A public university requires you sign a political statement to qualify for tenure.

https://www.realclearinvestiga...which_it_stands.html

If you think this is out of the mainstream, you are naive.

When I was on the job market, I heard that "diversity statements" were a thing, but before I got around to writing a draft of one (along with all the other job docs), I learned that they are not "a thing" in my field. None of the positions I applied to included it in their list of required application materials. At the time, I didn't give it any more thought beyond "thank goodness, one less thing to prep."
***
I liked the article Jon linked, because it does show the different takes on the question, whether it's viewed as a way to “learn more about candidates’ pedagogical skills for creating inclusive classroom environments,” (as per the article) or a way to force job candidates to fit themselves into one ideological box or risk not getting hired.

I come down on the side of being more sympathetic than not to the idea of a diversity statement. If you aren't committed to teaching, and valuing, all the students in your classroom, then you don't have any business being a teacher. What matters, I think, is how any diversity statement is defined/explained, and how it's used, and it's here where things get messy....

Nevertheless, regarding this comment: "for many positions it is not relevant" -- I'm not so sure about that.... in my classrooms, I have students of color, first-generation college students, LGBTQ* students, white students with Southern accents so thick they get laughed at by their classmates (not for long though, because I don't allow it and also I make them speak in Japanese, and then they all have an "accent"). So I think a commitment to diversity is very relevant in my position. I'm just not sure the generic "diversity statement" is the best way to ensure that teachers honor their students' diversity....

From a nerdly HR perspective, if the institution views "diversity" as a bona fide job qualification, and states as much in the position descriptions and job recruitment postings, they are well within their rights to ask for a statement of how that individual performs with diverse colleagues and students.

The question is whether it's really a bona fide job qualification, and people can argue about that. My personal view aligns pretty much with SK's.

I'm just not sure how a university could square its commitment to diversity (and they all have such a commitment, aside from maybe Liberty and the like) with not ensuring that its professors are committed to and will foster diversity.

Tenure is a hiring decision. It doesn't seem to me at all unexpected that a university with a commitment to diversity would want to make sure that those it hires have a demonstrated record of upholding such a commitment.

No such statements at my public university.

I would doubt that forcing insincere or sycophantic statements is a better way to improve diversity than teaching departments how best to attract a better pool and how to go about recruiting effectively from that pool. Many departments whose soul is in the right place simply are unaware of the mistakes they make. And many administrations do not use the tools at their disposal (target of opportunity hires) to improve diversity when it drops from the sky right into their proverbial lap.

quote:

Originally posted by QuirtEvans:
I'm just not sure how a university could square its commitment to diversity with not ensuring that its professors are committed to and will foster diversity.

You could probably write up a decent list of two dozen things universities are committed to. How many of them get their own required free-form statement at hiring time?

I'm going off topic here, but today I spent a good 45 minutes filling out online forms demanded by a university where I performed last month. Just to get paid. For a $350 fee, it took what I'd say was $50 worth of my time.

Create "portal" into the school's payment system, devise username & password, fill out online W9, authenticate your payment status, make endless declarations of citizenship etc.

Can't they just hand you a check after the performance as most places do?

Bureaucracy!

How much does this sort of thing add to the cost of college?

quote:

Originally posted by jon-nyc:

quote:

Originally posted by QuirtEvans:
I'm just not sure how a university could square its commitment to diversity with not ensuring that its professors are committed to and will foster diversity.

You could probably write up a decent list of two dozen things universities are committed to. How many of them get their own required free-form statement at hiring time?

Are all commitments equally important?

Presumably not.

It I’ll bet many of these universities will tell you that eliminating “rape culture” is a top priority. How common are explicit free form statement requirements for that?

How about seeking the truth? ‘Veritas’ sure shows up in a lot of mottos. Making applicants give real thought to how to counteract known cognitive biases could be useful. Not to mention hearing how they’ll avoid p-fishing and contributing to the replication crisis if they’re in the social sciences.

And how about requiring a treatise on the importance of free speech? Seems like that should be the bedrock value of the knowledge-seeking enterprise.

Now you’re changing your argument. You started with, hoe terrible that they are mandating a belief?

Now it’s, why this and not others? Other stuff is just as important!

Frankly, from my perspective, it sounds as if you just have diversity outrage.

I wasn't changing my argument, I was replying to yours. I was simply pointing out the hole in your argument. It simply doesn't scale.

By the way, I'm fine with diversity. Tribalism saddens me, illiberalism scares me. The combination I think is the greatest danger we face as a civilization. That sounds hyperbolic but I really believe that. That is probably what you see behind many of my posts on a variety of topics.

quote:

Originally posted by RealPlayer:
I'm going off topic here, but today I spent a good 45 minutes filling out online forms demanded by a university where I performed last month. Just to get paid. For a $350 fee, it took what I'd say was $50 worth of my time.

Create "portal" into the school's payment system, devise username & password, fill out online W9, authenticate your payment status, make endless declarations of citizenship etc.

Can't they just hand you a check after the performance as most places do?

Bureaucracy!

You are outlining the downside of enterprise level human resource applications. Bottom line: for you to get paid, they must have a W-2 for you. But the W-2 is now electronic. But you can't get to the electronic W-2 without creating an account in their system. But once you have an account in their system then you are an "employee" (even if temporary). But now that you're an employee, you have to fill out the I-9. But the only way they have to pay you is via direct deposit, so you have to then fill out that information.

I feel your pain.