3 ms·
If you are absolutely outstanding in your field you should always prevail. Also, if you didn't know, hiring candidates based on race is explicitly forbidden by
by fallingknife 4y ago
If you are absolutely outstanding in your field you should always prevail. Also, if you didn't know, hiring candidates based on race is explicitly forbidden by federal law (Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964). The fuss is absolutely not overblown.
- efficax 4y agothey're not hiring based on race, they're hiring based on the way they score a statement about one's commitment to, history with, and future plans for advancing diversity, equity and inclusion in the university setting. you can be black and have a terrible dei statement. it just happens that minorities are more likely to have had involvement with these issues for most of their academic lives.
- fallingknife 4y agoIf the scoring on the DEI statement is correlated to race of the applicant, and I would bet every dollar I have that it is, then it is considered de facto racial discrimination by law. Google "disparate impact." Same issue as Harvard giving low "personality scores" to the Asian applicants. You can't get around anti-discrimination laws that easily.
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y agoI would argue you shouldn’t always prevail in your field if your academics are outstanding. For example consider the paper-approval scandal in computer science a few years ago, leading to the suicide of a phd student. All those professors involved are outstanding on paper, and I don’t think any of them should prevail. Similarly if an otherwise outstanding academic drives a student to suicide they need to gtfo academia.