Diversity, equity and inclusion programs in universities lead to even more prejudice and bigotry, a new study has found. 

A recent research report published by the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, authored by social scientist David Millard Haskell from Wilfrid Laurier University, casts doubt on the effectiveness of the practices touted as solutions to systemic racism. 

Haskell’s study, titled “Reality Check,” critically examines existing scholarship on DEI initiatives, aiming to ascertain their impact on societal harmony and prejudice reduction.

Drawing from a wide array of research published in leading social scientific journals, including contributions from prestigious institutions like Harvard University and Princeton University, Haskell’s findings challenge the prevailing narrative that DEI instruction leads to lasting positive behavioural changes. 

Proponents of DEI training often assert its efficacy without sufficient empirical evidence to support their claims,” Haskell said.

“However, there’s clear empirical evidence that certain aspects of DEI instruction lead to greater prejudice and even harm,” explained Haskell in a press release. 

The report highlights several key concerns. Firstly, past research suggesting the effectiveness of DEI instruction suffers from methodological weaknesses, including issues with internal and external validity and indications of publication bias. 

This raises doubts about the reliability of claims regarding the impact of these interventions.

Secondly, recent meta-analyses conducted by Haskell reveal a significant gap between the exponential growth of DEI training programs and the lack of evidence supporting their efficacy.

Despite the widespread implementation of DEI initiatives, proof of their effectiveness in reducing prejudice and fostering inclusivity remains elusive.

Moreover, DEI instruction has been associated with the activation of bigotry, with certain core concepts like “white privilege” being directly linked to increased hostility toward majority populations.

While acknowledging the value of diversity in society, Haskell cautions against the divisive nature of DEI instruction, which he argues can lead to a more hostile and fragmented world.

“’Organic’ diversity—where individuals of all colours, creed and ancestry are free to flourish within a Canadian mosaic that values everyone equally—is a good thing,” said Haskell. 

Instances of punishment, expulsion, and employment termination faced by individuals who challenge DEI narratives underscore the suppression of dissenting voices within educational and professional settings.

Furthermore, DEI proponents’ adoption of divisive rhetoric, such as labeling Asians as “white adjacent” and accusing them of perpetuating “white supremacy,” underscores the potential for these initiatives to exacerbate rather than alleviate societal tensions.