University of Michigan’s Embrace of DEI Policies Has Backfired
“Michigan has poured a staggering quarter of a billion dollars into D.E.I.”
The policies in question have apparently caused the opposite of what they were intended to do. Who could have guessed?
From the New York Times Magazine:
What to Know About the University of Michigan’s D.E.I. Experiment
A decade ago, the University of Michigan intentionally placed itself in the vanguard of a revolution then beginning to reshape American higher education. Around the country, college administrators were rapidly expanding D.E.I. programs. They believed that vigorous D.E.I. efforts would allow traditionally underrepresented students to thrive on campus — and improve learning for students from all backgrounds.
In recent years, as D.E.I. programs came under withering attack, Michigan has only doubled down on D.E.I., holding itself out as a model for other schools. By one estimate, the university has built the largest D.E.I. bureaucracy of any big public university.
But an examination by The Times found that Michigan’s expansive — and expensive — D.E.I. program has struggled to achieve its central goals even as it set off a cascade of unintended consequences.
Here are some key takeaways from the Magazine’s article on Michigan’s D.E.I. experiment.
Michigan has poured a staggering quarter of a billion dollars into D.E.I.
Striving to reach “every individual on campus,” Michigan has invested nearly 250 million dollars into D.E.I. since 2016, according to an internal presentation I obtained. Every university “unit” — from the medical school down to the archives — is required to have a D.E.I. plan.
The number of employees who work in D.E.I.-related offices or have “diversity,” “equity” or “inclusion” in their job titles reached 241 last year, according to an analysis by Mark J. Perry, an emeritus professor of finance at the university’s Flint campus.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“Michigan has poured a staggering quarter of a billion dollars into D.E.I.”
Could have been worse — could have gone to an increasingly unfunny Ukrainian comedian.
DEI is such a fraud.
Its mind boggling that any R1 top tier research universities would ever go there.
DEI faculty are not capable of writing grants to gain funding. They become a perennial economic sinkhole. I saw this three decades ago when I was asked to proof and correct a manuscript by a Chinese post-doc, in addition to my own work. I refused. Someone had to point out that there are costs to cheap labor and that I wasn’t going to be the stop gap.
By definition, a “DEI Hire” is not the best-qualified applicant.
I’m glad to see DEI offices close. The DEI office in the college where I used to work was a political commissariat. All new hiring decisions and research proposals had to be approved by the DEI functionaries. They knew nothing (and cared nothing) about good quality teaching and research. They just wanted to fill their quotas and control the political thinking on campus.
Even CBS News has admitted that their journalists must have their interview questions approved by their Race and Culture Office. That’s why their journalists have begun to look more like cheerleaders for Kamala.
So the DEI offices have closed. The employees have been shuffled around and their titles/functions renamed. It’s all a game.
And this is another reason why I stopped donating and volunteering for UofM and the medical school. They have lost their way.