Social Justice and Inclusion: More Than Just a Competency

Across the nation, students are still experiencing marginalization for their racial or ethnic identity, their gender or sexual identity, their religious beliefs, and to some degree, their generational status -“Millennials are so [fill in the blank]”. Recent campus demonstrations highlight the timeliness of the updates to the ACPA/NASPA Professional Competency Areas released earlier this year, particularly the transformation of the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) competency into Social Justice and Inclusion (SJI). In addition to its practical application regarding student activism, I think this change reflects a more active assertion of the values of the profession.

Looking at the text of the SJI competency, including its new name, it is clear that mere diversity is not enough for student affairs professionals. By this, I mean that simply bringing a diverse set of students to campus (often operationalized only by the number of non-White students enrolled) does not create the kind of campus that I believe we as a profession want to see. As Concerned Student 1950 has shown us at University of Missouri at Columbia (Mizzou), simply having Black students on campus does not ensure their just treatment or their equitable education.

With SJI, integrating “knowledge of social justice, inclusion, oppression, privilege and power into one’s practice” is now a foundational outcome, as is advocating “on issues of social justice, oppression, privilege, and power that impact people based on local, national, and global interconnections” (ACPA & NASPA, 2015, p. 30). In addition to being foundational to this competency, I believe these skills are foundational to our work and our responsibility to our students. Daily, I try to consciously consider how my interactions with students are promoting their agency as creators of change and how my actions are creating an environment of justice and support for all students. With this new set of outcome statements, doing the work of social justice is not optional - we all have to consider issues of inclusion, oppression, privilege, and power, every day.

So what does this mean for colleagues who have not made social justice advocacy or activism part of their practice? I think it is easy to view the Professional Competency Areas with a deficit mindset - considering what areas we (or others) are lacking. To some degree, this is important, because the SJI outcomes are essential to empowering professionals to put knowledge and skills into action for students. Without them, particularly in regards to the intersection of the Professional Competency Areas (ACPA & NASPA, 2015, pp. 9-10), I think it would be hard for student affairs professionals to ensure that their work is not contributing to the kind of campus environment that leaves students feeling as though they do not truly belong.

However, rather than dividing the field into SJI haves and have-nots, I believe that it is our duty to help bring along professionals who still need time to grapple with the challenging ideas of privilege, power, and oppression, particularly systems of oppression that are larger than individual oppressive behaviors - a process that Freire (2012, originally published in 1970) referred to as conscientization, gaining a critical consciousness of the nature of our world. I try to use the relationships with my colleagues that I have built to support having challenging conversations. I encourage others to engage in activities and conversations that are consciousness-raising and I offer support to discuss how it may be painful to consider one’s role in oppressive systems. And I talk about the many times I’ve failed to live up to my social justice aspirations and how I have grown from those missteps.

This process can be long, difficult, and emotionally taxing. But, to live up to the values of our work, as espoused in our ethical documents (ACPA, 2006; NASPA, 2012), we must make it a labor of love.

Shifting our language from diversity to social justice is important. However, it will require work from every student affairs professional to make it about more than just language. Manning (2009) discussed the difference in values and philosophy that underpin various perspectives on difference, noting that,

many educators claim this position [social justice] yet have an incomplete understanding of its full meaning. Just as diversity became a catch-all phrase for all practice related to difference, social justice is unfortunately becoming the generic phrase for the same. Yet without an understanding of oppression, action related to transformational change, and passion for equitable sharing of power, claims of social justice may be another perspective in disguise. (p. 17)

If social justice is truly a core value and professional competency of our field, we must embody these principles in our work, not just our rhetoric. The work of social justice is everyone’s responsibility because all of us impact students through our words, actions, and interactions. It’s now up to us to empower our colleagues and students to create a more just world.

Chris Venable, M.A.
Academic Advisor
Kent State University

---

References
ACPA. (2006). Statement of ethical principles and standards. Retrieved from www.myacpa.org
ACPA & NASPA. (2015). Professional competency areas for student affairs educators. Washington, DC: Authors.
Freire, P. (2012). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Manning, K. (2009). Philosophical underpinnings of student affairs work on difference. About Campus, 14, 11-17. doi:10.1002/abc.284
NASPA. (2012, July). Ethics statement. Washington, DC. Author.