A recent discovery by CriticalRace.org found that UMass Chan Medical School considers faculty applicants’ past “contributions to diversity and equity” when evaluating candidates for appointment. The school’s Department of Medicine emphasizes the importance of this effort, aligning with UMass’s broader mission to “meet the educational and clinical needs and interests of its diverse population.”
“The Department of Medicine is now requesting faculty candidates to submit a statement on their past contributions to diversity and equity and future plans for continuing this effort as part of their application for an academic appointment,” states the department website.
“The purpose of the statement is to identify candidates who have professional skills, experience, and/or willingness to engage in activities that would enhance diversity and equity efforts.”
The school also encourages faculty applicants who lack experience advancing DEI to “focus on their future plans” to contribute to those efforts. “If faculty candidates do not have substantial past activities, we recommend that they focus on their future plans.”
The revelation comes just weeks after Pennsylvania State University was sued for allegedly denying a professor a promotion for failing to “exceed” diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) requirements. The professor, Molly Kelly, claims that she was unjustly denied promotion twice because she would not adhere to the university’s “DEI orthodoxy” and simply “checked the box” when it came to required DEI training.
“Penn State denied her promotion to Extension Educator Level 5—twice—not because of any deficiency in her professional performance, but because she failed to demonstrate sufficient ideological commitment to the University’s prescribed DEI orthodoxy,” the lawsuit alleges.
Mandatory adherence to DEI policies in faculty appointments can also be seen at several other medical schools, where employees appear to face ultimatums to comply or seek employment elsewhere.
In a job posting for the faculty position of “Problem Based Learning Facilitator” at the Burnett School of Medicine at Texas Christian University, one of the qualifications listed is that applicants maintain a “commitment to contribute to the diversity and excellence of the academic community.”
At The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, one way faculty on the “Clinical Excellence Track” can fulfill their requirement to engage in “activities consistent with good citizenship” is by participating in “diversity/equity/inclusivity activities” in the community.
As lawsuits advance through the courts on faculty DEI requirements regarding appointment and promotion, such as the Penn State case, a legal battle is sure to ensue to determine if these types of requirements are viable.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) makes the claim that court cases such as “Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York,” set legal precedent to strike down certain faculty requirements at universities that can “cast a pall of orthodoxy” over a campus.
“Vague or ideologically motivated DEI statement policies can too easily function as litmus tests for adherence to prevailing ideological views on DEI,” states FIRE.
These policies effectively “penalize faculty for holding dissenting opinions on matters of public concern, and ‘cast a pall of orthodoxy’ over the campus.”
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY