I mean, he said it's n=1.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It's just an example of a thing, not empirical evidence that the thing is already widespread.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Noah Smith 🐇 Retweeted Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️
Here's his follow-up! What do you think?https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1339938309246603264 …
Noah Smith 🐇 added,
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ @realchrisrufoThe participants identify themselves by both gender pronouns and race labels. While it has become commonplace in academia to use gender pronoun identifiers, this is perhaps the first example of an institution creating the expectation for explicit race-labeling in the workplace. pic.twitter.com/PJM95tVR0XShow this thread7 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Maxtropolitan @ArmandDoma
I would say n=1, since it's one panel.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Yup, n equals 1, because it's a first, as I point out. Hopefully it stays that way.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Chris, is there evidence that the participants were required to state their races, or might it have been voluntary?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Not confirmed, but not sure it matters in this instance. Someone asked everyone for the info for race labels and created the expectation. Could be "voluntary," but the basic social pressure for stuff like this can gain compliance rather effectively.
-
-
Replying to @realchrisrufo @Noahpinion and
It very much matters. You're incorrectly suggesting something that happened in a single PD session with specific pedagogical goals with a specific group of facilitators is indicative of a social trend. What is your goal here?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.