Dear Tech Companies: Is inclusive language enough?

We’ve told you why you need to rethink who the ‘traditional’ student is. It’s time to rethink our mindset too.

Each story in our Dear Tech Companies series focuses on issues in the tech space and provides strategies and solutions to companies looking to invest in meaningful solutions that will drive impactful industry change and make the industry more accessible to Black, Latina, and Native American women.

This is the final installment of our newest series — “Dear Tech Companies: What’s a ‘traditional’ student anyway’?’ Click on the links to read parts I and II.

What does ‘traditional’ mean to you? It could bring to mind long-established holiday rituals, the way you typically approach a problem, or your daily route to work. There is no one definition of ‘traditional’.

How about when we say ‘traditional’ student? We’ve spoken before about how most US post-secondary students are no longer 18 years old, straight out of high school, and studying on campus full-time. In fact, most undergraduates in America’s classrooms have taken ‘non-traditional’ routes to get there.

So how can the language we use catch up to the reality of today?

We’ve spilled some ink in our last two Dear Tech Companies pieces telling you why this question is important. By lumping a majority of students into a nebulous group like “non-traditional”, we are defining student experiences by what they’re not, instead of accounting for the diversity of pathways and journeys that inform those experiences.

In our own experience, we’ve realized that a shift in mindset makes a shift in language easier, more intuitive, and more representative of the work we do. Here are a few things we’ve learned:

1. Good intent doesn’t replace intentionality.

A few years ago, we used the gender-neutral term “Latinx,” believing it welcomed more individuals into conversations around inclusion in tech. Then we learned that only 3% of Hispanic adults in the US had actually heard the phrase Latinx. For us, this was a clear indication that this term was not predominantly used by the community we serve, and we have since shifted to using the term “Latina.”

Reflecting on who you’re speaking to, who’s doing the speaking, and who’s doing the listening is critical. Some students may find the term “non-traditional” helpful in locating often scarce resources and support, and may also rally around the term as a point of pride and community. Other times, the same students might prefer specific language that accounts for their unique realities. Context matters — by listening to how the communities you’re speaking to talk about themselves and their experiences, you can walk the walk to support these individuals’ needs.

2. If you’re not getting specific, you’re not doing it right.

In 2017, we used the term “underrepresented women of color” to acknowledge that some women of color (like East and South Asian women) were more represented in tech while others (Black, Latina, and Native American women) were not. However, we’ve since learned that while some shorthands can be helpful, others can be reductive and deficit-framed. (And, we know that East and South Asian women remain quite underrepresented at leadership levels in tech.)

We asked ourselves what was stopping us from getting specific about who we were really speaking to — Black, Latina, and Native American women. Similarly, if your initiatives cater to moms, veterans, or transfer students, why not explicitly say that? By identifying these groups individually, you can be more clear about who your programs support and get clear about what these individuals might need from you.

3. Keep the long game in sight.

No amount of sensitivity to language can cover up a lack of sustained investment in programs that benefit the GED recipients, veterans, caregivers, and other students in your workforce.

Sustained investment could look different depending on your context — you could take a page out of Comcast’s book and create targeted recruitment internships; or you could partner with community colleges like Amazon did to help continue employees’ professional journeys after they enter the workforce. You could also invest in learning what stops potential employees from applying for a job with you in the first place — our grantee partners at WGU audited their own application processes to identify potential roadblocks students may face while applying for computing programs, like paying fees to access transcripts from previous educational experiences. The common thread? Engaging your resources to create more meaningful support and community for current and future employees.

You might think we’re asking you to throw out the word “non-traditional” entirely. We’re not. Before you dive headfirst into adopting a new term or phrase, ask yourself: are you just solving for accuracy, given that 4-year first-time students only comprise 49% of our current undergraduate population? Or are you solving for something larger — the exclusion embedded in corporate hiring and recruitment practices?

If it’s the latter (hint: it should be), then it’s time to dig deeper and consider what’s behind the language change — and how we can not only disengage from deficit-framed, reductive, and monolithic language, but also phase out the mindsets driving those language choices. Inclusive language is critical — and language without action rarely leads to impact. At the end of the day, changing how you talk won’t move the needle unless it’s accompanied by changing how you act.