3 language mistakes to avoid in your institution’s campus belonging plans

Strategic plans are powerful tools for shaping campus priorities, but their impact depends on more than just the goals they contain. The language institutions use to frame those goals can either build trust and inspire action—or create confusion and skepticism. Too often, plans rely on vague, generic, or poorly defined terms that leave stakeholders uncertain about an institution’s true commitments. Clear, precise, and intentional language is essential to establishing credibility and fostering shared understanding across the campus community.

Our review of institutional plans from across the U.S. and abroad revealed several recurring language pitfalls that limit their effectiveness, especially when it comes to plans for belonging and inclusion and economic and social mobility. Below we share how to avoid common language errors in campus belonging plans and choose wording that reflects clarity, accountability, and respect.

Lessons from campus belonging plans

As institutional leaders develop campus belonging and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategic plans, it’s important for them to consider how they frame their priorities and commitments. EAB reviewed over 40 DEI plans from institutions across the U.S., Canada, and Europe and found that many used generic and deficit-based language to articulate their priorities. This inattention to language impedes the specificity of action plans and can raise doubts amongst students, faculty, and staff about the institution’s commitment to DEI progress. To create a common foundation and a shared understanding of institutional priorities, academic leaders should avoid the following common mistakes made in DEI plans.