The White House had its annual science fair last week, but every week is political correctness week at the White House, so the president warned that we must
work through some of the structural biases that exist in science. Some of them — a lot of them are unconscious. But the fact is, is that we’ve got to get more of our young women and minorities into science and technology, engineering and math, and computer science. I’ve been really pleased to see the number of young women who have gotten more and more involved in our science fairs over the course of these last several years.
And as I said to a group that I had a chance to meet with outside, we’re not going to succeed if we got half the team on the bench, especially when it’s the smarter half of the team. (Laughter.) Our diversity is a strength. And we’ve got to leverage all of our talent in order to make ourselves as creative and solve as many problems as we can.
Now, as I discussed years ago, it’s fine to make sure that no one discounts a STEM career because of his or her race, ethnicity, or sex, and maybe it’s even okay for the president to encourage more students to think about STEM careers if we think that for some reason our country needs that. But all the currently fashionable talk about “structural” and “unconscious” bias is just that — fashionable talk — and what’s more, I conclude, “whether we want to save someone from a missed opportunity for the student’s sake or the country’s or both, the relevance of race, ethnicity, and sex is limited at best. A missed career opportunity is a shame for anyone, and if the country faces a shortfall in profession X, then we shouldn’t care about the color or plumbing of those filling the breach.”
As for the president’s joke about girls being smarter than boys, can you just imagine what would happen if he or anyone else made such a joke at the expense of women? Why, he’d be pilloried before you could say, “Larry Summers.”
Can You Say, “Quota”? – There is an article on Inside Higher Ed this week, “Diversifying the Humanities,” that discusses growth in the number of degrees in the humanities awarded to minority students at the undergraduate level, but worries that the growth is “uneven,” since “[m]ost of the gains are attributable to Latino students.” What’s more, there are “declines — with the exception of philosophy — in the number of doctoral degrees in the humanities awarded to minority students” (emphasis added).
Forgive me for not panicking. Indeed, I worry less about the bean-count than I worry about the bean-counters. Here’s my posted response:
Two points. First, whether the identified shortfalls are a problem or not depends on why there is a shortfall. Is it because of discrimination? Is it because of some other lack of opportunity that can or should be addressed? Or is it because of a lack of interest in one field compared to more interest in another?
In all events, these passages [in the article] are disturbing: “These declines could complicate the efforts of colleges that have pledged to make set percentages of their new hires or faculties as a whole come from minority groups.” And “This could create particular problems for departments under pressure to be sure that offerings in literature, history and other fields are taught by diverse professors.” Can you say, “Quota”? Recruiting, hiring, and promoting with an eye on skin color and national origin is illegal.
Harvard vs. Freedom of Association — That’s how Harvey A. Silverglate and Timothy C. Moore see the latest chapter in the sexual-assaults-on-campus saga, which involves the school’s all-male clubs. Naomi Schaefer Riley is equally dismissive.
Dealing with Student Protestors – Over at Inside Higher Ed, there is a piece on “Quelling Racial Tensions,” calling for the application of conflict-resolution principles in campus racial protests. My posted response:
I have to say that most of this seems to me to be better addressed to the typical protestor than to the typical dean. Similarly, the central point in this piece is that “dealing with racial conflict is a problem of affirming the dignity of the other” — and what dean denies the dignity of the other? And perhaps I missed it, but it’s interesting that IHE has so far failed to cover the way student protestors were handled recently at Ohio State. The administrator there certainly was respectful, but he made it clear that those who break campus rules will be punished. Period. As Abraham Lincoln told the Lyceum, “There is no grievance that is a fit object of redress by mob law.”
And, if your time is limited, don’t waste it on reading the IHE article; instead read the post regarding the Ohio State matter, to which I link in my comment above.
