The Fora: A Higher Education Community

QuoteUniversity of Florida (https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/03/01/university-of-florida-dei-cuts/) eliminates DEI staff to comply with state law
The state flagship school announced the cuts Friday, but said it is 'unwavering in our commitment to universal human dignity'

If the above is behind a paywall, here's another article (https://www.axios.com/2024/03/01/university-florida-dei-terminate-positions-desantis).

Is it possible to be disgusted by the politics behind this but not entirely unhappy that these positions were eliminated?

Yes, that is possible, although I have the feeling there is more to that comment than asking whether those events and feelings can actually exist.

Quote from: Ruralguy on March 02, 2024, 11:44:29 AMYes, that is possible, although I have the feeling there is more to that comment than asking whether those events and feelings can actually exist.

Well, yeah, of course.

I've posted before my series of anecdata about DEI a couple of times.  Some hiring protocols and decisions; an instance of double-standards on a tenure decision; a student-to-PhD contract for someone simply not qualified; things said by students and faculty in private that would probably have gotten them expelled or fired except that these comments were about "white people"; and a number of incompetent, silly, and/or aggressive training sessions which kind of turned my head and also turned my tenured and full prof wife, who was pretty avowedly "liberal" about DEI at one point in time, into a doubter herself.

The big one that still sticks in my craw is our time at a little Div III rural, 4th-rate uni.  Worst pay in the state; no raises in years.  Terrible technology.  Buildings literally falling apart.  Unable to hire FT faculty, TT or NTT. Questionable reputation.  Terrible morale. Open enrollment for many students who should never grace a college classroom...

And then the new prez hires a "Chief Diversity Officer" at a salary at least worth three FT faculty.

What we got were endless "climate surveys," all focused on the perception of race; a few memos; and more workshops. No increase in people of color on campus.  A continuation of petty racist vandalism that enflamed the students.

And this was kind of the thing, I guess.  These were country kids, but by and large they did not have a problem with race, gender, or sexual orientation.  Sure, we had someone who was scrawling racist crap on the stalls in some of the bathrooms, but this really energized and enraged the students, who protested endlessly.  There really was no need of a CDO.

I think they stopped bringing busloads of minority high school students to campus because, I assume, the expense, and because once these city kids got a look at the town, there was no way they were going there.

Anyway, I could go on (for instance, in my experience dedicated minority lounges, study rooms etc. in practice mean that students of color have a safe zone where they can feel comfortable; in reality, minority safe zones tend to isolate students of color from the rest of the student body, hindering the kind of "color blind" culture we want).

And then we often----not always, but often----have tremendous resistance to examining DEI from some corners.  We often have angry responses to any challenges to DEI, no matter how relevant or justified.

So, while I am 100% in favor of diversity, equity, and inclusion, I am extremely dubious of the bureaucratic construct of "DEI."  It seems to cause more anxiety and toxicity around race, gender, and orientation, not less.

I just don't think those are the sorts of things fueling Florida's hysterical reactions.   

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 02, 2024, 02:36:22 PM

Quote from: Ruralguy on March 02, 2024, 11:44:29 AMYes, that is possible, although I have the feeling there is more to that comment than asking whether those events and feelings can actually exist.

Well, yeah, of course.

I've posted before my series of anecdata about DEI a couple of times.  Some hiring protocols and decisions; an instance of double-standards on a tenure decision; a student-to-PhD contract for someone simply not qualified; things said by students and faculty in private that would probably have gotten them expelled or fired except that these comments were about "white people"; and a number of incompetent, silly, and/or aggressive training sessions which kind of turned my head and also turned my tenured and full prof wife, who was pretty avowedly "liberal" about DEI at one point in time, into a doubter herself.

The big one that still sticks in my craw is our time at a little Div III rural, 4th-rate uni.  Worst pay in the state; no raises in years.  Terrible technology.  Buildings literally falling apart.  Unable to hire FT faculty, TT or NTT. Questionable reputation.  Terrible morale. Open enrollment for many students who should never grace a college classroom...

And then the new prez hires a "Chief Diversity Officer" at a salary at least worth three FT faculty.

What we got were endless "climate surveys," all focused on the perception of race; a few memos; and more workshops. No increase in people of color on campus.  A continuation of petty racist vandalism that enflamed the students.

And this was kind of the thing, I guess.  These were country kids, but by and large they did not have a problem with race, gender, or sexual orientation.  Sure, we had someone who was scrawling racist crap on the stalls in some of the bathrooms, but this really energized and enraged the students, who protested endlessly.  There really was no need of a CDO.

I think they stopped bringing busloads of minority high school students to campus because, I assume, the expense, and because once these city kids got a look at the town, there was no way they were going there.

Anyway, I could go on (for instance, in my experience dedicated minority lounges, study rooms etc. in practice mean that students of color have a safe zone where they can feel comfortable; in reality, minority safe zones tend to isolate students of color from the rest of the student body, hindering the kind of "color blind" culture we want).

And then we often----not always, but often----have tremendous resistance to examining DEI from some corners.  We often have angry responses to any challenges to DEI, no matter how relevant or justified.

So, while I am 100% in favor of diversity, equity, and inclusion, I am extremely dubious of the bureaucratic construct of "DEI."  It seems to cause more anxiety and toxicity around race, gender, and orientation, not less.

I just don't think those are the sorts of things fueling Florida's hysterical reactions.   

And that, I'm afraid, is the sort of reputation that DEI initiatives have by and large earned for themselves in many places.  It really does sound counterproductive. 

We are having meetings on campus about a recent violent occurrence, and there are different groups scheduled to meet with the outside consultants.

ALANA/BIPOC has 2 different meeting times set aside, all (other) students get 1, Faculty and staff 1, and athletes 1.

There are rumblings afoot about why this is the case, and they run the gamut from coddling to racist demographics.

Quote from: FishProf on March 05, 2024, 12:25:04 PMWe are having meetings on campus about a recent violent occurrence, and there are different groups scheduled to meet with the outside consultants.

ALANA/BIPOC has 2 different meeting times set aside, all (other) students get 1, Faculty and staff 1, and athletes 1.

There are rumblings afoot about why this is the case, and they run the gamut from coddling to racist demographics.

You probably don't want to give details about the recent incident for privacy reasons, but could you give an indication of how violent "violent" was in this case?  Is it an isolated incident, or has there been a cluster of incidents recently?  Do you get the feeling that the administration is serious about trying to deal with what's going on, or do the meetings give off a "we're making the expected gestures" vibe?

on campus shooting, no students involved.  Community spillover.

There have been a lot of shootings on campuses in the news lately around the country.  The violence is just getting to be everywhere.

The DEIIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, Indegeneity, accessibility) staff at my doctoral university accomplished a lot. One was a summer program, at the university, for high school students from traditionally underrepresented groups to explore what careers in certain fields might look like, and to show them such careers were possible. A huge success! Another success was implementing universal design for all new courses, so that accessibility wasn't an afterthought, or something profs had to worry about if they suddenly had a student who needed certain accommodations. Instead, courses were designed to be accessible from the ground up. But I'm in Canada. The U.S. seems to be very different. Although some posters in Canada seem to have radically different experiences. Maybe because I'm in the health sciences and I'm Indigenous (Métis) but I see a lot of good being done by DEIIA staff and committees.

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 05, 2024, 03:48:42 PMThe DEIIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, Indegeneity, accessibility) staff at my doctoral university accomplished a lot. One was a summer program[...]

Maybe because I'm in the health sciences and I'm Indigenous (Métis) but I see a lot of good being done by DEIIA staff and committees.

Thank you for being specific.  I've asked a couple of times for examples of what DEI peeps actually do.  I don't want to be one of those people with an inflexible opinion based on limited firsthand knowledge.

The summer program sounds good.  Did it result in an increase of minority students?

I have not liked bureaucratically imposed curriculum or syllabus design; they are usually done for the right reasons but tend to make teaching more difficult and are often more cosmetic than helpful----at least in my experience.  I don't know exactly what you mean above, however.

And I am happy to concede without a struggle that my perspective on DEI might be much different if I were a not a middle-aged WASP, so I do try to keep that in mind.

Other specific examples of DEI work?  Anyone?

We had a good DEI coordinator for a bit, before he got lured away by someone who could pay a reasonable wage. He chipped away at some of the bigotry of some of our more stick-in-the-mud codgers who run a few of our least diverse (no coincidence there) programs. I've heard what these folks say behind closed doors, and it's everything you'd imagine. The DEI guy was actually a good and witty respondent and could anticipate what these guys would say, and he might have unbent a few minds a tiny bit.

But then he left and we got a standard-issue bureaucrat who required us all to watch anodyne videos ("Discrimination is unlawful. Be careful not to discriminate." Etc.). So much for that. I think for DEI initiatives to work well, they need to be run by people who are cleverer and cannier and more energetic than your average administrator. Sometimes that happens. Sometimes not.

Quote from: Hegemony on March 05, 2024, 08:37:15 PMWe had a good DEI coordinator for a bit, before he got lured away by someone who could pay a reasonable wage. He chipped away at some of the bigotry of some of our more stick-in-the-mud codgers who run a few of our least diverse (no coincidence there) programs. I've heard what these folks say behind closed doors, and it's everything you'd imagine. The DEI guy was actually a good and witty respondent and could anticipate what these guys would say, and he might have unbent a few minds a tiny bit.

So I'm curious. Other that those "stick-in-the-mud codgers", what value did he provide everywhere else? As those codgers retire, what else needs to be done that requires ongoing staff and infrastructure, presumably in perpetuity?

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 05, 2024, 03:48:42 PMThe DEIIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, Indegeneity, accessibility) staff at my doctoral university accomplished a lot. One was a summer program, at the university, for high school students from traditionally underrepresented groups to explore what careers in certain fields might look like, and to show them such careers were possible. A huge success! Another success was implementing universal design for all new courses, so that accessibility wasn't an afterthought, or something profs had to worry about if they suddenly had a student who needed certain accommodations. Instead, courses were designed to be accessible from the ground up. But I'm in Canada. The U.S. seems to be very different. Although some posters in Canada seem to have radically different experiences. Maybe because I'm in the health sciences and I'm Indigenous (Métis) but I see a lot of good being done by DEIIA staff and committees.

Now that sounds like some useful initiatives that could bring a lot to benefit some without needlessly alienating others.  So it looks like there is such a thing as DEI done right.

Quote from: apl68 on March 06, 2024, 06:20:27 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 05, 2024, 03:48:42 PMOne was a summer program, at the university, for high school students from traditionally underrepresented groups to explore what careers in certain fields might look like, and to show them such careers were possible. A huge success!

Now that sounds like some useful initiatives that could bring a lot to benefit some without needlessly alienating others.  So it looks like there is such a thing as DEI done right.

That kind of thing has been around for decades, long before "DEI". I used to help with such a program to encourage girls in high school to consider STEM, and that was in the 90's or so, as I recall.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 06, 2024, 05:48:00 AMSo I'm curious. Other that those "stick-in-the-mud codgers", what value did he provide everywhere else? As those codgers retire, what else needs to be done that requires ongoing staff and infrastructure, presumably in perpetuity?

I don't know anything at any university that is preserved in perpetuity. But sadly, it's not only the old codgers who have retrograde ideas about which demographics are fit to be hired. I'd love to see initiatives against bigotry discontinued because all bigotry has ceased and all groups of people have equal access and opportunity. I know many people in the top group already think it's all hunky-dory out there and all this DEI is just a lot of fuss over nothing. The real problem with DEI, as I see it, is not that there's no need for it: it's that it hasn't found a widespread, replicatible way of changing a lot of people's minds. Some people's minds, yes. But not as many people as need to be changed for the playing field to be level. You can go through any thread on the subject on these boards and see solid evidence of that. And even if the people here don't have hiring power, there are plenty of people with hiring power, and grad-student-supervising power, and undergrad-mentoring power, who feel that only certain kinds of people should be let in through the gates. It's not always easy to spot if you haven't been on the receiving end of the bigotry. I applaud the DEI people who can make headway, but a lot of headway remains to be made.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 06, 2024, 06:55:04 AM

Quote from: apl68 on March 06, 2024, 06:20:27 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 05, 2024, 03:48:42 PMOne was a summer program, at the university, for high school students from traditionally underrepresented groups to explore what careers in certain fields might look like, and to show them such careers were possible. A huge success!

Now that sounds like some useful initiatives that could bring a lot to benefit some without needlessly alienating others.  So it looks like there is such a thing as DEI done right.

That kind of thing has been around for decades, long before "DEI". I used to help with such a program to encourage girls in high school to consider STEM, and that was in the 90's or so, as I recall.

Which indicates that DEI is not actually anything new.  Certain approaches to it, and certain jargon surrounding it are.  If some approaches turn out to be counterproductive, there are ways to work toward the desired goals that might be more productive. Issues with the DEI "brand" becoming unwelcome in some places don't mean that the goals have to be abandoned.  The problematic strategies might need rethinking.

Clearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Quote from: Hegemony on March 07, 2024, 12:07:26 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 06, 2024, 05:48:00 AMSo I'm curious. Other that those "stick-in-the-mud codgers", what value did he provide everywhere else? As those codgers retire, what else needs to be done that requires ongoing staff and infrastructure, presumably in perpetuity?

I don't know anything at any university that is preserved in perpetuity. But sadly, it's not only the old codgers who have retrograde ideas about which demographics are fit to be hired. I'd love to see initiatives against bigotry discontinued because all bigotry has ceased and all groups of people have equal access and opportunity. I know many people in the top group already think it's all hunky-dory out there and all this DEI is just a lot of fuss over nothing. The real problem with DEI, as I see it, is not that there's no need for it: it's that it hasn't found a widespread, replicatible way of changing a lot of people's minds. Some people's minds, yes. But not as many people as need to be changed for the playing field to be level. You can go through any thread on the subject on these boards and see solid evidence of that. And even if the people here don't have hiring power, there are plenty of people with hiring power, and grad-student-supervising power, and undergrad-mentoring power, who feel that only certain kinds of people should be let in through the gates. It's not always easy to spot if you haven't been on the receiving end of the bigotry. I applaud the DEI people who can make headway, but a lot of headway remains to be made.

What should people change their minds from and to?

What should they believe?

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2024, 02:32:58 PMWhat should people change their minds from and to?

What should they believe?

Oh come on, that's just a disingenuous question. You know what racism and bigotry is, even if you think it's "all overblown" or "White men are the most victimized group there is!" or whatever. But come off that "I have no idea what the issues are" facade.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Quote from: Hegemony on March 08, 2024, 02:52:36 PM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2024, 02:32:58 PMWhat should people change their minds from and to?

What should they believe?

Oh come on, that's just a disingenuous question. You know what racism and bigotry is, even if you think it's "all overblown" or "White men are the most victimized group there is!" or whatever. But come off that "I have no idea what the issues are" facade.

Well, okay.  I did not want to proverbially put words in your mouth or misstate what you said if I responded (as you just did to me).  I was thinking of things much more complex than "white men are victimized."

My questions were too general, I see.

So: I'll just respond.

I've never met anyone in academia who thinks "all bigotry has ceased" or "the top group already think it's all hunky-dory out there and all this DEI is just a lot of fuss over nothing."  What I see are well-compensated Diversity Officers, a lot of forced training, "diversity hiring" strategies and job postings, a lot of expensive diversity recruitment, and a great deal of rhetoric. I also see relatively diverse campus cultures and students who are very invested in the idea of diversity, even if it is not all of them.

And while I would never hyperbolize to the extent of "White men are the most victimized group there is!" (which is, of course, ridiculous and I personally have never heard anybody say that) but I have seen some double-standards reified whether or not we want to admit that this happens. 

Outside of academia I have met a couple of unapologetic hardcore bigots, many in my youth in the conservative small town I grew up in.

The problem with "people need to change their minds" is that someone assumes they know what other people are thinking and should be thinking instead.  I find that people very involved with DEI are often very inflexible and self-righteous thinkers who are still fighting the problems of inequality like it is 1965 and not 2024.

Are the people who want to change other people's minds capable of changing their own, even a little?   

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2024, 03:32:12 PMI find that people very involved with DEI are often very inflexible and self-righteous thinkers who are still fighting the problems of inequality like it is 1965 and not 2024.

That's because the vast majority of DEI officers are admincritters with Ed.Ds or similarly lightweight credentials who never actually received a proper training in history, psychology, the social sciences, or a similar field employing more rigorous methodologies than the mad libs "dissertations" that come out of so many education programs. (As someone who's been doing DEI work for over a decade).

Quote from: apophenia on March 08, 2024, 03:49:30 PM

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2024, 03:32:12 PMI find that people very involved with DEI are often very inflexible and self-righteous thinkers who are still fighting the problems of inequality like it is 1965 and not 2024.

That's because the vast majority of DEI officers are admincritters with Ed.Ds or similarly lightweight credentials who never actually received a proper training in history, psychology, the social sciences, or a similar field employing more rigorous methodologies than the mad libs "dissertations" that come out of so many education programs. (As someone who's been doing DEI work for over a decade).

Fair enough.  That seems to fit with what little I've seen.

What should a DEI official be doing?

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 08, 2024, 04:40:53 PM

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Although race and income are highly correlated.

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

In practice it does. I have seen Upward Bound students for decades, and at least in the Midwest they have been overwhelmingly students of color.


Anyone who pays attention to income disparity is of course not shocked. Unless I'm addled Upward Bound was also connected to the Civil Rights Act, which like it or not was born of the struggles of African Americans.

Quote from: ciao_yall on March 09, 2024, 08:11:35 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 08, 2024, 04:40:53 PM

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Although race and income are highly correlated.

Absolutely. Indigeneity would be correlated like race. "Socioeconomic status" and income must be near perfectly correlated. Same with disability.

QuoteI have seen Upward Bound students for decades, and at least in the Midwest they have been overwhelmingly students of color.

Which is exactly what one would expect using income as a selection criterion.

Quote from: dismalist on March 09, 2024, 09:57:45 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on March 09, 2024, 08:11:35 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 08, 2024, 04:40:53 PM

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Although race and income are highly correlated.

Absolutely. Indigeneity would be correlated like race. "Socioeconomic status" and income must be near perfectly correlated. Same with disability.

QuoteI have seen Upward Bound students for decades, and at least in the Midwest they have been overwhelmingly students of color.

Which is exactly what one would expect using income as a selection criterion.

And which is why many anti-poverty programs have been fought over the years. Because it must be "those people's" fault they are low-income. Not that they were denied education, access to jobs, ability to buy homes, etc etc etc.

Easier when they don't look like you.

Quote from: ciao_yall on March 09, 2024, 08:11:35 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 08, 2024, 04:40:53 PM

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Although race and income are highly correlated.

But dismalist's point is that income is actually causal, rather than correlated with something causal, and if that is actually used as the criterion it will serve essentially the same population without facing the criticism of it being segregationist.

It makes far more sense because it's focused on the more relevant issue.

Quote from: dismalist on March 09, 2024, 09:57:45 AM

Quote from: ciao_yall on March 09, 2024, 08:11:35 AM

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 08, 2024, 04:40:53 PM

Quote from: dismalist on March 08, 2024, 03:06:31 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2024, 11:25:58 AMClearly not new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_Bound

Interesting. I hadn't heard of these programs to support some high school students.

What is notable is that nowhere is race mentioned. Support is conditioned mainly on income. First generation college potential status is also supported. [That's the sop to the educational establishment -- us.]

If support were based solely on income, the racial mix of those supported by any program would not be changed much and nobody would have anything against such programs. So it has nothing to do with DEI.

Umm, it has everything to do with EDI. EDI isn't just about race, it's about providing opportunities to communities that have been traditionally marginalized or underserved or underrepresented. That includes race, but also socioeconomic status, ability/ disability, Indegeneity, etc.

Although race and income are highly correlated.

Absolutely. Indigeneity would be correlated like race. "Socioeconomic status" and income must be near perfectly correlated. Same with disability.

QuoteI have seen Upward Bound students for decades, and at least in the Midwest they have been overwhelmingly students of color.

Which is exactly what one would expect using income as a selection criterion.

So what about a student who is disabled, but comes from a high-income or professional family? In that case, disability is not correlated with income. And even high-income First Nations and Black individuals in Canada experience far more racism than their white peers.

TRIO is directly focused on DEI. Diversity based on class, Equity based on class, and Inclusion based on class. It does not address the needs of all such groups, notably those of rural youth.
Saying it isn't a DEI program is simply ridiculous. Believing that indicates, to me, a very narrow view of DEI, and is why it's so disheartening to see DEI become the whipping post of the right wing.

Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 09, 2024, 11:43:44 AM

Quote from: dismalist on March 09, 2024, 09:57:45 AM

QuoteI have seen Upward Bound students for decades, and at least in the Midwest they have been overwhelmingly students of color.

Which is exactly what one would expect using income as a selection criterion.

So what about a student who is disabled, but comes from a high-income or professional family? In that case, disability is not correlated with income. And even high-income First Nations and Black individuals in Canada experience far more racism than their white peers.

"Peer" is the operative word here. High income kids, of any ethnic background, will have more in common with each other than with the very poor members of their own ethnic background. The kids from high income families will have lots of support no matter what, while the low income kids will struggle.

The disabled student from a wealthy family will face obstacles, but the family's wealth will open doors and smooth the road whether there is anything like "DEI" or not. The poor kids with no advocacy are much more likely to fall through the cracks, regardless of their ethnic background.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 09, 2024, 12:54:52 PMHigh income kids, of any ethnic background, will have more in common with each other than with the very poor members of their own ethnic background.

The black high-income kids will have an important part of their experience that the white high-income kids will not share — and that's that coming from an affluent family does not insulate a black kid from racism. Indeed, as we have seen, it invites particular kinds: black kids driving expensive cars frequently get pulled over by police on suspicion of having stolen the car. You may claim that the affluent black kids have more affinities with their white peers, but I wonder if that's what they would say. I suspect they would add a number of caveats to that assertion. And when they emerge from their expensive schooling, they will still face obstacles that their white peers will not, for instance white academics claiming that racism is a negligible part of the kids' experience.

Quote from: Hegemony on March 10, 2024, 05:39:42 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 09, 2024, 12:54:52 PMHigh income kids, of any ethnic background, will have more in common with each other than with the very poor members of their own ethnic background.

The black high-income kids will have an important part of their experience that the white high-income kids will not share — and that's that coming from an affluent family does not insulate a black kid from racism. Indeed, as we have seen, it invites particular kinds: black kids driving expensive cars frequently get pulled over by police on suspicion of having stolen the car. You may claim that the affluent black kids have more affinities with their white peers, but I wonder if that's what they would say. I suspect they would add a number of caveats to that assertion. And when they emerge from their expensive schooling, they will still face obstacles that their white peers will not, for instance white academics claiming that racism is a negligible part of the kids' experience.

For my EdD I interviewed one of my Black students. Pretty rough background, spent time in juvenile hall for murder. I taught him at a Community College, then it turned out he was getting his Bachelor's at the same university where I was getting my EdD. So big turnaround.

We had a really great discussion. He shared he felt a bit isolated - his friends were still basically his old crowd he ran with. He didn't have friends at school. I asked him if he had considered joining the Black student clubs and he said "No." Why? "I don't have anything in common with them - they just like to go out and try different kinds of foods." It sounded to me like many of them had come from more middle-class backgrounds and he didn't feel like he could fit in.

He said "Would you join the women's clubs on campus? Just because you are women doesn't mean you have anything in common." I said I saw his point. Still, I said, these people and you are probably dealing with a lot of the same issues. As you get to know them, you'll need to find support in this environment.

He agreed. At the end of the day, there are people who don't see anything but the skin in front of them. Whether they grew up going to the Boys and Girls Club or Jack and Jill, Head Start or Montessori, they just don't see a difference.

Quote from: ciao_yall on March 10, 2024, 09:45:06 AM

Quote from: Hegemony on March 10, 2024, 05:39:42 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 09, 2024, 12:54:52 PMHigh income kids, of any ethnic background, will have more in common with each other than with the very poor members of their own ethnic background.

The black high-income kids will have an important part of their experience that the white high-income kids will not share — and that's that coming from an affluent family does not insulate a black kid from racism. Indeed, as we have seen, it invites particular kinds: black kids driving expensive cars frequently get pulled over by police on suspicion of having stolen the car. You may claim that the affluent black kids have more affinities with their white peers, but I wonder if that's what they would say. I suspect they would add a number of caveats to that assertion. And when they emerge from their expensive schooling, they will still face obstacles that their white peers will not, for instance white academics claiming that racism is a negligible part of the kids' experience.

For my EdD I interviewed one of my Black students. Pretty rough background, spent time in juvenile hall for murder. I taught him at a Community College, then it turned out he was getting his Bachelor's at the same university where I was getting my EdD. So big turnaround.

We had a really great discussion. He shared he felt a bit isolated - his friends were still basically his old crowd he ran with. He didn't have friends at school. I asked him if he had considered joining the Black student clubs and he said "No." Why? "I don't have anything in common with them - they just like to go out and try different kinds of foods." It sounded to me like many of them had come from more middle-class backgrounds and he didn't feel like he could fit in.

He said "Would you join the women's clubs on campus? Just because you are women doesn't mean you have anything in common." I said I saw his point. Still, I said, these people and you are probably dealing with a lot of the same issues. As you get to know them, you'll need to find support in this environment.

He agreed. At the end of the day, there are people who don't see anything but the skin in front of them. Whether they grew up going to the Boys and Girls Club or Jack and Jill, Head Start or Montessori, they just don't see a difference.

You do realize how this sounds if white students also feel that the only place they will "find support in this environment" is with other white students?

It's one thing to argue that the colour of someone's skin may make some difference in their experience, but arguing that it's basically the most significant factor in their experience suggests that the whole concept of a racially diverse society is a complete waste of time.

IHE: Black Scholars Face Anonymous Accusations in Anti-DEI Crusade (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/diversity/race-ethnicity/2024/04/01/black-scholars-face-anonymous-accusations-anti-dei-crusade)

Lower Deck:

QuoteSince right-wing firebrand Christopher Rufo helped bring down Harvard's president, at least seven more scholars—most of them Black—have confronted accusations of plagiarism or research misconduct spread by conservative media.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 01, 2024, 05:59:47 AMIHE: Black Scholars Face Anonymous Accusations in Anti-DEI Crusade (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/diversity/race-ethnicity/2024/04/01/black-scholars-face-anonymous-accusations-anti-dei-crusade)

Lower Deck:

QuoteSince right-wing firebrand Christopher Rufo helped bring down Harvard's president, at least seven more scholars—most of them Black—have confronted accusations of plagiarism or research misconduct spread by conservative media.

An odd comment:

QuoteObservers such as Isaac Kamola, director of the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom at the American Association of University Professors, see "a coordinated attack" behind it all. He said "it's clear there's a bunch of resources, there's somebody who has a lot of money, plagiarism software," and is fishing for misconduct.

He doesn't seem to be claiming that the software is finding false positives, but rather that there are so many positives they shouldn't be cause for concern.

Plagiarism is so 20th century.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 01, 2024, 06:20:51 AMPlagiarism is so 20th century.

Ha!

The Atlantic: The State That's Trying to Rein in DEI Without Becoming Florida (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/03/utah-anti-dei-law-higher-education/677928/)

QuoteThe law prohibits universities from giving individuals preferential treatment or discriminating against them based on race, color, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, or gender identity. It forbids offices that help students from excluding anyone based on their identity. It bans mandatory campus training sessions that promote differential treatment. It prohibits "discriminatory practices," such as ascribing "values, morals, or ethical codes, privileges, or beliefs to an individual" because of their identity.

<snip>

Even so, the law's mandate to disregard race, gender, and other traits, rather than treating people differently based on their identity, is polarizing. Many of its critics believe that education policy must elevate identity to be "equitable"––that the just response to systemic racism, disparities in graduation rates, and the culture of a state that is almost 80 percent white and socially conservative, is targeted initiatives for Black, brown, Indigenous, and LGBTQ+ students.

But that position forecloses the possibility of trying new approaches to discover whether they could be better. The DEI framework is often expensive to implement, dogmatic, and thin on evidence that it helps students thrive. Utah's attempt to rein in DEI's excesses while investing in plausible alternatives might just represent the best way forward.

<snip>

Like most Americans, I support many goals associated with DEI, such as admitting students of diverse backgrounds to college, ensuring their equal access to a good education, and eliminating any bigotry they are subject to because of their personal or group identity.

But among people who value diversity, not everyone agrees with the ways DEI advocates attempt to promote and manage it. For example, many DEI supporters urged doing away with the SATs, a move some institutions now regard as a mistake (the test, a good predictor of student success, is less vulnerable to being gamed by affluent applicants than essays or extracurricular activities). And many academic departments require DEI statements from prospective hires, even though some professors see such statements as ideological litmus tests. Put simply, some DEI work advances important goals that most Americans support. Other initiatives take unrigorous, intrusive, or unpopular stances, fueling liberal and conservative backlashes.

There are hyperlinks in the article.