JEA Diversity equity inclusion. All in: Diversity Audit Pilot Study Update. Image of students at school with JEA and The diversity pledge institue logos over top

by Sergio Luis Yanes, MJE

Introduction

In November 2021, the JEA board officially adopted its first Commitment to Diversity, outlining the organization’s specific goals in addressing various inequities and disparities in the fields of education and journalism. The statement was intended to shape how our organization continues to serve the professional field and our members while also holding us accountable for our part in dismantling systemic barriers that have existed for generations. 

In conjunction with this statement, JEA also added a new section to its website focused exclusively on the topics of diversity, equity and inclusion. The page provides member-created content, including resources and suggestions, to provide our members a way to gain awareness and understanding as well as to reflect and develop their own meaningful practices and claim individual responsibility in this very important work. It also provides us a platform to keep ourselves accountable to our commitment to diversity.

In order to make intentional choices about how best to serve our members, we need to understand the current landscape that exists in scholastic journalism, including: 

  • teachers of journalism and advisers of student-produced media; 
  • students in journalism programs and staff members of student-run publications; and 
  • the internal and external processes of scholastic media classrooms

Getting us “All In”

Our work began when JEA President Sarah Nichols, MJE, first proposed an idea to the board and later presented it in her general session to all conference attendees at JEAai in July 2022 — “All In: National Diversity Audit.” The idea grew into a partnership with the Diversity Pledge Institute at Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication, and since then we have started collecting information about where we are as a profession and where our student media programs are. 

The ultimate goals of the “All In” project are:

  • To gain a clear picture of how diverse student media programs are — both in staffing and coverage
  • To provide student media programs a set of resources and practices to support them in developing, sustaining and measuring their own specific DEI goals and processes 

A few months later, at the 2022 Fall JEA/NSPA National High School Convention in St. Louis, we began our first steps in gaining this understanding. 

At the convention, David Ragsdale, CJE, Nichols and I facilitated a session introducing the initiative to a voluntary group of attendees who became our first pilot group in the project. The group represented a cross-section of media types, school structures — public and private — and settings —urban, suburbs, rural — across 11 states, with one overseas American school participating as well.

In December 2022, we launched the first part of the pilot: separate surveys for advisers and student media staff with questions about various processes that are common in establishing and sustaining DEI efforts and their perceived outcomes. Participants had two weeks at the end of the fall semester to complete the surveys. 

What we found

How diverse are scholastic journalism programs?

Because this initial group of participants volunteered to take part in the pilot launch—without explicit control to ensure a sample reflective of the current educational landscape—we cannot yet assess how diverse scholastic journalism programs are at the national level. However, we are working on a process for gathering some baseline data, beginning with this pilot group.

From the participant group, we did find that a vast majority of respondents (over 70%) identify as white, heterosexual, cisgender females, which has been a trend in the field of journalism for decades now.

In the gender and sexuality data we received, it is interesting to note that roughly 2% of respondents filled in responses that indicate a lack of understanding of some of the terminology frequently used to identify genders and orientations (e.g. cisgender, non-binary / non-conforming, gender fluid). 

Of that small percentage, a few answers identified “normal” as a response, perhaps suggesting a perspective of privilege from those respondents. However, it appears that most participants were able to answer using the options given, perhaps expressing an awareness of these identities that are typically underrepresented in the media.

We also examined instances of neurodiversity (including mental health issues) and physical disability within participating media staffs and found that over 58% of respondents identify as neurotypical (including without mental health issues), and well over 90% present without physical disabilities.

Staff diversity can strengthen a newsroom by providing more opportunity for media staff to accurately represent their communities. A staff’s perception and understanding of its diversity—or lack thereof—can help identify potential blindspots as well. Despite the arguably limited diversity among participants in the study, around 77% of participants believe that their media staff is ethnically / racially diverse. That number jumps to almost 86% when focusing on adviser responses alone. 

Conversely, however, fewer advisers (approximately 64%) than media staff members (almost 71%) believe that their media staff leadership is racially / ethnically diverse.

How do scholastic media members understand diversity within their organization(s)?

Noticing demographics and perceiving diversity are entry points into the conversation of DEI. Student media staffs should also develop an understanding about the importance of diversity and inclusion in their programs. However, from written policies to recruitment and staff training, there still seems to be a varying level of implementation.

Written DEI Policy

Out of the 13 participating schools, four included written policies or commitment statements that explicitly mention their focus on DEI efforts. However, individual awareness that such a policy exists within a program highlights another obstacle to those efforts: Only about 81% of responses from those four schools indicated knowing whether such language existed among their editorial policies. 

Even more interesting are the responses from programs without a written DEI statement or policy—only 41% of those responses clearly identify not having language in place, whereas the remaining responses split somewhat evenly between “Yes” and “I don’t know.”   

Recruitment and training

Over half of the responses (56%) indicate that the staff actively recruits with an intentional focus on underrepresented groups within their school community. While we did not explicitly ask what that looked like, several responses indicated in the open-ended questions about practices that they focus primarily on racial / ethnic diversity when recruiting. 

One adviser responded with specific instances of presenting to linguistically diverse students as well as to affinity groups for identities other than race / ethnicity (e.g. GSA) and of working with special education case managers to help recruit new staff members.

In regards to training, over 93% of all participants feel that development and leadership opportunities are available to all staff members regardless of differences. Nearly 82% also feel that their training always or sometimes includes learning about the importance of diverse opinions and ideas.

What are different ways in which scholastic media programs practice DEI?

DEI efforts involve enacting processes and measures aimed at intentionally creating a space where groups who are traditionally marginalized and underrepresented may feel a sense of belonging and accessibility. In scholastic media programs, student staff members and advisers alike share the responsibility in this work.

Coverage decisions

We asked participants how often their coverage decisions are influenced by a commitment to diversity. About 37% believe that they always consider diversity when they choose what stories and people are covered. The overwhelming majority of these responses came for participants in schools with written DEI statements or policies. Additionally, just under 40% of the responses indicate diversity sometimes plays a part in coverage decisions.

In the open-ended questions asking about their practices, participants most frequently cited race / ethnicity as the main type of diversity discussed in coverage choices, with a few others mentioning other types, mostly orientation and gender.

Inclusive, culturally responsive language

The most accessible and most prevalent practice among participants seems to be the use of inclusive and culturally responsive language in both internal and external communications, with about 63% of staff members and advisers responding that their staff, in general, always do this. However, there might be some instances of perceptions not matching realities as there is a discrepancy between advisers and staff members. 

This could potentially also be a sign of what happens when the adviser is not directly supervising—for example, there may be some performative action while advisers are present that might not be occurring when the adviser is away—or it could be evidence that advisers lack awareness of some inclusive and culturally responsive language, especially since language evolves constantly.

Collecting demographic data to evaluate DEI

When asked about whether their staff collects demographic data to measure and assess the effectiveness of DEI efforts, responses seem to lack connection, particularly between advisers and student staff members. Only one adviser observes that their staff collects demographic data, but about a third of student respondents claim to, representing nine schools in all.

Also, this could be a practice taken on almost exclusively by media leadership, which could account for the other third of respondents who do not know whether or not demographic data is collected. 

Given that industry-wide, intentional DEI efforts are relatively recent (within the past decade), it makes sense that there is limited knowledge — subsequently, application — of processes directly tied to measuring and ensuring DEI practices and their outcomes. As such, most programs have not yet been exposed to a model of implementation, which is a significant area of need, and one our ensuing work seeks to address in future stages.

How do DEI strategies shape scholastic media programs and the content they produce?

When DEI practices are effective they create a culture and environment where all members feel seen and valued. In scholastic media programs, this means evolving the forum for free, open expression to include voices that traditionally have been silenced or erased. 

However, measuring emotion-based responses, or feelings, is often a bit more convoluted than observable traits or actions. When it comes to DEI, it is important to remember that “all means all” and that media staffs should continue to examine their practices to work towards everyone feeling included and welcome.

Trust, value, respect

Three questions asked about perceptions of trust and respect, each receiving similar results. This suggests there is trust and respect among staff members, but it is difficult to gauge whether it is directly linked to specific DEI efforts or other factors, such as common backgrounds.

More than 95% of participants agree or strongly agree when asked if they trust their colleagues to treat all fellow staff members with fairness. 

When considering if media leadership is prepared to manage a diverse staff, almost 92% agree or strongly agree. And, a little over 91% agree or strongly agree that their individual opinions are valued among the staff.

Comfort discussing backgrounds and beliefs

However, the confidence appears to dip a little—to about 88% agreeing or strongly agreeing—when staff members consider whether or not they feel comfortable discussing their background, beliefs and cultural experiences with other student staff members. It is important to note that 62% of the responses of disagree or strongly disagree (18 out of 29) came from respondents of one or more traditionally underrepresented identities, in terms of race/ethnicity, gender and/or sexuality.

When asked if people of all cultures and backgrounds are valued and respected within their program, almost 96% of those who took the survey responded that was almost or sometimes the case, with 88% responding “Always.” While there were only six responses of “Seldom” — and none selecting “Never” — it is interesting that five of the responses came from participants of one or more traditionally underrepresented identities.

Free, open expression and representation

The numbers remain high when asked to consider whether the staff provides an environment for the free open expression of ideas, opinions and beliefs. Just over 94% of respondents answered that they strongly agree or agree with the statement.

There also appears to be some misplaced confidence that people of all cultures and backgrounds are represented in the work produced by the media program. This might be more a matter of assumption than of concrete reality, given how few programs actually collect demographic data. Still, almost 59% answered that diverse cultures and backgrounds are always represented in the work they produce, while nearly 34% responded that it was sometimes the case.

This question was also one where advisers differed greatly from student staff members. Half of the advisers answered that the representation of diverse cultures and backgrounds was sometimes present in the work produced. Perhaps, these advisers might spend more time observing from a more global view or perhaps they have learned what to look for in terms of accurate representation.

Overall, these participants’ responses might paint an optimistic picture, but it is important to remember that the group surveyed presented a clear majority — almost a homogeneity — of identities. While there are other factors that can significantly impact staff culture, a shared set of identities also plays a role in this feeling of comfort and shared values. 

Also, the survey questions focused primarily on media staff processes and the internal environment those processes produce. There is still much to learn about the external impact these processes might have on the school community as a whole, including the perceptions those underrepresented identities might have of the media that aims to serve as an equitable forum of expression for them.

What we should do

As mentioned earlier, DEI efforts are relatively new to the entire industry, so a specific set of best practices has yet to be developed. However, there are some suggestions offered by this pilot that student media programs might consider in their own work.

Understand what “diversity” is

First, it is important for advisers and student media staff alike to develop an understanding of diversity that encompasses its various forms and intersections, not just the most discussed or the most visible ones. This means developing an awareness (both individually and as a group) of the identities that exist within the school community as well as outside of it, including the language that is used around identity. 

In the open-ended responses, the word “diversity” appeared frequently but without little if any specific indication of the identities being considered. Some hovered around racial / ethnic identity, and a few specifically mentioned race. However, it is just as important to be conscious of identities involving sexuality, gender, neurodiversity, physical ability, economic status, and so on. Understandably this is difficult work, especially considering how society and language both evolve so rapidly. How do we keep up?

The main goal is to develop an awareness that both visible and invisible identities and that these affect individuals’ experiences both on a media staff as well as in the school overall. Perhaps advisers and staff leaders could begin by identifying common gaps in their own knowledge and learning together. The JEA Curriculum Initiative offers several lessons on leadership that can help advisers guide their editors through this process.

Commit to diversity (officially)

Programs seeking to address diversity and inclusion should strongly consider a developing written DEI policy that the staff can use to hold itself accountable. A written policy also communicates to a program’s audiences its intent to actively work to address systemic inequities both in functional practices as well as in the work produced. Like the editorial policies a staff might refer to in its regular production work, a DEI policy would exist as an additional standard to uphold.

Address staff diversity

Ideally, the demographics of a student media staff match the school’s demographics. However, this is not the sole measure of staff diversity. A media staff should include individuals who have traditionally not been represented in the program. Recruitment is an ongoing area many media programs focus on and many others struggle with. Regardless, this should remain an intentional area of focus

One possible recruitment tactic could be to simply highlight the gaps a media program seeks to close in its staff. This candid transparency could communicate to underrepresented voices the program’s intent to do better in providing a platform where all are truly represented.

Evaluate and reflect often

In order for a media program to accurately know how well its DEI efforts are going is to frequently assess its own work. Start by maintaining records of sources used, individuals covered in published work — including how they were represented — and even topics covered by staff members of underrepresented identities. 

An audit of those records as well as reflecting on individual work produced would then serve as a way for a media staff to gauge the impact of its efforts, as well as to adjust course in clear, intentional ways. 

Conclusion

The information gathered in this first phase of the “All In” pilot, while limited, has provided evidence that confirms some of our initial perceptions. While this may not be representative of all media programs nationwide, it might provide a snapshot to a common reality for many. 

The next phase engages participants in administering a schoolwide audience survey and a more thorough publication audit, where staff members are asked to look through published work to examine the actual diversity represented and the accuracy of that representation in relation to a media program’s audience. Both of these steps should conclude in April 2023 just in time for the spring convention in San Francisco, where we will share more of our findings and provide space for some additional learning about a few more DEI topics.

Additionally, the JEA board has been working behind the scenes on multiple grant opportunities to provide a few more opportunities for advisers and media staff members to engage in meaningful and productive learning around DEI work.

We are looking forward to these next steps and to the full roll-out of “All In” as it continues to develop.


Sergio Luis Yanes, MJE, teaches journalism and advises the student media at Arvada High School in Colorado. He currently serves as a mentor and as a director-at-large for JEA. This post is presented as work submitted for his Master Journalism Educator project.

Lindsay Porter

Related Posts

92 Superior rankings awarded, 537 students recognized in Fall 2024 NSMC

The National Student Media Contests were all completed online and on site for the 2024 Fall…

Read More ›

Walnut Hills captures third National Journalism Quiz Bowl win in Philadelphia

Students from Walnut Hills High School in Cincinnati, Ohio were named National Journalism Quiz Bowl…

Read More ›

Bautista’s poster design to represent Scholastic Journalism Week 2025

A poster design from Maryann Bautista, junior at Omaha (Nebraska) Bryan High School, was selected…

Read More ›