What to Know About the University of Michigan’s D.E.I. Experiment

A decade ago, the University of Michigan intentionally placed itself in the vanguard of a revolution then beginning to reshape American higher education. Around the country, college administrators were rapidly expanding D.E.I. programs. They believed that vigorous D.E.I. efforts would allow traditionally underrepresented students to thrive on campus — and improve learning for students from all backgrounds.

In recent years, as D.E.I. programs came under withering attack, Michigan has only doubled down on D.E.I., holding itself out as a model for other schools. By one estimate, the university has built the largest D.E.I. bureaucracy of any big public university.

But an examination by The Times found that Michigan’s expansive — and expensive — D.E.I. program has struggled to achieve its central goals even as it set off a cascade of unintended consequences.

Here are some key takeaways from the Magazine’s article on Michigan’s D.E.I. experiment.

Michigan has poured a staggering quarter of a billion dollars into D.E.I.

Striving to reach “every individual on campus,” Michigan has invested nearly 250 million dollars into D.E.I. since 2016, according to an internal presentation I obtained. Every university “unit” — from the medical school down to the archives — is required to have a D.E.I. plan.

The number of employees who work in D.E.I.-related offices or have “diversity,” “equity” or “inclusion” in their job titles reached 241 last year, according to an analysis by Mark J. Perry, an emeritus professor of finance at the university’s Flint campus.

Michigan has struggled to improve Black enrollment — and students overall feel less included, not more.

The percentage of Black students, currently around 5 percent, remained largely stagnant as Michigan’s overall enrollment rose — and in a state where 14 percent of residents are Black. In a survey released in late 2022, students and faculty members across the board reported a less positive campus climate than at the program’s start and less of a sense of belonging.

Students were less likely to interact with people of a different race or religion or with different politics — the exact kind of engagement D.E.I. programs, in theory, are meant to foster.

While its peers reconsider aspects of D.E.I., Michigan has doubled down.

This year, both the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences announced they would no longer require job candidates to submit diversity statements, or explanations of the candidate’s commitment to D.E.I. Such “compelled statements,” M.I.T.’s president said, “impinge on freedom of expression.” But at Michigan, a faculty committee this summer privately recommended that the school continue using such statements,” which are currently required by most of Michigan’s colleges and schools.

D.E.I. at Michigan has helped fuel a culture of grievance.

Instead of improving students’ ability to engage with one another across their differences, Michigan’s D.E.I. expansion has coincided with an explosion in campus conflict over race and gender. Everyday campus complaints and academic disagreements are now cast as crises of inclusion and harm.

In 2015, the university office charged with enforcing federal civil rights mandates including Title IX received about 200 complaints of sex- or gender-based misconduct on Michigan’s campus. Last year, it surpassed 500. Complaints involving race, religion or national origin increased to almost 400 from a few dozen during roughly the same period.

After Oct. 7, Michigan’s D.E.I. bureaucracy was tested like never before — and failed.

At Michigan, as at other schools, campus protests exploded after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks in Israel and Israel’s retaliation in Gaza. So did complaints of harassment or discrimination based on national origin or ancestry. This June, civil rights officials at the federal Department of Education found that Michigan had systematically mishandled such complaints over the 18-month period ending in February. Out of 67 complaints of harassment or discrimination based on national origin or ancestry that the officials reviewed — an overwhelming majority involving allegations of antisemitism, according to a tally I obtained — Michigan had investigated and made findings in just one.