Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

whyevolutionistrue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 807 posts

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#111

Post by jmyeet »

So DEI is an obvious political hot-potato but that the idea that the group with all the money and power are somehow being discriminated against is just silly.

Why? Because none of these discussions deals with the real bias in university admissions: legacy admissions. Harvard's undergraduate class hovers around 35% who are legacies. This is the very essence of anti-diversity and entrenching generational wealth and power. It should be front and center in any college DEI discussions.

The problem is it doesn't end there. Having a Harvard undergraduate degree opens up so many doors for graduate school, residencies for doctors, academia, etc.

So before you get worked up on the topic of DEI (on either side), please give a thought to legacy admissions.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#112

Post by ethbr1 »

bmitc wrote: post #101
ssijak wrote: post #3

Clicked through some links in the article. Really mind boggling material. How did such garbage end up in top universities is really weird.

People might be surprised how dumb top universities can be. When everyone is biased to thinking they're the best, it pretty easily creates tunnel vision.

Tenure is also a blessing and a curse.

It ensures academic freedom.

But it also ensures someone has limited checks on their bullshit, until they retire.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#113

Post by lazide »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #75

How would academics react to mandates requiring them to declare their support for: - Ensuring open access to research - Committing to long-term, foundational research - Prioritizing high-quality teaching and mentorship - Embracing diverse viewpoints - Questioning established academic orthodoxy - Focusing research on public rather than personal gain - Openly sharing data and methodologies - Upholding research neutrali…

If everything is a priority/mandate than nothing is.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#114

Post by gedy »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

In the spirit of trying to learn something from the community: while I can certainly understand the rationale and goals behind DEI programs (many of which I agree with, others not), I honestly can't understand these "DEI statements" at all. They always seemed very "1984" to me, and almost designed to engender resentment in a way that would ultimately backfire. So perhaps I'm in a like-minded echo chamber, but is ther…

I don't know if it's just DEI, or other types of politics, but there seems to be a recent trend towards "you must say you agree with us, otherwise you are ostracized".

My personal opinion/observation is that as corporate and academic has trended towards less direct confrontation/arguments, this has resulted in a lot more passive aggressive behavior such as statements like these, some debatable "codes of conduct", etc.

I mean no harm when I say that it has always felt like a more "feminine" way of fighting and arguing vs "masculine" like physical or verbal arguing. Perhaps it's a result of more women in the workforce and leadership.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#115

Post by nolongerthere »

bozhark wrote: post #65

Recently wrote a corporate DEI policy. Our policy is to not regard DEI as a metric of value. It’s absurd.

> Our policy is to not regard DEI as a metric of value

can you expand on what this means practically and how it differs from others?

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#116

Post by whoza »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

In the spirit of trying to learn something from the community: while I can certainly understand the rationale and goals behind DEI programs (many of which I agree with, others not), I honestly can't understand these "DEI statements" at all. They always seemed very "1984" to me, and almost designed to engender resentment in a way that would ultimately backfire. So perhaps I'm in a like-minded echo chamber, but is ther…

I was on the academic job market recently. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the process of writing my DEI statement was a valuable learning experience. For example, I read several interesting papers about randomized controlled trials testing the effects of various classroom interventions. I also have some more clarity about the relevant philosophical questions, both due to reading others' thoughts and due to being forced to articulate my own thoughts.

For those reasons, my feelings toward DEI statements are more positive now than they were before. Still, on balance, I think I'm inclined to favor removing DEI statements from faculty applications.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#117

Post by transcriptase »

logicchains wrote: post #78
oytis wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's a natural consequence of the statistics that 1. people get more conservative on average as they get older, and the average age of most countries is steadily increasing, and 2. conservatives have more children on average, and political views are partially heritable.

Are you excluding the possibility that after seeing first hand over the past decade that these policies are often detrimental to an organization despite the popular narrative otherwise, people are no longer willing to play pretend for fear of being ostracized.

My fiancé works for non-profits and an educational institution (Canada). In the former, every grant application or program has to involve some DEI component regardless of how little sense it makes. Applying for funding for replacing a failing HVAC system for a skating rink? Applying for new gutters for a shed that houses field maintenance equipment? Please write a brief essay on how these projects benefit and advance equity for minorities!

In the latter, hiring and promotions have become nearly exclusively about race. Internal candidates have been explicitly told that they’re going to be passed over in favour of others because they’re not diverse. Under-qualified individuals are hired based on skin colour.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#118

Post by whythre »

germinator wrote: post #84
LaurensBER wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you see yourself (or your group) as a victim it's easy to rationalize rather extreme measures to "fix" the world. The intentions behind a lot of these things are good but the sensitivity of the subject has made it hard(er) to have a healthy discussion about these issues.

I don't think that's a good explanation. The vast majority of people behind such initiatives don't come from underprivileged or victimized backgrounds. It's more about this idea of being an advocate for the downtrodden - a good person fighting the racists on behalf of those without a voice. And because you're fighting the good fight, it's of course OK to make the oppressors uncomfortable or to bully them into submiss…

I mean, that sword cuts both ways. If you just decide that the other side of the aisle is comprised of monsters, why stop at making them uncomfortable or bullying them? Why not persecute them further? And why would they not do the same to you, if given the opportunity? It all just seems so vicious and wrong headed. We conceived of tolerance in order to allow for discourse and the above perspective seems so stupid regressive.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#119

Post by warkdarrior »

germinator wrote: post #84
LaurensBER wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you see yourself (or your group) as a victim it's easy to rationalize rather extreme measures to "fix" the world. The intentions behind a lot of these things are good but the sensitivity of the subject has made it hard(er) to have a healthy discussion about these issues.

I don't think that's a good explanation. The vast majority of people behind such initiatives don't come from underprivileged or victimized backgrounds. It's more about this idea of being an advocate for the downtrodden - a good person fighting the racists on behalf of those without a voice. And because you're fighting the good fight, it's of course OK to make the oppressors uncomfortable or to bully them into submiss…

The anti-racist's burden, so to speak

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#120

Post by YZF »

leosanchez wrote: post #4
ssijak wrote: post #3

Clicked through some links in the article. Really mind boggling material. How did such garbage end up in top universities is really weird.

I don't understand how this crap got into America of all countries

American society is a bit messed up going back to slavery (and maybe the treatment of the indigenous people). That part (America of all countries) is not a surprise. It's also not new, random e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness

Maybe this also has to do with the general idea that it's not up to a government to do things, it's up to individuals, which to me is how Americans think. I would think that dealing with inequalities in society, ensuring everyone has equal opportunity and has their basic needs provided for (health, education etc.) would be the function of a government. If the government isn't addressing that then you have a vacuum. To me it's obvious that e.g. hiring policies or university acceptance criteria are not the right place to fix society but rather issues should be addressed upstream from those. By the government. But having government do things seem to be something Americans dislike.

Post reply on HN