UC San Diego

In an era in U.S. public education characterized by the rise of students of Color as the numeric majority in U.S. schools and national attention to racial inequality, P–12 school districts have increasingly created new roles tasked with leading diversity, equity, and inclusion-focused work: district equity directors (EDs). Scholarship addressing central office staff generally remains underexplored, while research on district EDs is especially limited. Using a three-article dissertation format, this dissertation examines recent (a) ED role establishment, (b) ED role design, and (c) ED work and role politicization over the 2020–2022 school years amid national efforts to restrict district equity work. Articles are based on a qualitative research design using interviews, surveys, and document analysis with over 70 EDs across 29 states and all nine U.S. census divisions. Using theory on social activism, equity-focused labor in organizations, role design, and political contention, findings contribute to the first national analysis of recently exploding ED roles. In Chapter 2, I examine when and why ED role establishment occurred locally, finding nearly 90% ED role growth between 2019 and 2022 among EDs in this study with nearly 40% of the largest 550 U.S. school districts having established such a role as of fall 2021. I further document how internal influence from district employees, intermediate pressure from community groups, parents, and students, and external coercion from state and national organizations led to ED role establishment locally. In Chapter 3, I analyze DEI leader role design trends, including features supporting and constraining role impact. I find roles are most often tasked with addressing “equity,” designed as central office “director” level roles, and held by Black leaders and women of Color leaders, with 70% of EDs surveyed serving as the inaugural ED in their district. In Chapter 4, I examine how nationally-coordinated anti-equity organizing targeting district equity work led to district equity “shutdown” enacted by new conservative school board majorities, district leaders, EDs, and educators. I explore three forms of district equity shutdown: censoring equity-focused communication and language, eliminating district equity-focused programming or personnel, and restricting books and learning resources. Further, I find over 90% of EDs reported experiencing some form of the national movement to restrict learning about race, gender, and sexuality in their district; 40% of EDs reported at least one form of district equity shutdown; and nearly 25% of EDs reported experiences of personal intimidation.