DIRE question

[waterboy]

So, my R1 has jumped full force into the DIRE (diversity, inclusion, racism, equity) discussion of late. I would fully support the conversation if I saw that it was leading to positive change. What I am seeing is "self-flagellation" on everyone's part about past transgressions. It's important to understand and accept our full history, but it strikes me as not very helpful to only moan and groan about the past rather than spend energy on improving the future.  As an example, look at the news stories coming out about the "land-grab" universities. Helpful to know how that happened via the Morrill Act, but not helpful to use that moniker. And now, we're being asked to acknowledge that history in our syllabi. Again, this strikes me as unnecessary.

I suspect I'm in an increasingly small minority that feels this way. So, keeping my mouth shut for the moment.  Which also doesn't help, I know.

[Wahoo Redux]

Actually, I think Donald Trump is, in part, a direct reaction to this dynamic in culture.

I hope the OP doesn't mind, but I would like to cross-post this to another ongoing thread.

[waterboy]

Feel free to cross-post. I wasn't sure where to put this anyway.

[Parasaurolophus]

All syllabi at my university begin with a land acknowledgement, which acknowledges that our institution is built on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded lands of several First Nations.

Although the land was stolen long ago, it's still not covered by any treaties (i.e. it's still illegally occupied), and it's part of several ongoing disputes about land and treaty rights and compensation. In other words, even though the bad event happened long ago, it's still a live issue that continues to impact local First Nations to this day. To be honest, I don't see how you could possibly work towards positive change without first acknowledging that basic fact, and a few others.

In itself, the land acknowledgement isn't much. It's a token gesture, and for many instructors, it's a totally empty one: just words on a page that you're supposed to recite on the first day of class (and which, perhaps, they don't). But I, and many other instructors, use it as an opportunity to talk about what happened, where we've gone wrong, what our moral and legal responsibilities are, and what we can do going forward. Many of us even include course content that directly addresses these issues.

[Hibush]

What I am seeing is "self-flagellation" on everyone's part about past transgressions.

Actually, I think Donald Trump is, in part, a direct reaction to this dynamic in culture.

If we could instead engage in Trump flagellation, the positive effects might be greater, and it would be better for the self-esteem of the established faculty.

[mahagonny]

Actually, I think Donald Trump is, in part, a direct reaction to this dynamic in culture.

I hope the OP doesn't mind, but I would like to cross-post this to another ongoing thread.

...And when Trump's dead or finished, there will be others.

[mahagonny]

As for the land that the campus occupies, being an adjunct, I'm  a sharecropper. So it doesn't affect my self esteem to acknowledge someone thinks the land was stolen.

[polly_mer]

waterboy, are there any resources in your field for useful actions?

For example, the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society have resources related to modifying curriculum to be more welcoming to novices, outreach to support middle and high schools, establishing bridge programs, and establishing undergraduate research cohorts for those who wouldn't normally be chosen.

If it's just diversity theatre, then sure, just keep your head down.  However, if you care about recruitment and retention in your field, then now might be a time you could make meaningful changes.

[Hibush]

waterboy, are there any resources in your field for useful actions?

For example, the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society have resources related to modifying curriculum to be more welcoming to novices, outreach to support middle and high schools, establishing bridge programs, and establishing undergraduate research cohorts for those who wouldn't normally be chosen.

If it's just diversity theatre, then sure, just keep your head down.  However, if you care about recruitment and retention in your field, then now might be a time you could make meaningful changes.

"Decolonializing the curriculum" is part of the conversation. I can see how the History department would have lots of content to reconsider. But it is nonobvious in Chemistry and Physics. So the effort by ACS and APS is noteworthy. I'd like to see what they tackle.

Physical principles and chemical reactions are not inherently colonial.
So much of the lower division curriculum covers work done in Germany or proto-Germany, whose imperial ambitions   regional with a small colonial footprint for European power. So even in that regard, the colonial imprint on the curriculum seems lower than for most fields.

Are they starting with the angle that a lot of the chemistry and physics was done in service of those imperial ambitions and commercial hegemony, accompanied by a certain appetite for subjugation?

[writingprof]

"Decolonializing the curriculum" is part of the conversation. I can see how the History department would have lots of content to reconsider. But it is nonobvious in Chemistry and Physics.

To the contrary, one merely has to accept "alternative [i.e., wrong] ways of knowing [i.e., not knowing]."  To say that one plus one equals two is to force your Western mindset onto oppressed peoples.  Hell, it's practically rape.  Certainly it's violence.  Whether in history or in physics, truth is a social construct.  All facts are contingent.  Your political superiors will tell you what you're allowed to believe.

[Wahoo Redux]

Civil Rights have always faced opposition that seems to confirm the intellectualized conception of power dynamics----power will never be shared or relinquished willingly.  The land our university is built on legally belongs to you?  Tough noogies.  Good people want to fight this attitude.

Unlike the '60s and '70s mass Civil Rights efforts, however, the goals of the revisionists are pretty vague.  The mid-century Civil Rights movement was a successful attempt to fight institutional, on-the-books racism and sexism, particularly in law-enforcement, and overt cultural attitudes.

Now we live in different times.  And no, before you get in a bunch, I am NOT saying racism, sexism, etc. is a thing of the past; I'm saying it is nebulous and relegated to private beliefs, which are much harder to regulate, and aiming at historical atrocities which happened well out of living memory.  Ben Shapiro has made a career out of pointing this out.

Sure, let's have a "reckoning" (although I think we could argue that we have, although not everybody has reacted to the reckoning in a manner the instigators would like) but what do the do-gooders (said respectfully) hope to accomplish with a statement at the head of a syllabus?

Writingprof's response is a perfect example of the elder Boomer response to Civil Rights and the new problem with trying to 'enforce' or 'force' a confrontation with political correctness.

[mahagonny]

It's an administrative bloat issue. Perhaps in a few years, if we ever get through this, there will be an opportunity to get rid of diversity and inclusions staff. Give them enough rope and they may hang themselves.
There's another thread around here somewhere, 'are you being asked to teach anti-racistly?'
Incidentally  I found out you can block emails on your campus server from these pests. Right into the spam folder. If anyone asks you why you didn't respond, say 'wow! I wonder if my computer has a virus?!"

[marshwiggle]

"Decolonializing the curriculum" is part of the conversation. I can see how the History department would have lots of content to reconsider. But it is nonobvious in Chemistry and Physics.

To the contrary, one merely has to accept "alternative [i.e., wrong] ways of knowing [i.e., not knowing]."  To say that one plus one equals two is to force your Western mindset onto oppressed peoples.  Hell, it's practically rape.  Certainly it's violence.  Whether in history or in physics, truth is a social construct.  All facts are contingent.  Your political superiors will tell you what you're allowed to believe.

Here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwZ651i5vls

[polly_mer]

waterboy, are there any resources in your field for useful actions?

For example, the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society have resources related to modifying curriculum to be more welcoming to novices, outreach to support middle and high schools, establishing bridge programs, and establishing undergraduate research cohorts for those who wouldn't normally be chosen.

If it's just diversity theatre, then sure, just keep your head down.  However, if you care about recruitment and retention in your field, then now might be a time you could make meaningful changes.

"Decolonializing the curriculum" is part of the conversation. I can see how the History department would have lots of content to reconsider. But it is nonobvious in Chemistry and Physics. So the effort by ACS and APS is noteworthy. I'd like to see what they tackle.

Physical principles and chemical reactions are not inherently colonial.
So much of the lower division curriculum covers work done in Germany or proto-Germany, whose imperial ambitions   regional with a small colonial footprint for European power. So even in that regard, the colonial imprint on the curriculum seems lower than for most fields.

Are they starting with the angle that a lot of the chemistry and physics was done in service of those imperial ambitions and commercial hegemony, accompanied by a certain appetite for subjugation?

No, no, no.  Nobody is seriously suggesting that crap for chemistry, physics, or any related topics.

The STEM folks are suggesting things like:

* separating intro classes by current ability so the novices really get to ask questions and explore instead of being run over by people who are first-year students, but aren't novices. Programming courses are particular topics where supporting the true novices means grouping by ability for more targeted instruction.

* creating bridge programs that purposely formally instruct on scientific thinking with far more contact hours with instructors, aides, and tutors available to help welcome and support all novices, but particularly those from lesser academic backgrounds.  These bridge programs also often have social activities for bonding as well as formal communication on additional life help programs to adjust to college including emergency loans or additional grants/scholarships for study abroad etc.

* restructuring curriculum so students can focus on a couple big courses like calculus I/II and intro courses instead of having six little courses.  Again, the focus is on communities that include problem-solving in groups with assistance.

* performing sufficient outreach to middle schools so the students there get support on mathematical and scientific thinking as well as examples of normal people engaged in science so those kids think STEM as really possible for themselves.

The STEM folks are working at supporting students from all backgrounds with the academics and non-academics they need to succeed in the majors.  Nobody reputable is doing the blaming aspects of racial/ethnic/gender groups or watering the material (changing the scaffolding and examples to better reach more backgrounds yes; reducing the rigor, no). 

Instead, the efforts are on inclusion by reexamining how to reach the novices who are discouraged by showing up and finding out the the other 'novices' know much more and are not kind about it.  Other efforts relate to what being a scientist means and how the person who has no life outside research is a terrible role model and reflects relatively few professional scientists.

At most, the acknowledgement of physical science as a human activity means humans select which areas of research are currently valued as worthy of funding or acceptance for publication.

[fizzycist]

Polly_mer, that was a great post, explained nicely a number of initiatives for retention/outreach and I agreed with almost all of it.

But there is indeed debate over these changes leading to a reduction in rigor, at least at the R1 schools I am familiar with. Structural things like eliminating GREs, eliminating candidacy/qual exams for grad students, lowering/eliminating GPA requirements for declaring major. But also curriculum things like focus on concepts over detailed calculations, programming over analytic math, and removing the most difficult courses from the list of required classes (both undergrad and grad levels).

Most of those things are probably good things, but certainly they are controversial and up for debate.