https://unherd.com/newsroom/mi...iversity-statements/

the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has ended the use of diversity statements for faculty hiring, making it the first elite private university to backtrack on the practice that has been roundly criticised as a political litmus test.

On Saturday, an MIT spokesperson confirmed in an email to me that “requests for a statement on diversity will no longer be part of applications for any faculty positions at MIT”, adding that the decision was made by embattled MIT President Sally Kornbluth “with the support of the Provost, Chancellor, and all six academic deans”.

The decision marks an inflection point in the battle over diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in higher education. Since at least the late 2010s, diversity statements have been ubiquitous in faculty hiring, sometimes carrying serious weight in the selection process. As one dean at Emory University put it while describing her approach to hiring, “Diversity statement, then dossier.”

MIT embraced the diversity statement trend. In late 2023, the university’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering sought an assistant professor “in fields from fundamental nuclear science to practical applications of nuclear technology in energy, security and quantum engineering”. Applicants were required to submit “a statement regarding their views on diversity, inclusion, and belonging, including past and current contributions as well as their vision and plans for the future in these areas”.

Such requirements have long been controversial, and the basic argument against them is simple: “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has come to connote a set of controversial views about identity, power, and oppression. Universities which require scholars to “demonstrate” their “commitment” to DEI can easily invite ideological screening, as well as potentially unlawful viewpoint discrimination. Many groups thus oppose the diversity statements on the grounds of academic freedom and free expression.

At MIT, these arguments seemed to have won the day. In a statement provided to me via email, president Kornbluth notes: “We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”

It’s very possible that more private universities, and state universities in blue states, will eventually follow MIT’s lead for one basic reason: a significant number of faculty from across the political spectrum simply cannot stand mandatory DEI statements. Last month, Harvard Law School’s Randall Kennedy — a self-described “scholar on the Left committed to struggles for social justice” — described the general sentiment: “It would be hard to overstate the degree to which many academics at Harvard and beyond feel intense and growing resentment against the DEI enterprise because of features that are perhaps most evident in the demand for DEI statements.”

dare we hope ?

It's a small step in the right direction.

They are simply reading the writing on the wall. The challenge that Ivy’s are losing their prestige to potential employers in that they want applicants who are prepared for work and contribute and not fatigue the HR departments with woke nonesense.

The part I liked best:

‘It’s very possible that more private universities, and state universities in blue states, will eventually follow MIT’s lead for one basic reason: a significant number of faculty from across the political spectrum simply cannot stand mandatory DEI statements. Last month, Harvard Law School’s Randall Kennedy — a self-described “scholar on the Left committed to struggles for social justice” — described the general sentiment: “It would be hard to overstate the degree to which many academics at Harvard and beyond feel intense and growing resentment against the DEI enterprise because of features that are perhaps most evident in the demand for DEI statements.”‘

The article’s title certainly sounds like this is a BIG deal. Reading the article, MIT requested a DIE statements of prospective candidates once during a particular hiring process, then decided it was a dumb idea, and won’t be asking again. That hardly meets the definition of a ban.

Like chellim1 said "It’s small step in the right direction.”

MIT still has a Committee on Race and Diversity , A Diversity and Inclusion Division of Student Life , Strategic Action Plan for Belonging, Achievement, and Composition, etc. From the last one:

“ Yet the Institute is part of a society in which opportunity is not evenly distributed and in which not all people feel their contributions are valued.”

quote:

MIT requested a DIE statements of prospective candidates once during a particular hiring process

I read that differently. The nuclear science case of late 2023 was just an example.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/...ing-requirement-work


Prior to the change , MIT required candidates applying for faculty positions to submit a statement that "demonstrates knowledge of challenges related to diversity, equity, and inclusion" as well as outlining their "track record of working with diverse groups of people" and how they plan to advance DEI in their position at the school, according to MIT’s Communication Lab.


link:

https://mitcommlab.mit.edu/eec...diversity-statement/

Faculty Application: Diversity Statement

Often, there is a large amount of flexibility on the content and structure of a diversity statement. Section headings are not required or fixed but may be used to help organize the document. In general, a well-structured diversity statement mimics the structure of a teaching statement, showing your knowledge of the topics you choose to discuss, demonstrating a track record of advancing DEI through past experiences, and presenting your future plans around DEI, as shown in the structure diagram below. However, diversity statements may also contain the same content organized topically rather than chronologically. Typically, diversity statements are no longer than 1-2 pages.

Small step but maybe a sign of changing attitudes.

The place is pretty-much run by the faculty and if this change got through, there must be some consensus around it.

Maybe they have seen their endowment donations shrinking because the donors do not approve in the path that these universities were taking.. Or maybe the threat of these monies disappearing. ............................... drill sgt.

quote:

I read that differently. The nuclear science case of late 2023 was just an example.

Must be. They wouldn’t write a whole “how to…” for a one off trial.

Kind of a weird example. How does one demonstrate a commitment to diversity in nuclear physics? Sell secrets to the Iranians?

quote:

MIT President Sally Kornbluth

How does she still have a job and wasn't excoriated like Harvard and Penn's presidents?