped relevant themes, also noting decision-making processes (Charmaz, 2001). This iterative process resulted in a coding schema which represented emergent themes and meanings from participant data.

Results

Analysis of interview transcripts resulted in four over-arching emergent themes: (a) Challenges in Teaching the Course, (b) Impact on the Instructor, (c) Coping with Course Challenges, and (d) Feelings about Teaching Multicultural Courses.

Challenges in Teaching the Course

The theme Challenges in Teaching the Course was used to categorize difficulties participants raised that were unique to this type of multicultural pedagogy and the courses they taught. In this category we identified seven subthemes: (a) Multilevel Classroom, (b) Lack of Multicultural Pedagogy Training, (c) Structure of the Academy, (d) Need to Constantly Adapt, (e) Structure of Course, (f) Resistance, and (g) Teaching Multiculturalism in Today’s Climate.

Multilevel Classroom

Many participants discussed the challenges of having a Multilevel Classroom—students of differing levels of multicultural awareness all being in the same space. One female, tenure-track, Latina- and White-identified participant stated:

The most challenging course that I taught was the doctoral level multiculturalism course where there were a handful of students who were very, I don’t quite know what the word is, but they had a really hard time with students who they perceived were not as advanced as they were on these issues. And so it felt like students repeatedly got offended when, from my perspective, other students were not being disrespectful or racist, or ableist, in one student’s case. But that their attitudes made it so that there was no room for anyone in the class to make any mistakes.

Another White, tenure-track, female participant addressed handling differing levels of multicultural development among students:

One of the things that I think is the hardest is kind of the emotional labor of teaching these courses because it very much relies on you being able to do some kind of judo in keeping multiple constituencies from, you know, attacked [sic] each other or feeling bored or checked out. Both of those things, I would mark as equally poor results from a classroom. And I have had one or two situations where I’ve just had to shut it down. I would say that is maybe not effective in the long term but I don’t know if maybe seeing where that limit is in the conversation might still be educational. We can’t go any farther. We have to stop here.

Lack of Multicultural Pedagogy Training

Almost all participants discussed the lack of specific training they had before teaching these courses, which we labeled Lack of Multicultural Pedagogy Training. One tenure-track, gender non-conforming, White participant stated she had no specific training but felt life prepared her to teach diversity courses:

I’m a queer woman but I’m also a White woman who grew up in the South. I’m not, I’m not sure that I’m 100% prepared for any of this but I’ve definitely thought about it more than some other people and am willing to take on the burden of teaching it and that’s more than some people are willing to do.

Another female, tenured, White-identified participant spoke of taking on the necessary extra training herself:

I think the first time I taught them, I think I gained confidence in my own level of expertise, you know, in these areas, and I think that was really positive, especially as a more junior scholar. Yeah, teaching a course like that, you wanna read everything there is to read and you really want to be, well, I really wanted to be prepared, right? So I feel like I bolstered my previous education in order to really prepare for the courses.

Structure of the Academy

Several participants felt that teaching diversity courses was poorly supported by the structure of the university system, which made teaching such courses particularly hard. For example, a White, tenure-track, female participant commented on the structure of academia not being conducive to “diverse forms of knowledge”:

So like I mean, I use the term from literature, but the administrative violence about just being somebody that teaches these kind of issues within a system that is really entrenched in merit and individualism. You can’t… you can’t teach, those don’t go together. You can’t value merit in that way and also want to recognize diverse forms of knowledge and understanding and expertise and those don’t gel and so what gets lost in that are people’s teaching positions and the content and the experience and then, of course, it always trends down to the students and then the students disappear from a system that is really entrenched in merit and individualism.

Need to Constantly Adapt

Several participants discussed how this type of course is challenging because it keeps them in a constant state of adaptation, whether to the changing definitions and pedagogies of multiculturalism or in the day-to-day classroom experience. One White, tenure-track, female participant stated:

I don’t wanna use the word dread, but just a piece of something related to that because you never know with any given class what’s gonna happen and how that’s gonna play out. You have to be ready.

Another White, female adjunct instructor talked about the need for creativity for adapting in teaching multicultural courses:

Like I said, I like anything that’s messy and challenging, where we’re constantly learning…If you’re gonna do multiculturalism well, you damn well better be a creative person. So you can’t think in the box and do multiculturalism. So I think that’s why I love it so much is that it’s all kind of resonating on the same level with getting students to be really creative to give them the skills to think out of the box and do that critical thinking work. So, if you look at the thread that runs through all my classes, that’s really kind of what it is.

Structure of Course

Every participant also talked about the challenges of the course given the way it was structured by the university or department, in other words, structure beyond the instructor’s control. In particular, participants highlighted the challenges of larger enrollment sizes and not enough time for depth of coverage of topics. A tenure-track, female, White-identified participant described why smaller size is better for multicultural pedagogy:

I have much preferred my classes that are more the size of a group than the size of a class. I think the students, it’s, quote/unquote, less of their information getting out there. There’s only, you know, 8 people to trust instead of 29. It’s also easier for me to get a sense of if people are fading out because, you know, it’s a lot or the topic or, or because it’s 20 some people in the room. I prefer it when they’re smaller. It allows for that process and that content a little more.

A gender non-conforming, tenure-track White participant explained the need for smaller class size in teaching diversity issues:

The bigger [classes] get, the more quiet certain personalities get. At 12, it’s hard to hide. At 22, there’s four to six that don’t have to participate really. So if participation is the goal, if participation is seen as something that can be assessed as having a positive outcome, if speaking up is necessary for certain kinds of learning outcomes, then I would say 12 is good, 15 is probably tolerable, 8 is probably the lower level of…after 8, it gets too small.

A White, male, tenure-track participant stated:

I think both in terms of group dynamics but also approach and so, pedagogically, I think my biases, the most effective way to teach these courses is to stimulate conversation and self-reflection and, I think, I sometimes felt like I was at a near impossible situation with a class that size [large class] to facilitate meaningful reflection and dialogue with the whole class. Some people would naturally kinda fade into the background or, you know, I had instances in which tempers kinda flared and there were confrontations. In a group of 25, I think that becomes more difficult to manage.

Another related challenge raised by some participants was needing more time in these courses to really teach the concepts and aid students in personal growth. As one female, tenured, White-identified participant stated, “I’ve had students say we wish this was a two-part class. This first part’s great and we wanna know how to apply it.”

Resistance

A huge challenge that all participants discussed in some form was general resistance to multicultural pedagogy and some of its content by colleagues, students, and the academy itself. One female, tenured, White-identified participant stated:

The biggest challenge is resistance. Both from students and faculty colleagues for what or how I’m teaching something. I’ve had, you know, colleagues say, ‘well, that’s, that’s probably too much.’ They are [saying] ‘we don’t wanna scare anybody off’ or ‘we don’t want parents calling,’ that kinda thing. You know, and student resistance, I’ve had students just really blow up in class, accusing me of indoctrination.

Teaching Multiculturalism in Today’s Climate

Finally, some participants spoke of the challenge of teaching multicultural courses in today’s political and cultural climate (time of Trump election and origin of Black Lives Matter, for example). One tenure-track, White-identified, female participant noted:

I think that there’s an understanding among many people about diversity as, or multiculturalism, about making Republican Christians feel comfortable or making White people feel comfortable in the classroom. And at some point, I want to be able to say ‘that’s not a valid point of view. Not all points of view are valid. That’s not based in fact’ or ‘that’s not based in history’ or ‘that’s not the theoretical framework we’re working with. It doesn’t fit.’ At some point there are lines that I want to draw in my classroom and it would be great to have training about how to do that in this age of polarization in a way that doesn’t let counterfactual statements stand as an expression of opinion.

Another tenure-track, White-identified female participant spoke of the “performativity” of today’s culture that creates challenges that permeate the classroom:

Because there’s also, there’s so much performance, like performativity for doctoral students, thinking about ‘what should I say? How should I say it? Who am I going to impress?’ All that. And I just wanna get that out of the way. But I know that we’re in a context where they’ve been socialized to problematize and generate all of this jargon, and I just want them to be human.

Impact on the Instructor

Participants discussed the wide-ranging impacts they felt because of teaching multicultural courses. As one White, female, tenure-track faculty member broadly reflected, “there’s no way for me to come out of a course like that unchanged.” These impacts were both the result of their experiences as well as how they thought others viewed them. We identified several subthemes related to the impact of teaching multicultural courses: (a) Professional and Personal Growth; (b) Student Evaluations; (c) Imposed Labels; and (d) Emotional Effects.

Professional and Personal Growth

On the positive side, faculty indicated that teaching these courses impacted their research, teaching, and service. Participants described gains to personal learning and knowledge and highlighted how this allowed them to grow as people, teachers, and scholars. A White, female pre-tenure professor shared:

Professionally, it has certainly shaped my career trajectory in my research because it has made me curious enough to do research in this area, as a solo author and with colleagues. So, it’s given me opportunities to collaborate with my doctoral students and with my friends/colleagues. My sister scholars. So, it’s been enriching in that way, too, I think. It has also, in terms of service, changed the type of service that I’m most committed to in terms of mentoring. So, I take mentoring very seriously. I think I’m good at it. I was well mentored and I really seek to well mentor others. The students in that class that I mentioned earlier, that seminar for the instructors, they’ve nominated me for three different mentoring awards in the past year. So that feels nice, like I’m doing something of value.

A White, gender non-conforming, pre-tenure professor indicated:

So the courses that I’m able to teach in [my department] have a completely different demographic makeup than our [other] classes. That’s exciting for me because they bring different backgrounds and different ways of thinking into my classroom and I learn from that and the other students in the class learn from that when we have a more diverse mix.

A White, female, tenured professor highlighted that teaching multicultural counseling led her to present and write on these issues. She further shared that teaching multicultural courses “has also furthered [her] understanding of [her] White privilege” in ways that have helped her bring that into her classroom. Finally, a White, female, tenured professor highlighted both her personal and professional growth, sharing:

So personally, it’s helped inform how I’m able to present [social justice], even in my personal life to my kids. And professionally, it’s helped me zone in on a focus of how I write and how I present and what publications I want to read or conferences I want to go to.

Student Evaluations

Participants also highlighted the impact of student evaluations on their teaching of multicultural courses. In particular, concern about receiving negative course evaluations even affected how some instructors taught the course. One White, female, pre-tenure professor shared:

I feel a little bit more sure of myself as a faculty member but this definitely was going on in my early years teaching. I was really worried about student evaluations and I was really worried about challenging students. I think I’ve been less concerned about that, maybe in this most recent year, the year before that, but I mean, that kinda sticks with me in terms of those class dynamics and really pushing students to develop and grow and self-reflect. That’s something that I always struggle with is how much do I push and challenge and where does that kind of butt up against you as being an effective instructor and an effective teacher and things like that. So that was definitely kind of a worry for me, especially early on, is wow, I really should probably challenge what this student just said but I know if I do, it might have this and this and this effect.

Expressing these concerns more directly, a White, female professor indicated, “I would also say that some of the worst teaching evaluations I’ve ever received has come from my multicultural counseling class.” These experiences and concerns with student evaluations, and the potential impact on their annual or merit review, highlighted the significant impact this can have on instructors of multicultural courses.

Imposed Labels

Participants discussed the negative labels they received as a result of teaching these courses. In particular, participants spoke of being negatively labeled because of the content, activities, and/or assignments they wove into their multicultural courses. One White, female, pre-tenure professor shared:

I also know that teaching about these issues and researching about these issues means that I am often seen as a radical or as a troublemaker or, you know, crazy, leftist, hippy, whatever the framing might be. There is that perception that when justice infuses one’s life, both personally and professionally, that they become trouble for others who want to maintain the status quo.

A pre-tenure, White female professor talked about “earning” the label “anti-White racist” after the last time she taught her course. This led to fears about this rhetoric reaching a member of the tenure committee and “the ways in which this could come back to bite [her], just simply doing the work, even if it’s done well.” A Black, female adjunct faculty member also felt that her colleagues merged her personal identity and role as instructor of a multicultural course. She shared, “I really got the feeling that [my new colleagues] felt like I was just gonna be this angry person who was just gonna be like, ‘well, have we thought about this group?’” Ultimately, while acknowledging the negative labels and assumptions, participants also shared the fact that such labels only result from teaching multicultural-focused courses that tend to highlight issues of power, equity, and social justice.

Emotional Effects

Most participants described feeling “exhausted” or “drained” after teaching a multicultural class and indicated that teaching multicultural courses was more emotionally demanding than teaching other courses like statistics or assessment. A White, pre-tenure female professor described this well, saying:

Teaching those classes, if it was a particularly tough class, I notice it takes me a really long time to recover from the emotional rollercoaster that it brings and I often also second guess myself a lot. So, ‘oh, my God, I said this in class and I was just kind of speaking off the cuff.’ You know? Just kind of the anxiety spiral of ‘oh, my God, I can’t believe I said that. What impact did it have? Do I need to talk about it?’ And so I think that sometimes that can take up more, I don’t know about physical time but I think just kind of more emotional or psychological space.

Participants also shared how teaching multicultural courses often seeped into and affected their personal lives in ways other courses did not. A White, pre-tenure, male professor indicated:

I think there’s a certain level of emotional arousal and exhaustion that comes with teaching this course, or these courses, that can have a significant impact on your work. And so, if I’m having a particular challenge with a student in the class, or if I feel like it’s not going well, I find that the emotional turmoil that causes just really seeps into my work and keeps me from being as effective or productive and I bring it home with me, too. I mean, I have a wife and a two-year-old at home and sometimes I think I more often bring home or take home the emotional impact of the work in this class compared to some of the other courses I teach. So, it just comes with the territory.

These types of personal and professional impacts led to instructors needing to find ways to cope.

Coping with Course Challenges

Participants often spoke of the range of ways they attempted to cope with the challenges of teaching multicultural courses, describing, how this need was specific to these courses and did not similarly apply to other courses they taught. We identified several subthemes among their coping strategies: (a) Existing Professional Networks and Environments; (b) Self-created Supports; and (c) Solo Strategies.

Existing Professional Networks and Environments

Faculty highlighted the importance of attending conferences and workshops that helped them with teaching multicultural courses. While they acknowledged the learning that happened at these events, they emphasized that networks providing supportive spaces in which they could engage with others having similar experiences was a main benefit. This allowed for opportunities to brainstorm and share ways to cope, while simultaneously offering a supportive network of colleagues who resonated with the challenging experiences, empathized, and allowed participants to feel they were not alone. This provided needed support and energy to continue to teach multicultural courses. One White, female, lecturer, when talking about conferences, emphasized that she had developed “relationships with people who are involved in these various groups” and that she “enjoy[ed] connecting around multiculturalism and social justice issues.” Ultimately, she highlighted the importance of the “interpersonal engagement” that stemmed from these conferences and the benefits she received from these experiences. Further, a White, female, pre-tenure professor suggested:

Any conference that I go to, I’m always looking for presentations regarding multicultural counseling, multicultural competencies, multicultural training. So that’s usually the first thing I look at in a conference program is opportunities to either have those discussions, dialogue, or to learn more about what someone else perceives as best practices.

Overall, these professional networks, conferences, and workshops not only provided coping strategies but also offered content to improve teaching practices—something they felt they really had to search for because it was not readily available otherwise.

Self-Created Supports

Participants acknowledged they often did not find the support they needed from professional organizations and conferences. As a result, they found themselves creating their own spaces to be able to continue to teach multicultural courses—spaces that allowed them to, as a White, female, tenured professor described, “feel both sane and supported.” For example, when talking about the challenges she faced, a White female administrator with a faculty appointment referred to “two very close colleagues” as her “outlets.” She said, “We talk probably weekly about things or we meet for lunch and go over why this is happening or, maybe, are there ways to mitigate it.”

Similarly, a White, tenured, professor shared:

Well, I just think talking with people who teach these classes and asking about the issue of self-care and sustainability, and how people can sustain themselves, especially if people are like me where they’re the only ones in their department that are really doing this kind of work. And just really being conscious especially for, I think, new faculty, that they need to sort of create networks and opportunities to get support because of the unique challenges that come with teaching this course.

In addition to being able to talk about issues of self-care with others, participants also sought content-focused support to improve their teaching and to address pain they experienced because of challenges teaching topics for which they had less expertise. One White, female lecturer shared:

I have my go to person for White privilege or my go to person for pronoun language, right? I need a go to a person for internalized ageism I’m suffering, self-inflicting a lot of pain around that. Also able-bodiedness, right? So there are people I can talk to who are accustomed to having these conversations and we have a good relationship and they can push me along.

A White, pre-tenure, male, professor shared:

I think those sorts of communities of colleagues become very important, both in learning how to do things but also in your own coping. Because sometimes you feel like you did something wrong or you screwed up and sometimes a colleague is able to share, ‘yeah, that happened to me, too.’ It in a way can be normalizing and therapeutic. So, I think that helps, too, the informal consultation.

Ultimately, these spaces were typically created to include others with similar experiences—sometimes peers and sometimes colleagues who had more experience with multicultural courses. With these connections, instructors were able to share “war stories” with others who understood them.

Solo Strategies

Participants also talked about the need to do individual work to cope with the challenges they faced teaching multicultural courses. One White, female tenured professor said, in addition to seeking support from colleagues and families, “I journal and I write.” A White, gender non-conforming, pre-tenure professor spoke about the importance of meditation and sports, and others talked about the importance of decompression time and reflection. A White, female tenure-track professor said,

I’ll write down these experiences to keep me going [because] it almost helps me to realize just how much more we have to do and that this isn’t about me and keep going, right? It’s not like this hasn’t happened to other people. Getting that perspective helps you…obviously you need to take a moment and breathe but then come back to the work maybe with more intentionality and urgency and reflection.

She also shared that keeping “testimonies” from students who were supportive and thanked her for her work allowed her to remember the positive and important work she was doing, even in the face of challenges.

Feelings about Teaching Multicultural Courses

Another theme that emerged was Feelings about Teaching Multicultural Courses. This theme categorizes any emotional reactions participants described to teaching multicultural courses. This included subthemes of: (a) Overwhelmingly Positive Despite Challenges, (b) Labor of Love, (c) My Passion, and (d) Fear and Vulnerability.

Overwhelmingly Positive Despite Challenges

The subtheme of Overwhelmingly Positive entailed discussion of the courses as worth the difficulties due to personal commitment to the subject matter and true enjoyment of the unique pedagogy required. For example, participants simply stated, “Love it,” or “Favorite class to teach.” Interestingly, comments by participants in this subtheme were very brief. While not offering extensive details, the emotional reactions of participants demonstrated the strength and significance of their feelings.

Labor of Love

Labor of Love entailed feeling “called” to do this multicultural teaching. One White, tenured female participant stated:

I just love it so I wanna keep studying it in all its forms but I recognize that some of that has to do with my own receptivity, my own willingness to look at myself so that my students can then look at themselves. My willingness to be vulnerable. Those kind of things. Those are stickier, ickier things that I think we’re less comfortable with as faculty.

My Passion

My Passion was coded when participants were personally interested in the subject matter and felt it their responsibility to share it with others. One female, tenure-track, White-identified participant stated,

This is the best part of my job. It is what sustains me. When working amidst the pressures of higher education in a neo-liberal world, especially given our current political climate, I love working with doctoral students. And I love getting to talk about these issues with them. So personally, I feel empowered, enriched, and engaged by it.

Another female, White-identified participant stated, “I always had a social justice heart, just did not have the words or knowledge to understand,” and another female, clinical faculty member who identified as Asian stated, “it is my dream course...due to my interests and work.”

Another tenure-track, female, White-identified participant spoke of the opportunity of doing this work:

My overall feeling. I think it is a space of tremendous promise and possibility. That is continuously fraught with challenges. But not an opportunity that I would ever give up and that I’m grateful to have.

Fear and Vulnerability

Along with positive feelings, participants often described an underlying Fear and Vulnerability which stayed with them as they taught the course. Specifically, one tenure-track, female, White-identified participant shared:

I guess that I still am scared when I’m making myself vulnerable or disclosing something that I’m afraid will be either misunderstood or perhaps understood, and that, that I don’t wanna disclose. You know? So I still get nervous and hesitate sometimes. Yet, you know, it’s important to do and it seems to work every time.

Discussion

The current study provides a unique and in-depth exploration of the experiences of faculty who teach diversity courses, allowing us to understand the participants’ meaning in the experience. In particular, the significant contribution comes from our focus on instructors who teach at the graduate-level, as much of the existing literature in this area focuses on undergraduate courses and instructors. Several takeaway messages are discussed below.

The findings in this study echo many of the burdens for which multicultural teaching is notorious (e.g., Ahluwalia et al., 2019; Prieto, 2018; Reynolds, 2011). Many faculty have described feeling unprepared to face such challenges in diversity courses (Mildred & Zúñiga, 2004) and, as per some of our participants, some institutions do not even allow junior faculty to teach diversity courses given this. Navigating these difficulties calls for specialized skills such as exploring one’s own biases and worldviews, and the ability to moderate disagreements on sometimes very personal issues (Reynolds, 2011). Almost all participants indicated having had little to no training in diversity and multicultural pedagogy; therefore, training for this important work could go a long way to help with confident and effective instruction as well as comfort of the instructors. Development of a specialized multicultural pedagogy course seems advisable if we value this type of teaching and awareness building in our students. This is particularly important as American Psychological Association (APA) program accreditation requires students to take a multicultural course (APA Guidelines on Accreditation, n.d.). The feelings of vulnerability discussed by some participants have been substantiated by prior findings, in which instructors of diversity courses may feel unprepared to intervene in complex classroom dynamics and may become silent or not intervene when necessary due to fear of making the situation worse (Sue, 2015). Rehearsing intervention strategies in microaggressive, conflictual, and other situations has been called for and found effective (Ashburn-Nardo et al., 2008; Scully & Rowe, 2009; Sue et al., 2021).

It was also notable that participants were often doing their work despite the system; in other words, systemic structures in departments, and with colleagues and in academia, were not necessarily conducive to the diversity teaching these instructors were attempting. Academic structures at the broad level, as well as colleagues in one’s own department, need to be aware of these challenges so they may provide support, as well as accurately judge the work of these colleagues. Similarly, the course logistics, which are typically beyond the control of the instructor, have bearing on how well the course may go. For example, class size is a huge factor that was discussed extensively by participants as determining the success of the course. If one is to teach multicultural content in any depth (which is recommended), and particularly if they are to instill some personal awareness on the part of students (also recommended), then time and space for experiential activities and personal and group reflection is needed, thus smaller class sizes are required. Little has been documented on this previously so it is important to note that structural issues for multicultural pedagogy may need to be decided in a different way than for other types of courses.

Multiple challenges arose that often exacerbated the experiences these instructors were having in other areas of their careers. It has been established that there are gender disparities in faculty representation, and that systemic barriers may impede women in their career building (Cameron et al., 2016). Implicit biases and stereotypes affect peer review processes, work climates, and academic success (Oleschuk, 2020). Faculty of color have even further barriers in these areas. In higher education there has even been concern that instructors will be split into two different labor markets, those that take on emotional labor (defined as emotion management performed as part of one’s paid employment; Hothschild, 1983/2012) and those who do not, to the detriment in the academy for those who do as it is often a “secondary, devalued” labor market (Moore et al., 2010, p. 182). This is compounded by the fact that these same individuals are often doing most of the hidden workload at universities (Harlow, 2003).

Relatedly, instructors of diversity courses may experience reactions based on their identity (Reynolds, 2011). Almost all of our participants commented on how their own identities impacted their classroom experience and how the students, and other faculty and administration, perceived them. Instructors of Color discussed students feeling they were doing this for personal reasons and White instructors described either feeling they did not have a “right” to teach the course, or, perhaps more often, feeling buffered from some of the negative experiences that minoritized faculty have.

Teaching in today’s particular political climate also presented a big challenge for these instructors of diversity courses. At the time of the interviews, President Trump had recently been elected, there was much anti-immigrant sentiment, and the Black Lives Matter Movement was strengthening. The nation was becoming increasingly polarized politically, and social media had been informing many people’s opinions in a biased way and potentially influencing political elections. Multicultural issues are dynamic and change with the times. Thus, in times of constant change and social unrest, every day’s news becomes content for a diversity course. This can be particularly challenging for instructors as they are not necessarily trained to teach in-the-moment discussion and analyses in their classes. Additionally, though the diversity course is not intended to be inherently political in nature, current politics and occurrences are inherently multicultural issues and, therefore, end up being discussed in the course, something which can take considerable skill to navigate, particularly in a volatile public opinion climate.

All of the points above necessitate a special kind of support for the diversity course instructor. Such instructors need to be aware, however, as they may not always receive understanding or support from their departments or universities in these areas, that they will often have to seek out specialized diversity and multicultural teaching conferences, attend continuing education courses and workshops related to such issues, and build their own network of peers who engage in such teaching and can serve as a resource and support. Ultimately, the success of multicultural courses depends on this. Interestingly, many instructors do seem able to find some form of support, though not necessarily easily, and most determined that, despite all the above-mentioned challenges, they love what they are doing and would not want to stop.

Conclusion and Future Directions

The current study raises many questions, as is common with qualitative research. Because this paper focuses on the experiences of a wide range of faculty teaching graduate diversity courses, future work is needed that focuses more intentionally on the role of instructor’s identity in the graduate diversity course experience. Many of our participants discussed their identities (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender) causing them to be perceived in certain ways by students, which was sometimes vastly different from how the instructors self-identified. Specifics of these perceptions and differences could be further explored.

Future research could include follow up and further exploration of the systemic barriers to teaching diversity courses. What are these barriers exactly and how could they be alleviated? Similarly, what kind of support structure works best for graduate diversity course instructors? Given the potential for negative student evaluations and other challenges, what type of training would help these instructors to better enjoy, and have less difficulty with, teaching these courses?

Finally, research on the best methods of pedagogy for multicultural courses should be conducted. A list of “best practices” could be established so that there are supports for teaching such graduate-level diversity courses in maximally effective ways and the burden of advocating for a certain structure (i.e., smaller class size) does not fall only on the instructor.

Ultimately, faculty who teach graduate-level diversity courses include discussions about social justice in their classrooms in the hopes that their students will take this training with them into their careers and the world. Many of these instructors believe passionately in what they are doing and have centered their careers on such teaching. Unfortunately, these same instructors have experiences that are not socially just as they teach these courses. With this study, we hope to shed further light on these faculty’s professional and personal experiences in these settings in order to name these contradictions and call on faculty colleagues, department chairs, and deans to acknowledge these problems and address them.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Melissa L. Morgan

Note

Appendix

References

Abbott

D. M.

Pelc

Mercier

(2019). Cultural humility and the teaching of psychology. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 5(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000144

Acosta

K. M.

Moore

H. A.

Perry

G. K.

Edwards

(2005). Dialogue on diversity teaching: Reflections on research, pedagogy, and passion for social justice. In Peters-Davies

Shultz

(Eds.), Challenges of multicultural education: Teaching and taking diversity courses (pp. 20–38). Routledge.

Ahluwalia

M. K.

Ayala

S. I.

Locke

A. F.

Nadrich

(2019). Mitigating the “powder keg”: The experiences of faculty of color teaching multicultural competence. Teaching of Psychology, 46(3), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628319848864

APA Guidelines on Accreditation . (n.d.). https://www.accreditation.apa.org/policies

Ashburn-Nardo

Morris

K. A.

Goodwin

S. A.

(2008). The confronting prejudiced responses (CPR) model: Applying CPR in organizations. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7(3), 332–342. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.34251671

Banks

J. A.

(1993). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. Review of Research in Education, 19(1), 3–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167339

Bellas

M. L.

(1999). Emotional labor in academia: The case of professors. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 561(1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271629956100107

Boysen

(2011). The prevalence and predictors of teaching courses in doctoral psychology programs. Teaching of Psychology, 38(2), 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628310390850

Callaham

(2020, August 23). Does “Black Lives Matter” hinder or help universal equity? Three diversity executives speak out. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/sheilacallaham/2020/08/23/does-black-lives-matter-hinder-or-help-universal-equity-three-diversity-executives-speak-out/?sh=28cb65c71967

10.

Cameron

E. Z.

White

A. M.

Gray

M. E.

(2016). Solving the productivity and impact puzzle: Do men outperform women, or are metrics biased? BioScience, 66(3), 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biv173

11.

Canton

(2013). The “cultural taxation” of faculty of color in the Academy. California Faculty Magazine. http://www.calfac.org/magazine-article/cultural-taxation-faculty-color-academy

12.

Charmaz

(2001). Grounded theory. In Emerson

R. M.

(Ed.), Contemporary field research (pp. 335–352). Waveland Press.

13.

Creswell

J. W.

Poth

C. N.

(2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.

14.

DeAngelo

Hurtado

Pryor

J. L.

Kelly

K. R.

Santos

J. L.

(2009). The American college teacher: National norms for the 2007–2008 HERI faculty survey. Higher Education Research Institute.

15.

Etikan

Bala

(2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics and Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6), 215–217. https://doi.org/10.15406/bbij.2017.05.00149

16.

Flores

(2012). Toward a more inclusive multicultural education: Methods for including LGBT themes in K–12 classrooms. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 7(3), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2012.707072

17.

Gloria

A. M.

Rieckmann

T. R.

Rush

J. D.

(2000). Issues and recommendations for teaching an ethnic/culture-based course. Teaching of Psychology, 27(2), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328023TOP2702_05

18.

Harlow

(2003). “Race doesn’t matter, but…”: The effect of race on professors’ experiences and emotion management in the undergraduate college classroom. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(4), 348–363. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519834

19.

Helms

J. E.

(April 2003). Keynote address, “Racial Identity Development and Its Impact in the Classroom,” Kennesaw State University Best Practices in Diversity Education Conference, Atlanta, GA.

20.

Hothschild

(1983/2012). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. University of California Press.

21.

Leedy

P. D.

Ormrod

J. E.

(2010). Practical research: Planning and design (9th ed.). Prentice Hall.

22.

Mildred

Zúñiga

(2004). Working with resistance to diversity issues in the classroom: Lessons from teacher training and multicultural education. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 74(2), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377310409517721

23.

Moore

H. A.

Acosta

Perry

Edwards

(2010). Splitting the academy: The emotions of intersectionality at work. The Sociological Quarterly, 51(2), 179–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2010.01168.x

24.

Morgan Consoli

M. L.

Marin

(2016). Teaching diversity in the graduate classroom: The instructor, the students, the classroom or all of the above? Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 9(2), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039716

25.

Morrow

S. L.

Smith

M. L.

(2000). Qualitative research for counseling psychology. In Brown

S. D.

Lent

R. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 199–230). John Wiley & Sons.

26.

Oleschuk

(2020). Gender equity considerations for tenure and promotion during COVID-19. Canadian Review of Sociology, 57(3), 502–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.12295

27.

Padilla

A. M.

(1994). Ethnic minority scholars, research, and mentoring: Current and future issues. Educational Researcher, 23(4), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176259

28.

Prieto

L. R.

(2018). Incorporating diversity content into courses and concerns about teaching culturally diverse students. Teaching of Psychology, 45(2), 146–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628318762875

29.

Reynolds

A. L.

(2011). Understanding the perceptions and experiences of faculty who teach multicultural counseling courses: An exploratory study. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 5(3), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024613

30.

Sciame-Giesecke

Roden

Parkison

(2009). Infusing diversity into the curriculum: What are faculty members actually doing? Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2(3), 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016042

31.

Scully

Rowe

(2009). Bystander training within organizations. Journal of the International Ombudsman Association, 2(1), 1–9.

32.

Sue

(2006). Cultural competency: From philosophy to research and practice. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(2), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20095

33.

Sue

D. W.

(2015). Race talk and the conspiracy of silence: Understanding and facilitating difficult dialogues on race. John Wiley & Sons.

34.

Sue

D. W.

Calle

C. Z.

Mendez

Alsaidi

Glaeser

(2021). Microintervention strategies: What you can do to disarm and dismantle individual and systemic racism and bias. Wiley.

35.

Tervalon

Murray-García

(1998). Cultural humility versus cultural competence: A critical distinction in defining physician outcomes in multicultural education. Journal for Healthcare for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2010.0233

36.

Tummala-Narra

(2009). Teaching on diversity: The mutual influence of students and instructors. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 26(3), 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016444