Можеш да добавиш към туитовете си информация за местоположението (например града ти или точното ти местоположение) през мрежата и чрез приложения на трети страни. Винаги можеш да изтриеш историята на местоположенията на туитовете си. Научи повече
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it.https://twitter.com/TheFIREorg/status/1060983184425410564 …
Of course, I *could* have said it, but by doing so I would have become a target for focused and dedicated opposition, which would have diminished or even ended my ability to serve the functions I was hired to pursue. That’s how it works. At the moment.
It is a huge issue: one one hand we need to promote excellence full stop. On the other hidden academic glass ceiling exists against women, foreigners (e.g. UK), and in many countries against ethnic minorities for senior positions.
We agree. The issue of the day is how best to move further towards a world in which mistreatment of these groups is diminished and eventually ended.
From this thread, minimally it would seem the issue of the day is “how best to move further towards a world in which mistreatment of these groups is diminished and eventually ended, without using liberal words acknowledging their agenda, that make me feel bad as a conservative.”
That is my reading of it too. If diminishing mistreatment is a worthy goal, surely they would have alternative proposals they would offer to the ones they don't like.
To take a charitable view, I’ll accept that the people espousing their opposition to inclusivity think they’re sticking up for conservative over progressive values. What I’d challenge them on is whether they’re being bamboozled into that polarity againhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-policy-history/article/gops-abortion-strategy-why-prochoice-republicans-became-prolife-in-the-1970s/C7EC0E0C0F5FF1F4488AA47C787DEC01 …
Well congrats you’ve got the tiki torch boys all reved up. But I’ll bite, how does a statement describing ones efforts towards diversity affect academic freedom? I also had to make statements about my teaching philosophy and research approach for tenure and my freedom survived.
1. Your tiki- torch comment is ignorant and offensive. I’m sure you realize the latter, though not the former. 2. My tweet received amazing positive response from many people across the spectrum. Others seemed to understand the adverse effects of such policies to diversity goals.
I looked through the replies you got before making my comment. I’m glad you feel affirmed. But what please inform me, if I’m uninformed, how diversity statements affect academic freedom.
Should your appointment require an affirmation of : 1. Your being an honest person; 2. Your being a charitable person; 3. your being a devout person; 4. Your opposing illegal immigration? Consider not only your current views, but how such policies could be used.
1. Yes. 2. Not applicable but can’t hurt. 3. Not at a public institution. 4. Irrelevant. I don’t think my diversity statement would discuss any of those things. I’d just say I’m committed to understanding my own biases and systemic underrepresentation and correcting it. 1/2
2/2 I’d also just simply point to my hiring and mentoring track record, both in academia and industry, and let it speak for itself. Not that hard. I don’t see what the fuss is about. I’m happy to be asked tough questions and should anyone in leadership.
equity statements are asking you to align to a very specific leftwing ideology which sound good on the outside but are trojan horses for bad policy. Harvard for example discriminates against asians to promote "equity". Why should I agree with that?
https://twitter.com/maxdenken/status/1061418410603569152 … BTW, Dean Flier, there is no value, true or otherwise, to "diversity, equity of inclusion." The value is negative--centrifugal chaos and corruption of true meritocracy.
inclusivity does lead to meritocracy by combating the effects of systemic discrimination. this applies in academia too, unless you think (e.g.) the reason so many faculty members are white men is because white men are somehow genetically predisposed toward being professors
That's silly talk that yr CV does not justify. There are 10 reasons why men this & women that, none having to do with discrimination; it ain't 1948. The reverse is true, and you know it: all universities bend over backward, lower their standards to have more women & "minorities."
ten reasons? not nine or eleven? are you sure? is it really unthinkable that "people harbor backwards opinions about women, which manifest in both subtle and unsubtle ways that hinder their academic career advancement" is a factor, as well?
If there is systemic gender based discrimination in academia it now operates in favor of women. The data is indisputable.http://www.aei.org/publication/women-earned-majority-of-doctoral-degrees-in-2016-for-8th-straight-year-and-outnumber-men-in-grad-school-135-to-100/ …
LOL. It is disingenuous to claim gender bias against men because women earn more university degrees, and then ignore the overwhelming majority of academic positions still held by men.
Once again, the actual number of academic positions held by women in the US is 49.3% as of 2016 and rising. The perception that the "overwhelming majority of academic positions" are still held by men is totally false. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_315.10.asp …
once again, when you break this down by rank, it becomes obvious that many of these female-dominated positions are temporary, early-career, or instructor-level appointments: comparatively few full professors are women. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=61 …
Twitter може да е претоварен или да изпитва моментно затруднение. Опитай отново или виж Twitter Status за повече информация.
