Beyond tokenism and objectivity: theoretical reflections on a transformative equity, diversity, and inclusion agenda for higher education in Canada

Universities, the sites for objective knowledge, apolitical and legitimized to contribute to human and intellectual capacity, find themselves in a tenuous position on issues of merit, equality, and fairness. On one hand, social forces have demonstrated how universities have been institutions for the production and reproduction of systemic inequality. On the other hand, universities maintain that they are well positioned, as part of their institutional renewal practices, to address contemporary calls for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI). Since universities are now eager to embrace EDI principles, it is appropriate to demonstrate their historical failures and provide some recommendations towards institutional renewal. Drawing on critical pedagogy, the paper examines selected academic contributions and knowledge claims that have reproduced systemic inequality, specifically on the discourse on human classification. The broader question is whether universities are simply going through the motions and hope EDI is a fad or are serious about institutional renewal and transformative changes. The study offers some ideas on how universities can pursue transformative changes grounded on EDI principles.

Enhancing Researcher Reflexivity About the Influence of Leading Questions in Interviews

Interviewing is the most frequently used qualitative research method for gathering data. Although interviews vary across different epistemological perspectives, questions are central to all interviewing genres. This article focuses on the potential for the wording of interview questions to lead and unduly influence, or bias, the interviewee’s responses. This underacknowledged phenomenon affects the trustworthiness of findings and has implications for knowledge claims made by researchers, particularly in research that aims to elicit interviewees’ subjective experience. We highlight the problem of the influence of interview questions on data; provide a typology of how interview questions can lead responses; and present a method, the “cleanness rating,” that facilitates reflexivity by enabling researchers to review and assess the influence of their interview questions. This clarifies the researcher’s role in the production of interview data and contributes to methodological transparency.