Toward Culturally Sustaining Governance in Higher Education: Best Practices of Theory, Research, and Practice

Abstract

Demographic shifts within the nation have elicited an explicit and implicit call to action to address issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Topics such as curriculum, access, and tuition and individuals such as students, faculty, staff, and even administrators are presently foci for equity-centered initiatives and research within higher education. Within the equity imperative, however, one vital stakeholder group continues to be ignored in both research and practice—governing boards of higher education. As the group situated at the highest level of leadership, governance, and decision-making in higher education institutions, it is of great concern that research has not explored the role of the board as related to issues of equity, inclusion, and diversity. The authors reflect on the development of culturally sustaining governance (CSG) and the ways it can be applied in higher education. The authors argue for an increase of scholarship at the intersection of governance and equity. The authors discuss their work with boards as an example of how culturally sustaining governance facilitates a recognition of decision-making that intentionally prioritizes matters of equity and justice. Specifically, using document analysis, extant literature, and exemplar board cases, the authors present and define CSG within higher education, then delineate its features specifically for boards. The authors encourage additional research in this space in order to advance equity goals in higher education. Ultimately, the authors suggest that to better recognize, comprehend, and challenge systemic educational and social injustices, postsecondary stakeholders must consider and center the decision-making practices of trustee boards.

Examining racial discourse in equity reports: Florida’s public Hispanic serving institutions

“…At the state level, legislatures and governing boards are critical sites for developing policies and implementation guidance to advance equitable engagement for racially minoritized students (Rall et al, 2020). These policies become sites "infused with values people hold about equity, [thus] examining the plans with a critical eye is needed to elicit their actual meaning" (Ching et al, 2018, p. 825).…”

A Potential Canary in the Coal Mine: A Critical Policy Analysis of the Illinois LSAMP During the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Only time will tell the full extent of the early parts of the pandemic on the Alliance and the prospect of its underrepresented minoritized 1 (URM) STEM students, but what felt like an exercise that could be addressed more immediately was the extent to which the policies and communications amid the pandemic even sought to address student success in STEM with an eye towards equity. By equity focus, we mean devoting the requisite level of resources at all levels of the institution to ensure minoritized groups have opportunities and support to realize their educational outcomes and exhibit the fullest extent of their agency and talents (McNair et al, 2019;Rall et al, 2020).…”

Hiding in Plain Sight: The Potential of State-Level Governing Boards in Postsecondary Education Policy Agenda-Setting

“…Regarding accountability, aspirational outcomes must be constructed with measures from the outset of potential policy windows that are nimble in addressing multiple stakeholders (Nisar, 2015). Boards who wish to do this equitably and dynamically should interrogate how these measures may need to differ across various state factions as well as various institutional types (Dougherty & Natow, 2019;Rall et al, 2020). Understanding the impact of how discourse is constructed and framed, what constituencies have a voice in those conversations, and how discourse impacts policy formulation and implementation will aid SLGBs in operating optimally as political intermediaries in the postsecondary sector.…”

“…There is also important work to understand the relationship between SLGBs, governors (Lingenfelter, 2012), and state higher education officers (Tandberg et al, 2018). Additionally, more attention needs to be given to diversity and equity discourses both de facto and de jure in policymaking and how policy actors, such as SLGBs, respond to these issues (Rall et al, 2018(Rall et al, , 2020. It is crucial to investigate alignment between words and action in strategic plans and in mission statements, memoranda of understanding, and legislation to grasp the full scope of how SLGBs impact policymaking.…”