Events of summer 2020 have resulted in deep consideration of issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion throughout all segments of society in North America. Indeed, 5 of the 11 articles in the fall 2020 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education focused on this topic (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2020). When the fall semester enrollment data was released for the University of Arkansas, one of the first tasks completed was an analysis of the demographics of our student body. Findings from that study, while not surprising, stung a bit more in fall 2020 than in previous years. We are not as diverse as we should be. Comparing our departmental student race/ethnicity/gender to that of the state revealed that the two groups with the greatest discrepancy of representation are African Americans and men.

Only 1% of interior design students at the Fay Jones School of Architecture + Design (FJSoA+D) at the University of Arkansas are African American. The state of Arkansas is approximately 15% African American (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019). According to Council of Interior Design Accreditation (CIDA) data, the average percentage of Black students enrolled in CIDA-accredited programs is 7%, yet the percentage of African Americans in the United States is 13.4% (CIDA, 2021; U.S. Census Bureau, 2019).¹¹ Although CIDA is an international organization and the institutional data provided in this article include all CIDA programs, it is important to note that the vast majority of CIDA programs (91.4%) are located in the United States; 7.4% are in Canada; and 1.1% are in the Middle East (CIDA, 2021).
The FJSoA+D, like most CIDA-accredited schools, is not in alignment with the representative African American population.

Only 6% of our student population is male, compared with 49% in the state of Arkansas (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019). Even if our school was at the CIDA average of 11% male, we would still be out of alignment with the state and national male population.

Why are U.S. interior design programs not more diverse? How can schools recruit a more diverse student body? To answer these questions, we must start by studying programs that are more successful in recruiting African American and male students. Figure 1 shows the CIDA programs with the highest percentage of Black students.²² All CIDA-accredited programs must result in bachelor's degrees. Graduating from a CIDA-accredited program is not required to sit for the NCIDQ exam, although it is a very efficient way to demonstrate that a designer has fulfilled the educational requirements to sit for the exam (CIDA, 2021).

2020 年夏季的事件引发了对北美社会所有阶层的多样性、公平和包容性问题的深入思考。事实上， 《高等教育纪事》 2020 年秋季刊的 11 篇文章中有 5 篇集中在这个主题上（高等教育纪事，  2020）。当阿肯色大学发布秋季学期入学数据时，首先完成的任务之一是分析我们学生群体的人口统计数据。该研究的结果虽然不足为奇，但在 2020 年秋季的影响比往年要多一些。我们没有应有的多样化。将我们部门的学生种族/民族/性别与该州的学生进行比较后发现，代表性差异最大的两个群体是非裔美国人和男性。

阿肯色大学 Fay Jones 建筑 + 设计学院 (FJSoA+D) 的室内设计学生中只有 1% 是非裔美国人。阿肯色州约有 15% 为非裔美国人（美国人口普查局，  2019 年）。根据室内设计认证委员会 (CIDA) 的数据，参加 CIDA 认证项目的黑人学生的平均比例为 7%，而在美国的非裔美国人比例为 13.4%（CIDA，2021；美国人口普查局，  2019 年）。¹¹ 虽然 CIDA 是一个国际组织，本文提供的机构数据包括所有 CIDA 项目，但需要注意的是，绝大多数 CIDA 项目（91.4%）位于美国；7.4% 在加拿大；1.1% 在中东（CIDA，  2021 年）。
FJSoA+D 与大多数 CIDA 认可的学校一样，与具有代表性的非裔美国人人口不一致。

我们的学生中只有 6% 是男性，而阿肯色州的这一比例为 49%（美国人口普查局，  2019 年）。即使我们学校的 CIDA 平均为 11% 的男性，我们仍然与州和全国的男性人口不一致。

为什么美国的室内设计项目没有更加多样化？学校如何招收更多元化的学生群体？要回答这些问题，我们必须从研究在招募非裔美国人和男性学生方面更成功的项目开始。图 1 显示了黑人学生比例最高的 CIDA 项目。²² 所有 CIDA 认可的课程必须获得学士学位。从 CIDA 认可的课程毕业不需要参加 NCIDQ 考试，尽管这是证明设计师已满足参加考试的教育要求的一种非常有效的方式（CIDA，  2021 年）。