Has MIT Really Dropped Diversity Statements in Hiring Process?
“We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”
This is the way things are going in the country and it’s not just happening in red states.
The New York Post reports:
MIT tosses controversial ‘diversity statement’ hiring requirement — becoming first elite US university to throw away practice: ‘They don’t work’
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology will no longer require prospective hires to pledge allegiance to the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion as an employment condition, becoming the first elite university in the country to do away with the controversial practice denounced by free speech advocates as a “political litmus test.”
“Requests for a statement on diversity will no longer be part of applications for any faculty positions at MIT,” a university spokesperson told The Post in an emailed statement, noting that the decision was made by MIT president Sally Kornbluth along with the support of the provost, chancellor and all six academic deans.
“My goals are to tap into the full scope of human talent, to bring the very best to MIT, and to make sure they thrive once here,” Kornbluth said. “We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”
Part CV and part DEI loyalty oath, diversity statements have become common practice in higher ed in recent years, compelling faculty or research applicants to bloviate over two to three pages about their commitment to “advance excellence in diversity, inclusion, equity, and belonging as a teacher and a researcher in higher education,” as Harvard describes its own diversity statement requirement.
Professor Jacobson is skeptical:
Discarding mandatory DEI statements is an empty gesture if they are still permitted to be submitted and used voluntarily. Everyone applying will know it is to their advantage to submit such statements, even if not required. https://t.co/6tULVGM00v
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) May 5, 2024
“Requests for a statement” will no longer be made, that’s not quite as broad as saying they are not permitted or used. Also, the comment about impinging on freedom of expression was specifically with regard to “compelled statements.”
— William A. Jacobson (@wajacobson) May 5, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
OK, I’ll be somewhat skeptical too, but I have a decent feeling about Kornbluth. At least unlike those other presidents who got fired, and Baroness Shafik who should be fired, Kornbluth has a real academic record, and that almost always goes with middle of the road views on diversity and inclusion and a generally merit-based approach to things. The people with these wacky leftist views don’t even have honest academic careers in grievance studies, let alone real science.
Any applicant can submit whatever writing they want, which is then evaluated according to whatever the readers consider important. That’s a normal application process, and of course applicants try to guess what sort of writing is desired.
Some readers might want DEI stuff in the writing and give it plus points. But others, it seems to me, are equally free to subtract points if they see it.
reality:
everything dei affirmaction etc etc
is so now normalized we dont need to put anything out there,,upfront ,to be challenged by any maga types