1. Data Collection and Accessibility for Inclusive Excellence
Lindsay Murdock
Kayley Robsham

2. Presenters Kayley Robsham Lindsay Murdock Engagement Specialist
Community Engagement Manager
Inclusion Strategist
she/hers
Lindsay Murdock Engagement Specialist
Inclusion Strategist
she/hers

3. Starting Point Rigid, less inclusive demographic markers
Census style data can:
Create gender binaries
Confuse gender & sex
Confuse race & ethnicity
Fail to provide comprehensive racial & ethnic breakdowns

4. Benefits from Inclusive Practices
Provides strategic direction forward as campuses make inclusion mission critical
Supplements current accountability measures to improve experiences of at-risk students
Serves as a starting point for the interpretation of campus climate
Helps inform and align campus policies to reflect inclusive student experiences

5. Important Considerations
Implicit Bias
Trainings to accompany data accessibility
Data Negligence

6. Challenges to gathering & Sharing data
Top Down Approach
Rigidity of Student Information Systems (SIS)
Functional areas & different softwares

7. Theoretical Framework

8. Shifts in EDI Work Trend shifts since 70’s Next Steps?
More integrated social justice work
Outcomes central to practice
Developing Internal capacity for systemic change
Top down, well integrated
From stereotypes to patterns of treatment
“Good one” to organizational change
Single issues to intersectionality
Silence to competence

9. Moving Forward Broadened data = more nuanced understanding
Implications of self report
Expressions of fear
Role of Faculty
Students data use expectations

10. Student Expectations Proximity to differences Demonstrated Action
Appreciation
Collective consciousness
Make efforts more visible to students

11. ADA & Disabilities
Accommodations
Culture, norms & practices
LGBTQ Identities
Multiracial students in a mono-racial world

12. In Practice

13. In Practice | Gender Identity
Campuses using Presence
Utilizing Gender identity
Tracked involvement based on these demographics
Tailored engagement for marginalized LGBTQ population
Identified needs, improved retention

14. In Practice | Campus Climate Surveys
Effectiveness of outcomes improves with inclusive data as starting point
Intersection of race, gender & class
Intersection of LGBTQ identities and sexual violence

15. In Practice | Preferred Name Policies
Following State of Oregon HEC lobby - preferred names in Banner
Several states have followed suite
See example policies in handout

16. In Practice | Campus Inclusion Plan
Tie data collection goals to overarching inclusion plan,
Metrics
Accountability measures

17. Overarching strategies for success

18. Top 3 Consistent collection of data at events
Building a culture of inclusive assessment
Access to assessment policies
Data sharing
Constant review & iteration
Collaboration & integration with internal software & third party vendors

19. Departmental Implementation
Provide templates with exhaustive or near exhaustive demographics
Departmental Collaboration on forms, data sharing

20. Divisional Implementation
Intersectionality trainings
Identifying opportunities for expanded demographics in admissions
Strategic initiatives to increase diversity and inclusion, add in goals and metrics that focus on data collection

21. Campus Wide Implementation
Preferred name policies
Tracking consistent data processes from applicant stages to alumni databases
Partnering with academics - personalized learning
Expand data collection in campus climate plan selection and development

22. Ethical Data Use

23. Discussion Prompts Ethics surrounding practitioner use of data
In what ways do you raise awareness around the importance of these policies or practices on your campus?
What trainings have you found effective around EDI and data usage and analyzation? What gaps in training can you identify on your campus?
Integrity and responsibility of data utilization and reporting
What are some of the effective ways your department trains employees on effective data utilization and reporting?
How can these trainings be improved?

24. References
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25,
Barton, D. (2015). The most important factor in a college student’s success. blogs.wsj.com/experts/2015/09/16/the-most-important-factor-in-a-college-students-success/
Kuh, et al. (2006). What matters most to student success: a review of the literature.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Milem, et al. (2005) Making diversity work on campus: A research-based perspective.
DLE Survey Changes Survey-Changes.pdf
Elliot, et. al. (2013) Institutional barriers to diversity change work in higher education.
Johnston, Sara (2015) Unequal Treatment or Uneven Consequence: A Content Analysis of Americans with Disabilities Act Title I Disparate Impact Cases from 1992 – sds.org/article/view/4938
Obear, K (2012) Reflections on our practice as social justice educators: How far we have come, how far we need to go

25. For More Information Handout URL for more copies:
Inclusive Data Blogs/ Inclusivity Page
Lindsay Murdock @linds_murdock
Kayley Robsham @kayleyrobsham