Do you want a job at the University of Massachusetts Boston? Well, until recently, you had to first commit to diversity, equity and inclusion.
The troubling requirement came to light in a job advertisement, which required aspiring computer science assistant professors to write a “diversity statement that reflects [their] commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion” as part of your job application.
And applicants for a faculty position in the health sciences department had to demonstrate a commitment “to support[ing] our goal to ensure an inclusive, equitable and diverse educational and work environment.”
That’s a political litmus test if I’ve ever seen one.
Fortunately, the school has quietly dropped the requirement, after being exposed by the First Amendment watchdog group the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
DEI’s mandatory statements, according to FIRE, “invade the First Amendment right of professors not to adopt prescribed opinions.”
“Its subjective criteria could also easily be abused to penalize applicants with minority, dissenting, or even simply nuanced opinions on DEI-related issues that may not fit neatly with the university’s goals,” wrote Haley Gluhanich, FIRE program manager. , in a letter to the university. .
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression called out UMass Boston for possible viewpoint discrimination. FIRE
FIRE is right. Requiring professors to profess allegiance to vague and highly politicized concepts of “equity” and “inclusion” is undoubtedly an infringement on their academic freedom.
Also, what exactly does DEI have to do with computing?
In my book “The Cancellation of the American Mind,” my co-author Greg Lukianoff and I argue that it is time for all universities to eliminate required DEI statements.
“For any sensible person, a statement that requires you to explain your commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion is a political litmus test,” Lukianoff, president and CEO of FIRE, told The Post. “There’s literally no way it won’t be abused as a way to evaluate someone’s politics.”
Although promoting “diversity” sounds like a laudable goal at first glance, the DEI bureaucracy that has taken over college campuses and corporations alike is divisive.
A controversial diversity training given to Coca Cola employees urged workers to be “less white.”
DEI advocates can be hugely alienating, like “White Fragility” author Robin DiAngelo, who advised people of color to “stay away from white people,” and diversity consultants who schooled Coca Cola employees about how to “be less white.”
I have seen this first hand. When I was 14, my classmates and I were divided into “affinity groups” based on race and segregated into separate buildings to discuss our experiences, all in the name of “equity.”
Even as a teenager, I already felt alienated by DEI. No doubt, teachers looking for jobs may feel the same way, but they may also feel pressured to betray their conscience in order to get a paycheck.
No college or university that seeks to protect the freedom of expression and free conscience of its professors should require a commitment to any concept or philosophy, let alone one that is so controversial.
Co-author Greg Lukianoff is the president and CEO of the free speech watchdog group, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). Courtesy of Greg Lukianoff
UMass Boston’s elimination of the requirement is a victory for academic freedom, but that’s just the beginning.
A 2022 survey of large universities by the American Association of University Professors found that 46% use DEI criteria in the tenure-granting process.
Another survey by FIRE also showed that half of professors agree that DEI statements are political litmus tests that violate academic freedom.
And they are right that viewpoint discrimination really does occur in the hiring process.
A survey by the University of California, Berkeley, found that 76% of applicants for a biological sciences professorship were eliminated from the pool. only based on their diversity statements.
“The Canceling of the American Mind” argues that DEI statements on job applications can be abused as political litmus tests.
It’s worth asking again: How do a teacher’s views on DEI impact their ability to teach students about science: life, health, computer science, or anything else?
If only certain opinions on DEI are allowed, campuses (where just one in ten professors consider themselves conservative, according to recent figures from the Higher Education Research Institute) will undoubtedly become even more isolated echo chambers than they already are. .
“At a time when viewpoint diversity is at an all-time low among professors, suddenly applying a political litmus test now is crazy,” Lukianoff said. “In any case, universities should look for heterodox opinions, but they are doubling down on measures that induce conformity.”
Public universities are not even allowed to require professors to swear allegiance to the United States for the sake of their freedom of conscience, and rightly so.
So why should they be able to demand a commitment to the creed of diversity, equity and inclusion?
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn