Silence is complicity
Written by Kelly Coate, our Provost and Deputy Vice Chancellor.
On Tuesday 5th May 2026, we held a roundtable discussion here at Richmond on the topic ‘Who’s Afraid of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion?’. The panelists were myself, Professor Phil Deans (Vice Chancellor), Annette Hay (Head of EDI at DeMontfort University), and Dr Peter Kay (Associate Dean of Academic Engagement and Partnerships at ASU London), and the event was chaired by Dr Kandida Purnell, Head of Research and Professional Engagement at Richmond. I began by providing the context which inspired this roundtable: namely, the Trump Administration’s attacks on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) in universities in the US. I am very concerned that as an American university we are standing on the sidelines feeling powerless over what is happening there. We decided to start a conversation about it, and we hope this is just the beginning of much more discussion about censorship in US higher education that could conceivably have (and to some extent is already having) an impact in the UK.
For those who are not aware of what has been happening in US higher education, a March 2025 Trump Executive Order made it ‘unlawful’ for US higher education accrediting bodies to include any references to DEI initiatives in their criteria (standards) for accreditation. Richmond is accredited by Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), and MSCHE immediately suspended their standards (these set out the quality standards we must achieve to award US degrees) and are currently revising them with the removal of all references to DEI. The Executive Order is based on a 2023 Supreme Court decision that made it unlawful to make race-based decisions on admissions to universities. Clearly, a very specific ruling on admissions policies has now been stretched to support an all-out attack on what the Administration terms ‘woke ideology’ in universities.
Our panelists at the roundtable discussion brought perspectives from their varied experiences of transatlantic collaboration, all of which highlighted similar concerns. Phil reflected on his experience of working in American and UK universities, and drew distinctions between the US focus on race and equity (including ideas of ‘fairness’) and the UK focus on class and equality. Annette drew on her extensive experience of leading EDI work in UK higher education, including as a member of Advance HE’s EDI Committee, and in the US as a member of the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education, where she has concerns that many gains that were made in terms of DEI are now being lost. Peter’s perspectives offered a view of approaches to the teaching of Engineering in both the UK and US now that the US Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) has also removed references to DEI in its accreditation standards.
Through these contributions we were able to consider the different trajectories of DEI in the US (born from the Civil Rights movement to redress structural racism) and EDI the UK (emerging more slowly into an Equality Rights Act which aimed for a more level playing field). The initiatives described as ‘woke ideologies’ in the US are now categorised as discriminatory in themselves, and therefore unlawful. Anti-DEI laws are in force in 30 US States and at least 10 States have passed laws restricting the teaching of DEI and critical-race theory in universities. It may be difficult to imagine such an extreme backlash against EDI occurring in the UK; however, we are all aware how some right-wing politicians in the UK seem inclined to borrow heavily from the Trump playbook.
We seem to be in an illogical world now
Our panelists gave us salutary warnings about how the ‘chilling effect’ of what is happening in the US is being felt on our shores. If we extrapolate from the experiences of the panelists, we can hypothesise that academics in the UK working to promote diversity and inclusion in their curriculum are feeling dismayed by the sudden censorship of their counterparts in the US who can no longer talk about these issues. EDI practitioners in the UK with connections to their counterparts in the US are watching them lose their jobs or have their jobs changed and restructured. Those of us who manage American universities are now complicit with our US accreditors in pretending we no longer do DEI in our universities. My concern is that silence is complicity in accepting that diversity and inclusion initiatives are undesirable and should be banned.
As I said, the roundtable event was just the start of what we hope will be further discussions so that we do not remain silent. One issue which I would like to have more conversations about is whether the Freedom of Speech Act in the UK would protect us from similar moves to dictate what we can and cannot talk about. The Office for Students in the UK has made clear its determination to ensure that UK universities protect freedom of speech, but ironically this concern stemmed from a similar position that rightwing politicians have been expressing in the US regarding the perceived leftwing ‘bias’ permeating universities and a perception that this has resulted in the censorship of rightwing views.
Clearly it would be illogical for the OfS to then use tactics of censorship (to dictate that we can no longer discuss diversity) to protect freedom of speech. Yet we seem to be in an illogical world now: it seems more important than ever that Richmond continues to assert its fundamental commitment to its ‘Unity in Diversity’ motto.
