Representation is what we can count. There are many things we can count, ranging from one-dimensional to quite complex, but it is purely quantitative. Every institution likely has a graphic similar to the one presented below from my previous home institution, University of the Fraser Valley:<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"\"](\"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Picture1.png\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
Such data can inform many decisions taken by both administration and academic faculty. For example, based on the above, one can recognize that the average student demographic includes a large proportion of part-time students that likely have some combination of part-time jobs, caretaking responsibilities and more, shifting their preferences for class format (in-person versus online) and scheduling (day classes versus night classes). Noting the proportion of international students, one can dig further into this data to find that the majority come from India; this important observation might drive decisions around scheduling examinations and other events around non-Western cultural and religious holidays. The representation shows us the snapshot of the demographic at a point in time. But it neither captures all of the complexities of the data, nor does it in itself drive action or change. It also doesn\u2019t capture the very real and tangible experiences of the humans it is counting.<\/p>\n
Next up, I offer you Diversity Bingo. It is what it sounds like: imagine you are in a group of 20 or more people who you don\u2019t know and you are handed out a Bingo card as below. You\u2019re to go and chat with people and you\u2019re allowed to only cross one square per person for as many squares on the card as you can in 5 minutes. This is clearly not enough time to get to know anyone holistically, so in order to cross off the squares, you will have to ask blunt questions of strangers.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"\"](\"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Picture2.png\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
Which questions are easy to ask and which ones are hard? Which aspects of diversity do you think are visible? Which questions are you more likely to ask someone after a 5-second interaction based on the person\u2019s accent (or lack thereof) or their skin colour or clothing style? This simple exercise highlights the differences between what is visible, what is countable, what is assumed and finally what is meaningful. How quickly and how often do we judge our students based on their appearances, accents or handwriting?<\/p>\n
A few details about diversity follow. They are included to ensure we all share a clear understanding of the terms, but you may skip this paragraph if you\u2019re comfortable with the terminology. Diversity has many aspects. You can find various examples of a \u201cdiversity wheel\u201d, which is helpful in understanding that there are many dimensions of diversity, here is one such example:<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t![\"\"](\"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Picture3.png\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
Here, I will give a simpler model by only discussing two broad layers of the wheel, let\u2019s call them foundational and contextual. The foundational layer encompasses core human elements that are internal to one\u2019s identity: age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and others. The contextual layer consists of external factors, such as religion, education, geographic location, parental status, traditions and observances, political and economic systems and so on. A person\u2019s foundational characteristics influence how they navigate different contexts and how they are perceived by others within those different contexts, while the contextual factors shape which aspects of the identity are valued, challenged or even visible (or allowed to be visible) in a given environment. Diversity is complex: people are not just representatives of a finite set of categories, but individuals whose lived experiences are shaped by the overlap of the many dimensions they live(d) in. One important thing to note here is that any given individual can only control some of their diversity characteristics for themselves: the further away we move from the foundational layer, the less agency one has since the given aspects are shaped by circumstance, environment and social structures as opposed to personal agency or choice.<\/p>\n
Representation and diversity, though often used interchangeably, are not the same. The first is a quantitative measure of who is present. The second is more of a texture, a sense of how varied those presences are.<\/p>\n
What we can now conclude is that in a group of 2 or more people, we have diversity. And hence we have to be more precise when we talk about targeting diversity and provide actual axes along which diversity (and the progress towards it) will be tracked. For example, starting in summer 2024 CMS introduced diversity considerations into their conference session proposals and we are still working on the rubric to help organizers assess the diversity. To be clear, I\u2019m not contradicting myself \u2013 a group of white, able-bodied, straight, tenured mathematicians from Waterloo is still a diverse group by some metric mentioned above. This is why in the guidelines developed by the EDI committee for CMS sessions, we ask organizers to consider various<\/strong> categories, such as:<\/p>\n While it is of course not possible to have diversity along all the axes in a single session, I think we can agree that my edge example from above (a group of white, able-bodied, straight, tenured mathematicians from Waterloo) is certainly lacking.<\/p>\n We established that diversity is a fact. Inclusion, however, is a choice. And this is where reality comes in. You can hire a candidate from a historically underrepresented group (in math department, this is likely some version of female\/person of colour\/Indigenous\/disabled) and then do nothing else \u2013 except perhaps congratulate yourself on the \u201cdiverse\u201d hire and call it progress. What issues can possibly arise? Well, many. Here is a particularly poignant example that emphasizes that we aren\u2019t so far removed from the era of men-only education:<\/p>\n https:\/\/numberlandadventures.blogspot.com\/2017\/09\/are-urinals-in-womens-rooms-sign-of.html<\/a> which talks about the presence of urinals in women\u2019s washrooms in math departments of many prestigious old universities across North America, an ironic sign of slow and inconsistent progress toward gender equity. While I am here, I highly recommend Alice Silverberg\u2019s entire blog, not just the single piece linked above.<\/p>\n Diversity without inclusion is not progress. And inclusion is hard work \u2013 you have to explore barriers that are invisible to you but are real for others. This ranges from physical barriers to cultural to anything in between. I am an able-bodied, white woman. I am 5 ‘4\u201d, an average height for a Canadian woman, but apparently too short for an average academic because I have been unable to reach the top 20-30% of the blackboards in the majority of the classrooms I have taught in. As a result, I have to plan out my board usage very carefully as I literally have less space to work with than most. I thought I would leave this issue in the past thanks to technology and skeleton slides \u2013 only to discover that the podium height on which I rest my tablet is a whole other issue. Details aside, let\u2019s be honest \u2013 how many of you have thought that something as mundane as furniture height or classroom layout can quietly determine who is comfortable teaching there and who is not? I will give another, even more personal example. I suffer from an episodic condition that causes my blood pressure and heart rate to plummet, rendering me physically unable to move for a couple of hours. Luckily, this only happens 3-4 times a year and I get a strong wave of vertigo first thing in the morning as a warning sign. Unluckily, my in-person teaching responsibilities and a strong sense of professional ethics leave me facing a moral dilemma every time. Do I cancel class at the last minute, inconveniencing students, or do I push through, risking a collapse mid-lecture? If I cancel the class, how will this affect my student evaluations? How will asking for a substitution last minute reflect on my reliability? How will all of this affect my career? I know that many people with chronic or episodic conditions, visible or invisible, navigate similar choices every day. Accessible building entries, moveable boards, universal washroom facilities, flexible teaching schedules and formats, a tenure clock that accounts for life, funding structures that don\u2019t penalize career interruptions, recruitment and promotion practices that do not exclude those with non-traditional career paths. inclusion is not about accommodating one<\/em> person\u2019s needs \u2013 it is about designing systems that work for many<\/em>.<\/p>\n The last letter \u2013 the E. I will let the picture do the talking for me here:<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t Back to data for the last concept I want to mention: intersectionality<\/em>. According to Statistics Canada<\/a> and 2022 Census data, men earn higher salaries than women across all categories \u2013 age, geographic location, level of education, immigration status, etc. Overall average income of men in 2022 constant dollars was $17,600 higher than that of women. So men make more than women, we have certainly known that for years. However, women are not one uniform group and the data shows big discrepancies when intersectionality in education, citizenship and basically any two categories is applied. For example, Canadian-born women out-earn women who have immigrated to Canada, but that gap is much smaller for individuals without a university degree. Only recently have we as a society started analysing multi-faceted data across various characteristics to better understand compound barriers and necessary mitigations. Various practical considerations of intersectionality can be found in the report<\/a> from the Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women (where the table below is taken from).<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t Now that we understand the terms, let\u2019s ask the big question \u2013 why EDI? Why should universities (or another organization) strive to attract and retain diverse talent? Why should we expand time and effort to adjust our existing approaches to hiring? Why challenge practices that have \u201cworked\u201d for decades? Why invest in structures that might slow down short-term efficiency? Why make ourselves uncomfortable by questioning habits we didn\u2019t even know we had? Why EDI?<\/p>\n Because it’s the right thing to do.<\/p>\n This is not a good answer simply because it is not supported by a good solid argument. There isn\u2019t a single \u201cright thing\u201d that everyone agrees on; people\u2019s values and priorities differ, sometimes wildly; everyone has their own moral compass and most of us will bend or adjust it to convenience or circumstance (let\u2019s face it, we have all at some point in life considered a particular speed limit as optional). Ethics are subjective by nature \u2013 everyone thinks they\u2019re on the right side of history, even tyrants. Morality alone will not move institutions, budgets or egos.<\/p>\n EDI must ultimately be centered in shared human values and the creation of an inclusive community. Our foundation is a human-centered one. But the reality is that institutional decisions are often driven by incentives, finances, competition and resource considerations rather than shared moral frameworks — which are not consistent across individuals. What tools do we have to help motivate action in contexts where moral arguments, while valid, have historically been insufficient to produce change?<\/p>\n So why EDI?<\/p>\n Because it’s good for business \u2013 whatever your business is. According to Statistics Canada and Census 2022:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Excluding any of the above groups (intentionally or not) from opportunities is quite literally limiting yourself away<\/em> from a significant proportion of the population and hence available talent. When half the country doesn\u2019t even see your department as a plausible destination, then you cannot claim that you are attracting the best and the brightest. If the pool you draw from remains narrow by design, then the outcomes will remain narrow as well, by design. If you\u2019re serious about attracting the best people (student and faculty alike), EDI is a competitive necessity. To be clear \u2013 you need all of the E, the D and the I, because it certainly isn\u2019t helping your case if the retention of the diverse talent is low, while the word on the street about the dysfunctional culture is spreading.<\/p>\n As a first side note, I do have to mention one ever-present issue. The \u201cpipeline\u201d problem does not start at the age when our students enter the workforce or even the university system. It is widespread through generations and across the whole society. I\u2019m a woman and gendered statistics are easily available, so let me focus on those for a minute to illustrate the point. According to\u00a0 various studies, girls are more likely than boys to self-select out of advanced STEM courses in secondary school and beyond. We of course see the results of this on the other end. For example, according to the University of Waterloo CS studies website, thd percentage of women awarded BSc, MSc or PhD in CS studies hovers around 25%. This is supported by the more general data from Statistics Canada<\/a>: while women constitute just over 60% of recent Bachelor degree holders, they represent only 29.6% of those graduating with degrees in the field of \u201cMathematics, computer and information sciences\u201d with Quebec and BC showing the highest provincial levels. This of course implies that eventual workforce availability of women candidates is lower, propagating the problem into all STEM and STEM-adjacent industries, which tend to have higher wages than non-STEM fields (see here<\/a>).<\/p>\n Most people are familiar with the program pyramid: the four layers consist of the number of students taking courses at the corresponding years\/levels. The mathematical \u201cbase\u201d is quite heavy because math departments are large service departments, with students in many, if not most, programs having to complete a math requirement. The second layer is lighter, restricted to students in math and various sciences. Third and fourth layers consist largely of math students (majors and minors) with a few adjacent disciplines. While the shape of the pyramid will inevitably be narrower at the top, we would like to strive for a more gentle slope. And let me remind you that over 60% of Bachelor graduates are female, which means we have a captive audience that chooses to explicitly not<\/u> participate in our programs. You want to increase your numbers \u2013 tap into the untapped. You don\u2019t even have to go far: for example, according to the same stats, women represent over 60% of the graduates in \u201cPhysical and life sciences and technologies\u201d where additional mathematical background could be of interest if they want to enter the fields of bioinformatics, biostatistics, medical imaging and more. The students are already here, and in fact they are already succeeding in adjacent disciplines where mathematical and computational skills are increasingly valuable. The challenge is not an absence of talent or absence of interest, but a failure of inclusion. Are our introductory courses and advising structures welcoming to students with diverse goals? Do our curricula highlight connections to applications and interdisciplinary pathways that resonate with students in adjacent fields? Do we have flexible entry points into the minor or major programs? Can we speak coherently to career-relevant skills and applications?<\/p>\n A second side note is in the failure of connection. What we also face is a misalignment between what we teach, how we frame our fields and how students perceive their place within them. This, however, is a big topic that I will need motivation to write about \u2013 drop me a line if you\u2019d like to hear my thoughts.<\/p>\n In conclusion to my slightly all over the place piece above: EDI is not about quotas and there is no metric that will allow you to check the box on successfully diversifying your program. EDI is a method and a way of thinking. It is a way of questioning our systems with the same curiosity we bring to our research.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"template":"","section":[321],"keyword":[],"class_list":["post-21535","article","type-article","status-publish","hentry","section-mosaic"],"toolset-meta":{"author-4-info":{"author-4-surname":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-4-given-names":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-4-honorific":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-4-institution":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-4-email":{"type":"email","raw":""},"author-4-cms-role":{"type":"textfield","raw":""}},"author-3-info":{"author-3-surname":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-3-given-names":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-3-honorific":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-3-institution":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-3-email":{"type":"email","raw":""},"author-3-cms-role":{"type":"textfield","raw":""}},"author-2-info":{"author-2-surname":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-2-given-names":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-2-honorific":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-2-institution":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-2-email":{"type":"email","raw":""},"author-2-cms-role":{"type":"textfield","raw":""}},"author-info":{"author-surname":{"type":"textfield","raw":"Garaschuk"},"author-given-names":{"type":"textfield","raw":"Kseniya"},"author-honorific":{"type":"textfield","raw":""},"author-email":{"type":"email","raw":"kgarasch@gmail.com"},"author-institution":{"type":"textfield","raw":"University of the Fraser Valley"},"author-cms-role":{"type":"textfield","raw":"Notes Contributing Editor, CRUX Editor-in-Chief & Chair of Equity, Diversity and Inclusiveness Committee"}},"unknown":{"downloadable-pdf":{"type":"file","raw":"","attachment_id":null},"article-toc-weight":{"type":"numeric","raw":"99"},"author-surname":{"type":"textfield","raw":"Garaschuk"},"author-given-names":{"type":"textfield","raw":"Kseniya"}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/21535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/article"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/21535\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21547,"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/21535\/revisions\/21547"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"section","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/section?post=21535"},{"taxonomy":"keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/keyword?post=21535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Picture4.png\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/notes.math.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Picture5.png\")
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n\n