EDI in Research FAQs

How the approach to EDI is changing at the U of A.

The University is undergoing a shift in its approach to EDI and aiming for a more expansive vision. We have previously used the acronym “EDI” to express our commitment to a University that treats all of its community members fairly and with dignity, and that creates spaces for vital and challenging conversations across different disciplines, experiences and worldviews. Although equity, diversity and inclusion work continues to be a big part of that project, we have also increasingly drawn from a broader set of tools to help the institution to better address the significant and complex barriers and challenges in and to this work, as well as to better leverage the many opportunities. These tools include frameworks and concepts like human rights, decolonization, intersectionality, pluralism, universal design, social justice and interculturality, to name a few.

These expanded tools needed a more expansive container, one that is better able to hold a wide range of aspirations while remaining responsive and sustainable. The decision to evolve our strategic approach toward access, community and belonging is driven by a deepened focus on who we want to be as an institution, and our relationships to one another and to the communities we serve. By inviting reflection on the desired outcomes of our strategic actions and initiatives rather than on the tools to get there, we strive to offer a more context-specific, integrated and holistic approach to the critical and complex issues surrounding institutional change.

How we comply with expectations around EDI in research.

EDI remains an essential framework to the research ecosystem, not the least because it reflects the language used by Tri-Council. EDI is still a welcome framework to use and can be used alongside other frameworks like human rights, intersectionality, universal design, interculturality and pluralism. Researchers should actively integrate EDI and other frameworks into their research methodologies and practices in a way that reflects the specificity of their research areas and needs.

For example, researchers can use intersectionality to analyze how overlapping social identities influence research outcomes, or apply universal design principles to ensure research participation is accessible to diverse populations. Researchers are encouraged to reflect on how they will work to identify and remove barriers, bring in more diverse perspectives and ways of knowing and account for differences in impact on communities to help them achieve their research goals.

How hiring has changed in relation to EDI.

Removing specific EDI language from recruitment policy does not signal a retreat from human rights or fairness obligations. With respect to hiring in research, the UofA is strengthening and standardizing processes for hiring faculty (e.g. Canada Research Chairs), staff and students.

The university review of the hiring policy and procedures is underway following a phased review and approval process. The review of the policy is complete. For more on timelines of this work, see the Human Resources, Health, Safety and Environment page on the recruitment policies and procedures review.

The new policy is more streamlined and includes the purpose of, “...ensur[ing] a consistent, fair, equitable and transparent process for attracting, evaluating, and hiring new employees.”

All of the EDI components of the former policy were procedural (e.g., have hiring committees receive anti-bias training prior to hiring; make up hiring committees to ensure diversity).

The associated procedures as well as practices, which will include such matters as training or committee composition, are yet to be released because they require consultation with the UofA community. The Vice-Provost, Access, Community, and Belonging have struck a task force to identify the hiring procedures and practices that will guide hiring institution-wide.