Considering the Words We Use

An important aspect of policy writing and editing is wordsmithing, i.e., making changes to improve the clarity and style, as opposed to content. The language choices we make can affect a reader's impression of our organization and affect their emotional, as well as intellectual, ability to "hear" the information we're trying to convey.

The words we choose may change over time, as our understanding and appreciation of the impact of our language changes. As my administrative policy office approaches writing and editing new policies and/or updating existing policies, we try to use "new eyes" to view and plan for changes to the words we include, as well as the content we're asked to communicate.

While the wording in an existing or new policy may have been through a number of iterations and appear to still be applicable or agreed upon, it can be useful for policy administrators to review the language for possible updates. Here are some choices to consider:

Inclusive language -- Use inclusive language, replacing oppressive terms with terms that support persons and reduce bias. Inclusive word choices reflect awareness of and respect for the differences inherent in all individuals. Approaching language from a perspective of kindness and respect makes it easier for our audiences to feel safe and more open to accepting the content. It's important to remember that understanding is a function of the heart, as well as the mind.

Plain talk – Plain talk allows readers to find what they need, understand what they find, and be able to use what they find to meet their needs. Even if not mandated for your institution, as it is for federal agencies and Washington state agencies, following plain talk guidelines can greatly increase the usability of your policies and procedures.

Jargon -- Avoid jargon (special words or expressions used by a particular profession or group that are difficult for others to understand), when possible. Define the words when jargon terms must be used. When writing for institution-wide audiences, it's advisable to write your policies and procedures to be read and understood by non-subject matter experts.

Positive vs. negative -- Make positive statements, rather than negative statements, whenever possible. Positive phrasing is easier to understand than negative. And a positive tone affects how readers react to the writing, even just subconsciously.

Useful References

Here are some related references you may find useful:

• Inclusive Language Glossary (Crowdsourced list created by Anti-Racism in Academia (ARIA)):

  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EK39wLk4DgVvye8UagK9l8BnxxaETqioqOuTZ21LNNU/edit#gid=0
  

• Guidelines for Inclusive Language (Linguistic Society of America):
  https://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/guidelines-inclusive-language
  

• Plain Language Guidelines (Plain Language Action and Information Network, with support from the U.S. General Services Administration):
  https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines

Metropolitan State University's Policy Advisory Council

The views expressed in this article are my personal views and do not represent the official position of MSU Denver or ACUPA.

Metropolitan State University of Denver recently restructured its Policy Advisory Council to be more inclusive of various perspectives throughout the university. The council, a group that I helped to establish in 2016 and continue to facilitate, provides recommendations to MSU Denver leadership on university-wide policies and policy impacts prior to enactment or revision. In 2018, as part of MSU Denver’s inclusive-leadership movement, MSU Denver President Janine Davidson, Ph.D., opened the council membership to any interested student or employee at the university. A year later, the council has about 65 total members, comprised of students, faculty, and staff, with 20 to 25 of those members attending any given monthly meeting.

While having a large number of individuals on the council can make meeting and coming to consensus more difficult, the benefit of having diverse perspectives, particularly when it comes to implementation, training and communication, outweighs the challenge of including many voices in the process.

Conflict Management, Not Resolution

Involving multiple perspectives in the policy process will eventually lead to conflict. “Conflict is growth waiting to happen,” said MSU Denver Human Services Professor Tony Ledesma, during a peace-studies learning community. Instead of viewing this conflict as a problem to be resolved, I’ve learned to view the friction in the policy process as a force for positive change. Often, when there’s friction, there’s passion. The most outspoken faculty, staff, and students sometimes get reputations for being difficult or obstructive. Rather than viewing dissident community members as a roadblock, policy managers can channel negative energy and harness “difficult” individuals’ passion by including the most outspoken opponents in policy planning and development.

Focus on Students

When President Davidson began her tenure at MSU Denver, she said her priorities were, “Students, students, students.” In higher education, prioritizing students seems obvious. However, immediately following Dr. Davidson’s declaration, MSU Denver employees began to ask, “What about me?” It’s all too easy for administrators and faculty (who are pressured from many angles and also enjoy intellectual interests of their own) to forget that educating students and preparing them to succeed throughout their education and career is the main focus of their work. This case is especially true when the council is talking about policies on employee leave or financial conflicts of interest, which may seem unrelated to students. Yet, the wellbeing and satisfaction of employees often has a trickle-down effect on the satisfaction, retention and graduation of students. When conflicts arise during the policy process, reminding everyone of the organization’s emphasis on “students, students, students,” helps to unite disparate viewpoints by focusing individuals on a common goal.

Looking to the Future

While managing such a large council occasionally leaves me in introvert overload, the success of the inclusive process is worth the effort. In the past year, for example, the council conducted a comprehensive review of the Board of Trustees’ policy manual, and it plans to tackle the staff employment handbook next.