Diversity. A fine word. We all want lots of
diversity in our lives. When we go to the grocery store to buy, say…beer, we
like the stores that stock 50 different brands of brew. When we purchase a
cable television package we want a diversity of channels, not just NBC, CBS,
and ABC. Since we are not North Korean, we desire diversity in our clothing,
lots of different styles and colors in our closets. But somewhere down the line
in the field of higher education, the word “diversity” has become associated
with another fine word…moron.
Consider, if you will, the latest advance in the
diversity project at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, where they are
striving mightily to “place the mission
of diversity at the center of institutional life so that it becomes a core
organizing principle.” One would have thought that the “center of
institutional life” at a “university” would have been reserved for, you know…education,
but what do I know? I’m not an educational expert like the luminaries at UW.
The interesting part of this new project at
Wisconsin comes in the fine print of the plan as follows:
…it calls for “proportional
participation of historically underrepresented ethnic-racial groups at all
levels of an institution, including high status special programs and high
demand majors, and in the distribution
of grades.”
Hmmm…What measures does a professor have to use, besides
a student’s mastery of the material, in order to properly distribute the
correct grades, you might be wondering? Well, there’s lots of stuff…
“individual differences
in personality, learning styles and life experiences, group and social
differences that may manifest itself through personality, learning styles,
along with differences of race, gender, sex, and gender identification or
expression, sexual orientation, age, country of origin, physical or
intellectual ability, emotional health, social-economic status, and affiliations
that are based upon cultural, religious, political, or other identities”
Goodness. Using this menu of excuses, I could have
graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of Richmond, instead of “Thank
the Laude.” I mean, I clearly struggled in the hard sciences because of my “learning
style” which was heavy on baffling them with bull**** on the essay questions
and using my patented guessing system on the multiple choice. My “life
experiences” didn’t help out either, since I was working in a pallet
manufacturing factory 30 hours a week while I was in school. As for “emotional
health”, are you kidding me? I was a basket case every time I opened a blue
book in Dr. Rilling’s British history class. And, don’t even get me started on
my “intellectual ability” or “personality.” You try sitting for an
hour and a half listening to Dr. Bogel pontificate on the origins of the
Arab-Israeli conflict with ADHD!
Clearly, under this new regime of performance
analysis being employed at the University of Wisconsin, I could have turned out
totally different. Perhaps I could have graduated with an advanced degree in
Bio-Physics, and won a Nobel Prize by now.
Seriously though, when one thinks through the long
term consequences of this type of Balkanized learning curve, the results will
not be good. Suppose you are in a heart surgeon’s office and notice that he
earned his undergraduate degree from UW-Madison? How confident will you be in
allowing someone to cut your chest open who was given diversity A’s in biology
because of his low self-esteem issues? You might not give a hoot about his
sexual orientation, but when you consider that it might have helped him pass
Surgery101, you might care…a lot!
So, while the good people in Madison work hard fine
tuning their “representational equity,” I’ll look for a Johns Hopkins diploma
next time I need an operation.
No comments:
Post a Comment