In this line of research, I have been researching DEI-related centers and policies at U.S. colleges and universities. Specifically, along with Jessica Schachle-Gordon and Oklahoma State University graduate students Alexandria Love, Md Shihabul Islam, Md Muniruzzaman, and Daniel Tetteh, I have constructed a comprehensive database of DEI-related centers (e.g., general DEI centers, LGBTQ+ resource centers, interfaith offices) and DEI-related policies (e.g., LGBTQ+-inclusive policies) across the nearly 2,000 U.S. colleges and universities. My collaborators and I have been examining how sociopolitical contexts, school characteristics, and student body resources shape schools’ willingness to maintain DEI-related centers and implement certain DEI-related policies. Recent articles stemming from this project have been published in Socius, Journal of College Student Development, Journal of Homosexuality, and Sexuality Research and Social Policy.
Coley, Jonathan S., Jessica Schachle-Gordon, and Alexandria Love. Forthcoming. “DEI Centers at U.S. Colleges and Universities: Prevalence, Predictors, and Barriers.” Journal of College Student Development.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) centers seek to support minoritized groups, promote equitable policies, and foster more inclusive campus climates in higher education. However, recent literature says little about the prevalence and predictors of DEI centers at U.S. colleges and universities, especially in light of recent anti-DEI activism. Drawing on a comprehensive database of 1,756 four-year, not-for-profit U.S. colleges and universities, our study first shows that most U.S. colleges and universities (55%) host DEI centers as of summer 2024. Using binary logistic regression analysis, our study then demonstrates that colleges and universities that are located in Democratic-leaning states and counties, have larger student bodies, and have higher percentages of women students have significantly higher odds of maintaining DEI centers. Additionally, schools that are located in states and counties with higher percentages of persons of color, as well as schools that are designated by the government as “minority-serving institutions,” exhibit lower odds of maintaining DEI centers. This study offers the most extensive analysis to date of the presence of DEI centers in U.S. higher education institutions and underscores enduring structural barriers to diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education.
Coley, Jonathan S., Md Muniruzzaman, and Md Shihabul Islam. 2025. “Institutionalizing Safe Spaces: LGBTQ+ Resource Centers at U.S. Colleges and Universities.” Journal of Homosexuality 72(14): 2873-2893. (external link)
LGBTQ+ resource centers offer multiple forms of support to LGBTQ+ students at U.S. colleges and universities, but in the wake of recent legislation curtailing diversity, equity, and inclusion-related initiatives in higher education, we know little about their current prevalence and why some schools maintain LGBTQ+ resource centers while others do not. Drawing on a comprehensive database of 1,756 four-year, not-for-profit U.S. colleges and universities, we first show that a relatively small percentage of U.S. colleges and universities (14%) currently maintains LGBTQ+ resource centers. Employing binary logistic regression analysis, we then show that larger, public, selective colleges and universities that have higher percentages of full-time students and are located in progressive areas exhibit significantly higher odds of hosting LGBTQ+ resource centers. The study represents one of the most comprehensive analyses to date of college- and university-based LGBTQ+ resource center presence and highlights the enduring structural barriers to LGBTQ+ inclusion in higher education.
Coley, Jonathan S., Gabby Gomez, AJ Kurtz, and Anna Baeth. 2025. “Promoting Equality in College Sports: LGBTQ+-Inclusive Policies in NCAA Division I Athletic Departments.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 22(3): 1105-1122. (external link)
Because LGBTQ+ student athletes continue to face significant challenges in college sports, some U.S. college and university athletic departments are implementing policies that protect LGBTQ+ students from discrimination and promote LGBTQ+ inclusion. However, we know relatively little about the characteristics of schools that maintain these policies. To address this gap, the authors analyze a comprehensive dataset on LGBTQ+-inclusive athletic department policies at 353 U.S. colleges and universities with NCAA Division I programs as of the 2022-2023 school year. The authors estimate results from an OLS regression of an overall scale of LGBTQ+-inclusive athletic department policies, as well as ordinal and binary logistic regressions of eight separate athletic department policies. The authors find that larger student body sizes, larger endowments per-student, and the presence of LGBTQ+ student groups are associated with higher scores on an overall scale of LGBTQ+-inclusive athletic department policies. Additionally, affiliation with a religious denomination is associated with a lack of certain types of policy. The findings underscore the remaining barriers to the full inclusion of LGBTQ+ student athletes in college sports and provide mixed support for social movement theories of LGBTQ+-inclusive policy change. Most U.S. colleges and universities have more work to do to implement LGBTQ+-inclusive athletic department policies, but state and federal laws could potentially induce more schools to implement LGBTQ+-inclusive athletic department policies.
Schachle-Gordon, Jessica, Jonathan S. Coley, and Daniel Tetteh. 2025. “Fighting Back? The Contradictory Effects of Anti-DEI Laws on DEI Centers and Student of Color Organizations at U.S. Colleges and Universities.” Socius 11: 1-14. (external link)
A growing number of states have passed laws that ban or restrict diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in higher education; however, we know little about how such laws affect the prevalence of DEI centers and student of color groups, which are often housed within DEI centers. Through logistic regression analyses of longitudinal data on DEI centers and student of color organizations across 1,756 U.S. colleges and universities, we find that anti-DEI laws are associated with schools losing DEI offices between 2020 and 2024. Yet, schools in states with anti-DEI laws were more likely to gain Black, Latinx, and Native American groups and less likely to lose existing Black and Latinx student groups. Additionally, anti-DEI laws were not associated with gains or losses in Asian or Asian American student groups. Our study thus suggests that students are organizing to create new inclusive spaces in response to anti-DEI legislation.