admin
The new Heterodox Academy report landed like a splash of cold water on the DEI industry. It says explicit demands for diversity, equity, and inclusion statements in faculty job ads plunged between the 2024 and 2025 hiring cycles. That’s a big headline, and it deserves one — but it also deserves a closer look, because universities are expert remodelers of language when duty calls.
The report: what the Heterodox Academy found
Heterodox Academy analyzed more than 16,500 faculty job ads from the 2025 cycle and compared them with roughly 10,000 ads from 2024. They report explicit DEI requests dropped from about 25% to 11%, and standalone DEI‑statement requirements fell sharply — roughly 13.4% down to about 2.5%. Dylan Selterman of Heterodox Academy called the decline “real and substantial.” The group used automated coding supported by human checks to sort ads into “explicit,” “requested,” or “signals DEI will be valued.” Those are big numbers, and they suggest colleges are at least cleaning up their public paperwork.
Skeptics: rebranding, optional wording, and the garden‑variety dodge
Not everyone is ready to pop the champagne. Critics say the drop may be mostly cosmetic. Universities can remove the words “DEI” and ask for the same things under the names “belonging,” “inclusive teaching,” or “community engagement.” Some schools appear to make DEI materials optional rather than required — the ad looks nicer, but the hiring rubrics may still favor the right politics. Peter W. Wood and other observers point out that about 37% of ads still “signal” DEI will be valued, and combined signals plus explicit asks in 2025 still hovered near 48%. In plain English: the grammar changed, but the script might not have.
Political pressure moved the furniture — now check the closets
HxA and others tie much of the shift to political and legal pressure. State laws restricting diversity statements and executive actions from President Donald Trump pushed federal grants and contracting rules in a different direction. That pressure matters; when funding is on the line, institutions tidy their public pages fast. But pressure can also produce a clever sort of compliance. Change the label, keep the staff, and carry on. Colleges know how to play that game — they’re usually a few steps ahead of the public, and sadly often a step behind accountability.
What should happen next?
If you care about fairness and academic freedom, don’t be fooled by new paint. Demand transparency: release the hiring rubrics, show whether DEI is scored in candidate evaluations, and publish data on hires and promotions tied to those criteria. Auditors should see the datasets behind the Heterodox Academy numbers and verify how ads were coded. If institutions have truly dropped coercive ideological tests, that’s welcome. If they’ve merely moved the same checklist into a new folder labeled “belonging” — well, that’s not progress, it’s theater. The public deserves more than a plaque; it deserves the truth about what happens behind campus doors.
