What’s New
The University of South Carolina has eliminated “diversity, equity, and inclusion” from the title of its top diversity official on the flagship Columbia campus.
Julian R. Williams, who had been vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion since 2020, is now vice president for access, civil rights, and community engagement. The university also changed its Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to be the Division of Access, Civil Rights, and Community Engagement.
The university announced the title change in an email on Monday, according to The Post and Courier, but has not updated its website.
The Details
The changes in Williams’s title reflect the office’s work to comply with civil-rights and Title IX requirements, enhance the university’s engagement efforts, and create opportunities for students regardless of their backgrounds, said Jeffrey Stensland, a university spokesperson.
All staff members in the Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion will stay in the new division, he said.
Williams has been serving as the university’s first vice president for diversity, equity, and inclusion. South Carolina previously had a chief diversity officer, but elevated Williams’s job to a cabinet position. The change gave him direct communication with the university’s president and increased the diversity office’s budget.
Williams declined an interview request.
The Backdrop
The title change at South Carolina comes at a time when many Republican-led state legislatures have sought to restrict or eliminate campus programs and activities that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Lawmakers in Florida and Texas recently enacted legislation banning diversity offices, training, and hiring practices at public colleges.
Some institutions have already renamed or dissolved DEI offices and repositioned or fired DEI officers. A few have also updated their websites by removing sections dedicated to diversity, links to cultural celebrations and events, and DEI-commitment statements.
Legislators in other states, including South Carolina, proposed anti-DEI bills that didn’t go anywhere. The South Carolina legislation, introduced in April, would have eliminated mandatory diversity training and banned the use of diversity statements in hiring.
South Carolina was also among a handful of states that required public colleges to tell state leaders how much they spent on DEI. The 33 public campuses reported spending a total of about $8 million in a one-year period on programs, training, and activities targeted at people based on race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Some Republican lawmakers later attempted to pull state funding from college diversity efforts, but failed.
The Stakes
Changing office titles and restricting diversity programs are part of a years-long attempt to curtail equity efforts on college campuses, said Roger L. Worthington, a professor of higher education at the University of Maryland at College Park and its former chief diversity officer.
Faculty members and students have expressed frustration over the push to end DEI, saying the changes could harm the campus environment, student outcomes, faculty recruitment, and even research funding.
“We need funding, we need appropriate policies, we need an infrastructure and resources within institutions that help to undo past injustices and exclusionary policies,” said Worthington, who is also executive director of the university’s Center for Diversity and Inclusion in Higher Education.
Without more information about how the vice president’s duties may change, Worthington said it’s difficult to determine how the title change may affect the University of South Carolina. Renaming the position, though, could be a way of using language to cover up a shifting mission at the university, he said.
Removing DEI from the office title indicates “a move from an office with concerns about creating a welcoming and inclusive campus where marginalized students, faculty, and staff can achieve a sense of belonging,” Worthington said, “to an office strictly focused on compliance with nondiscrimination laws and policies.”
