Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

DEI Language Rose 4,200% in 10 Years in Scientific Resources

DEI Language Rose 4,200% in 10 Years in Scientific Resources

“the truth is that DEI is often a cover for a particular political ideology that will corrupt the sciences completely”

This ideology is everywhere. It has spread like wild fire.

The College Fix reports:

DEI in scientific publications up 4,200 percent between 2010 and 2021: study

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion language has increased “exponentially” over the past several years in STEM, according to a quantitative study from the National Association of Scholars, which argued in releasing its findings that the trend “promises to do great intellectual and economic damage.”

“DEI indicators linked with STEM have risen 2,600 percent compared to a decade ago on university websites, with similar trends observed in social media content,” states the study published November 29 by NAS, a center-right nonprofit focused on reforming higher education.

Titled “Ideological Intensification,” the report also found DEI-related language in scientific publications increased up to 4,200 percent from 2010 to 2021.

Mason Goad, a researcher at NAS, and Bruce Chartwell, a pseudonymous data scientist, co-authored the study, which “documents and quantifies the growing prevalence of DEI-associated language in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in the United States.”

The association stated that it commissioned the study “in an attempt to document the natural sciences’ conversion from seeking truth to forwarding political objectives.”

Goad, in an email to The College Fix on December 15, said that to “the unobservant and unquestioning, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion sound like the tenets of basic human decency, but the truth is that DEI is often a cover for a particular political ideology that will corrupt the sciences completely.”

“Ideological Intensification” involved over 30 gigabytes of data in more than 280,000 files, which the association bills as the largest quantitative study thus far focused on the spread of DEI ideology in STEM.

It lists five different online sources of data: U.S. research university websites, research university Twitter accounts, annual programs of academic associations, grants of three major scientific research funders, and scientific publications.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

“the truth is that DEI is often a cover for a particular political ideology that will corrupt the sciences completely”

DIE is an ideology, and consequence of grander ideology, which is intended to corrupt anything that isn’t it.

The governing ideology behand and before DIE is fundamentally, entirely, irreversibly contra science as science has been understood. (Ironically Dr I AM the Science illustrates this post-sciencey “science” brilliantly.)

That’s the game: things are re-defined to what’s convenient, because why not if reality is just a social construct. That works fine until reality’s vote goes against you.

Hey, it’s all good. Those freezing Geramans get to pull out Grandma’s quilts, recalling her foldly. Were they warmer, they wouldn’t have as much remembered nana.

So, they should be thanking the social engineeering authoritah for this boon, to be briefly enjoyed before they freeze to death — or the youngg, old, and infirm freeze, leaving more folks to fondly remember.

    BierceAmbrose in reply to BierceAmbrose. | December 26, 2022 at 5:38 pm

    /meta — Apologies for the typos.

    There is, as yet, no solution I’ve found for the something-like-written-aphasia which persists for me post-TBI.

    The fact that immediate proof reading fails is fascinating. I literally can’t see errors that I can see better, later. Not useful, but fascinating.

    Comments, not articles — tolerable errror rate, if barely so.

“I literally can’t see errors that I can see better, later. ”

Basically, that’s because you know what you intended to write and that subconsciously influences what you perceive. It’s a well-known problem not personal to you.

That’s why good editors hire proofreaders (or at least have someone other than the author also proofread).