Pedro Domingos

Chew on this: in 2019 the life-sciences department at Berkeley rejected 76% of applicants on the basis of their diversity statements without looking at their research records.

I got curious and dug up what appears to be the report this figure is based on: https://ofew.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/life_sciences_inititatve.year_end_report_summary.pdf …

From the report it appears that the first filter applied was for "basic qualifications". This reduced the pool from 993 to 893. Then the diversity statement filter was the second stage, not the first, reducing from 893 to 214, which matches the 76% figure quoted.

So one interesting question, before people rush to judgment, is how stringent the basic qualifications filter was. If there were 893 applicants who were qualified to be junior faculty (not at all impossible) then that puts a different spin on this than the essay implies.

Second, the report makes clear that this was not a general search for life sciences faculty. This was a specific diversity initiative with FTE allocated for that purpose. Whatever you may feel about such initiatives, the Economist essay hid that fact to get a clickbait line.

That's misleading. This is not a one-time pool, it's a pilot for all departments involved and meant to be continued. And pre-screening that lets only DEI activists through (highest ratings on the scale) is enforced across the UC system and many other universities.