Course ObjectiveThe aim of this course is to profoundly engage you in the most important
theoretical discussions on diversity and inclusion. Which factors and
processes facilitate the resilience of individuals and groups regarding
increasing diversity and inequality which by influential social
scientists is considered to be one the most challenging dilemma’s of
late modern societies? How can society and organizations contribute to
inclusion? The course provides you with the knowledge and conditions
that enable you to critically assess these discussions and transform
them to academic and thoughtful insights on these socially heated
topics. You will develop an academic view on the societal issues related
to diversity by learning to contextualize and theorize them and by
critically reflecting on your own position, opportunities and
responsibilities as social scientists. This course aims to enlarge the
reflective capacity of the students to comprehend the complexity of the
diversity issues in society and in organizations and grasp the necessity
of a layered approach towards inclusion to deal with this challenge.
The discussion in this course will include bodies of literature from
Sociology, Organization science, Social and Organizational Psychology,
Anthropology, gender studies and cultural studies. You engage with
qualitative and quantitative methodology. The course will start with
general introduction to the context of late modernity and specifically
the changed nature of power (from visible to less visible power) and
decrease of societal connectedness. Then we will discuss the challenges
of societal resilience related to growing diversity-related threats such
as exclusion and inequality. Simultaneously, we explore the structures
and conditions that are facilitating agency, inclusion and equality from
different disciplinary perspectives in various levels (individual,
group, community, organization and society). We expect you to have
prepared literature beforehand and take the lead in discussing the
literature of the course. As engaged lecturers we expect you to
challenge us and be challenged by us throughout the course.
Course ContentIn the era of late or liquid modernity, a solid foundation of security
has been replaced by the mobility of ideas, people, practices, and
resources. That said, mobility continues to be connected to structures
of inequality and exclusion, providing some individuals and groups with
more resources to be mobile than others. In addition, consolidating
nation states are guarding their borders and focusing on security issues
instead of inclusiveness. Yet intensified global mobility and migration
alongside more accessibility as a result of the advent of the internet
have led to increasing contacts across cultural borders. Societies,
organizations and individuals are in the midst of growing diversity in
terms of people, values and ideas. The paradoxical presence of increased
mobility and connectedness (e.g., through new technologies,
globalisation) and extreme disconnectedness and individualism provides a
new angle in investigating the layers of diversity. Culture, ethnicity
and religion seem to have become sites of contestation and identity
politics and management. Although societies have always been diverse,
some scholars have argued that the diversity of the late modern era
presents us with new challenges. Steven Vertovec uses the concept
‘super-diversity’ to describe this new condition. The rise of numbers of
migrants, the diversity of the groups of migrants, and most importantly
the differences within diverse groups introduces new complexities and
challenges to the existing diversities in the world. Diversity and the
differences between people and groups affect the effectiveness and
quality of their interactions. These effects are visible on multiple
levels: for individuals who are ‘different’, in interpersonal
relationships, in groups, in communities, organizations, and societies.
For example, growing populism and radicalization in Europe and beyond
are only visible examples of the ways that diverse communities are
reacting to these challenges. In this era we observe various forms of
communities, differing from gated communities (which are homogenous and
with an emphasis on excluding the other) and inclusive communities
(which are heterogeneous and embrace multiplicity). This course will
focus on the challenges of diverse and inclusive communities (on micro,
meso and macro level) in the context of growing globalisation and
You will read and discuss a variety of literature discussing themes
related to the binaries of diversity, diverse identities, democracy and
inclusion, and diversity ideologies. Additionally, two diversity cases
imbedded in different expertise labs will be discussed: the refugee
academy and women in academia.
Teaching MethodsIn the course, different teaching formats are used:
1. Meetings last approximately 1 hour and 45 minutes with a 15-minute
break. In the meetings, we discuss theories from sociology, organization
science, and social and organizational psychology regarding diversity,
diverse identities and ideologies, democracy and inclusion, and
diversity policies; we engage with theoretical discussion on resilience
and diversity; and discuss research questions and research methods of
empirical studies on the topics. Students will lead the meetings,
meaning that students, in sub groups, will present the assigned
literature and lead a critical discussion of the theories and
2. The duration of working groups is 1 hours and 45 minutes. In the
working groups, we follow up on the theories discussed in the
interactive meetings. In particular, we will focus on two cases: the
refugee academy and women in science. You will discuss additional
literature regarding these cases. Furthermore, you will individually
work on your research paper.
Method of Assessment1. The midterm exam consists of five open ended questions (20% of the
2. Final assignment (75% of the final grade). You can choose between two
different types of final assignments: writing a theoretical paper or
designing and presenting a poster (including extended abstract).
3. Research log and reflection assignment (5% of the final grade).
LiteratureThe literature in this course consists of theoretical and empirical
papers on the following topics:
- Power and agency in relation to societal resilience
- Definitions and categorization of diversity in relation to its
- Conceptualization of diversity of inclusion connected to democratic
promises and practices
- Perceptions of inequality
- Unsettling binaries towards inclusion
Readings per week:
- Power and Agency
Bauman, Z. (2000). Introduction and chapter 1: Emancipation, from the
book: Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 1-53.
B. Evans, & J. Reid (2015), ‘Exhausted by resilience: response to the
commentaries’, Resilience: International Politics, Practices and
Discourses, 3(2) (2015), p.154-159.
- Diverse Identities
Ellemers, N., & Haslam, S.A. (2012). Social identity theory. In: P. van
Lange, A. Kruglanski, & T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of
social psychology (pp. 379-398). London: Sage.
Hornsey, M.J. & Hogg, M.A. (2000). Assimilation and Diversity: An
integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 4, 143-156.
Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. S. R. (2002).
Integrating identity and instrumental approaches to intergroup
discrimination: Different contexts, different motives. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1455-1467.
- Binaries of Diversity
Hall, S. (1990). Cultural Identity and Diaspora. In: Jonathan Rutherford
(Ed.) Identity: Community, Culture, Difference (pp. 222-237). London:
Lawrence & Wishart.
Prasad, A. & Prasad, P. (2002). Otherness and large: identity and
difference in the new globalized organizational landscape. In: Iiris
Aaltio & Albert J. Mills (eds) Gender, Identity and the Culture of
Organizations. London: Routledge, pp. 57-71.
- The Value of Diversity
Gundemir, S., Homan, A. C., Usova, A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017).
Multicultural meritocracy: The synergistic benefits of valuing diversity
and merit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 34-41.
Biernat, M., & Fuegen, K. (2001). Shifting standards and the evaluation
of competence: Complexity in gender-based judgments and decision making.
Journal of Social Issues, 57, 707-724.
Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., Jurcevic, I., Dover, T. L., Brady, L. M.,
Shapiro, J. R. (2013). Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational
diversity structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104,
- Democracy and Inclusion
Appadurai, Arjun (2006). Fear of small numbers. Durham: Duke UP (35-86:
Globalization and violence & Fear of small numbers).
Ghorashi, H. (2014). Rooted connections in late modern time. In:
U.M.Vieten (ed.) Revisiting I.M. Young on democracy, inclusion, and
normalization. Houndmills: Palgrave, 49-67.
Kovács, Z., P. Smets & H. Ghorashi (2019) The Game of Participation in
Amsterdam East: An Alternative to the Neoliberal or a Neoliberal
Alternative? In: J.K. Fisker, L. Ghiappini, L. Pugalis & A. Bruzzese
(eds.) Enabling Urban Alternatives: Crises, Contestation, and
Cooperation. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 133-155.
- Perceptions of Inequality
Baron, D., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Kteily, N. (2018). Ideology and
perceptions of inequality, p. 47-62. In B.T. Rutjens & M.J. Brandt
(Eds.). Belief systems and the perception of reality. Oxon, UK:
Van der Lee, R. & Ellemers, N. (2018). Perceptions of gender inequality
in academia: Reluctance to let go of individual merit ideology, p.
63-78. In B.T. Rutjens & M.J. Brandt (Eds.). Belief systems and the
perception of reality. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Handley, I. M., Brown, E. R., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Smith, J. L.
(2015). Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is
in the eye of the beholder. PNAS, 112(43), 13201-13206.
- Unsetteling Binaries and Promoting Diversity
Ghorashi, H. (2017) Negotiating belonging beyond rootedness: Unsettling
the sedentary bias in the Dutch culturalist discourse. Ethnic and Racial
Studies, 40(14): 2426-2443.
Galinksy, A.D., Todd, A.R., Homan, A.C., Philips, K.W., Apfelbaum, E.P.,
Sasaki, S.J., Richeson, J.A., Olayon, J.B., & Maddux, W.W. (2015).
Maximizing the gains and minimizing the pains of diversity: A policy
perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 742-748.
- Case: Refugee Academy – co-creation methodolgy
Ghorashi, H. & Ponzoni, E. (2014) Reviving agency: Taking time and
making space for rethinking diversity and inclusion. European Journal of
Social Work, 17(2): 161–174.
- Case: Women in Academia – Quantitative methodology
Leslie, S.-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015).
Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic
disciplines. Science, 347, 262-265.
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., &
Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favour
male students. PNAS, 109, 16474-16479. Doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
- Inclusive Organizations – Cultural diversity
Holvino, Evangelina & Annette Kamp (2009) Diversity management: Are we
moving in the right direction? Reflections from both sides of the North
Atlantic. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25(4): 395-403.
Rast, M., Y. Younes, P. Smets & H. Ghorashi (2019) The resilience
potential of different refugee reception approaches taken during the
‘refugee crisis’ in Amsterdam. Current Sociology, forthcoming.
- Inclusive Organizations - Gender Diversity
Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact
career development. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 1, 46-54. Doi:10.1177/2372732214549327.
Rudman, L. A. & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family
leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social
Issues, 69, 322-340.
|Language of Tuition||English|
|Faculty||Faculty of Social Sciences|
|Course Coordinator||dr. R.A. van der Lee|
|Examiner||dr. R.A. van der Lee|
prof. dr. H. Ghorashi
prof. dr. T. Hartmann
dr. ir. T.A. van den Broek
dr. R.A. van der Lee
You need to register for this course yourself
|Teaching Methods||Study Group, Reading|