Two-thirds of US colleges, universities require DEI classes to graduate: report

[Say it aint so]

People attack the messenger because they can't win an argument on substance. Remember who actually promised to unify the country?

Biden Pledges to Unify, Not Divide US in Address to Nation

Biden is projected to defeat President Trump after days of post-election vote counting

www.voanews.com

Irony meter explodes.

 

[RileyG]

If we want to establish a society that rewards individuals based on merit rather than skin color, gender, or ethnicity, it is essential to educate our students about diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI). This will help them learn to respect every race, ethnicity, and color and evaluate individuals based on their merit. Without an understanding and respect for diversity, people in our society may never learn to reward others fairly and equitably based on merit.

That’s entirely fair. I think you can teach something from ALL sides of view.

 

[Say it aint so]

It's not so clear that the first sentence is true. I looked at University of Maryland's descriptions. They require a course that looks at diverse cultures and advocates understanding and acceptance, but that would not require classifying anyone as an oppressor. I looked at UMD because they are cited as an example. However their requirement hasn't actually happened,, so no specific courses are listed as meeting the requirement. That makes it hard to assess what it will actually mean. But the wording doesn't seem consistent with the first sentence.

I checked my own University (an East Coast state school with a strong commitment to diversity). It has a requirement similar to UMDs, but it's in effect. It is surely counnted in their 2/3. There's a very long list of courses meeting the requirement. It would be easy to pick courses where classifying a student as an oppressor would be unlikely. E.g. one could meet the requirement by "French Gastronomy and Global Food Culture" or "Ethical and Scientific Challenges in Biotechnology" and "Data 101" (a data science course from Computer Science). The course list includes courses covering a variety of cultures and ethical issues. Many of them aren't even in the US, and would be unlikely to involve students personally. I can't say that no course classifies students as oppressors, because I'd have to talk to students in every one of a very long list of courses, but it's very unlikely in many of them. But for a student concerned about that, it would be easy to pick courses from that group.

Down goes Frazier.

 

[Say it aint so]

Teaching racism and hatred and categorizing people by the color of their skin, for graduation or anything else, is fundamentally wrong and should be opposed by all. Joe Biden was dead wrong in opposing busing, according to Joe's explanation because it would create a "racial jungle." Children should have the same chance no matter what the color of their skin. Marxism and spinoffs of Marxism like CRT and such don't end well for the masses.

A. Racism is not being taught. B. There is no "categorizing of people by by color". DEI includes, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, religion, or opinion. Why are you fixated on race? C. Those courses are not like, "you must take this class" or you can't graduate. Everyone at universities or who have attended universities, know they may assign the need to have "X" amount of credits if you're a philosophy graduate in example. Take San Diego State in example from the "study". A student is required to take 21 credits (7 classes) of a 400 series course. There are over (28) 400 series to choose from. They are NOT "required" to take the class the bad study notes.

 

[Yttrium]

Power

Physics, electrical engineering.

class

Biology.
(Or any class in school that mentions that it's a class...)

inequality;

Math.

Sex

Biology.


Wow, I was inundated with DEI, wasn't I? I was being brainwashed to accept things like work over time in society and didn't even realize it. If only colleges will learn this lesson and get rid of all these harmful courses.

 

[Valletta]

A. Racism is not being taught. B. There is no "categorizing of people by by color". DEI includes, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, religion, or opinion. Why are you fixated on race? C. Those courses are not like, "you must take this class" or you can't graduate. Everyone at universities or who have attended universities, know they may assign the need to have "X" amount of credits if you're a philosophy graduate in example. Take San Diego State in example from the "study". A student is required to take 21 credits (7 classes) of a 400 series course. There are over (28) 400 series to choose from. They are NOT "required" to take the class the bad study notes.

"Speech First investigated 248 colleges and universities across every state, including Washington, D.C., representing a diverse array of
campus types. The findings indicate that a significant majority (67%) of these institutions mandate DEI academic courses to satisfy general education requirements. Among the 165 establishments we identified that enforce these requirements, 98 are public institutions, and 67 are private institutions. Furthermore, our research team examined the learning outcomes of qualifying DEI courses within 51 of the aforementioned 165 universities—comprising one from each state, in addition to Washington, D.C. The inquiry revealed that students are subjected to courses advocating far-left ideological perspectives and pushing far-left political advocacy."

https://speechfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/DEIReport.pdf

 

[RocksInMyHead]

"Speech First investigated 248 colleges and universities across every state, including Washington, D.C., representing a diverse array of
campus types. The findings indicate that a significant majority (67%) of these institutions mandate DEI academic courses to satisfy general education requirements. Among the 165 establishments we identified that enforce these requirements, 98 are public institutions, and 67 are private institutions. Furthermore, our research team examined the learning outcomes of qualifying DEI courses within 51 of the aforementioned 165 universities—comprising one from each state, in addition to Washington, D.C. The inquiry revealed that students are subjected to courses advocating far-left ideological perspectives and pushing far-left political advocacy."

https://speechfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/DEIReport.pdf

It's already been pointed out that the criteria used by Speech First to identify "DEI courses" are so broad and vague as to be completely useless. Therefore, their study is also useless except as ragebait - as amply demonstrated in this thread.

 

[Michael Z]

I had training in diversity, equity, and inclusion when I was in grade school. It was simply “Respect your fellow man”. That was in the early 60’s. If one muttered the “N” word, there were stern lectures. It was not at all about some Marxist-leaning form of Godless lifestyle that instructors in colleges cram down the throats of impressionable young adults.

 

[KCfromNC]

It was not at all about some Marxist-leaning form of Godless lifestyle that instructors in colleges cram down the throats of impressionable young adults.

I guess all the evidence this isn't actually happening can just be ignored and the next round of manufactured outrage can begin. Anything to distract the marks from the con, I guess.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

These classes are vitally important.

We need to make sure we keep producing well-adjusted people like this...

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

"Speech First investigated 248 colleges and universities across every state, including Washington, D.C., representing a diverse array of
campus types. The findings indicate that a significant majority (67%) of these institutions mandate DEI academic courses to satisfy general education requirements. Among the 165 establishments we identified that enforce these requirements, 98 are public institutions, and 67 are private institutions. Furthermore, our research team examined the learning outcomes of qualifying DEI courses within 51 of the aforementioned 165 universities—comprising one from each state, in addition to Washington, D.C. The inquiry revealed that students are subjected to courses advocating far-left ideological perspectives and pushing far-left political advocacy."

https://speechfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/DEIReport.pdf

Great news. Young students are taught to respect diversity, equality, and inclusion. What part of this do you find problematic?

 

[Valletta]

I had training in diversity, equity, and inclusion when I was in grade school. It was simply “Respect your fellow man”. That was in the early 60’s. If one muttered the “N” word, there were stern lectures. It was not at all about some Marxist-leaning form of Godless lifestyle that instructors in colleges cram down the throats of impressionable young adults.

I was taught the same back in grade school. Today's DEI is just the opposite, divisive. The related CRT, Critical Race Theory, is a spinoff from the Marxist Critical Theory, substituting hate of class with hate of race. You can see the effect of DEI in the New Orleans security lapse.

 

[BCP1928]

I was taught the same back in grade school. Today's DEI is just the opposite, divisive. The related CRT, Critical Race Theory, is a spinoff from the Marxist Critical Theory, substituting hate of class with hate of race. You can see the effect of DEI in the New Orleans security lapse.

Right. The Civil War is over, Jim Crow ended and discrimination made illegal. All that we've done for those people, and now the Marxsts have to come along and teach them not to be grateful.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I had training in diversity, equity, and inclusion when I was in grade school. It was simply “Respect your fellow man”. That was in the early 60’s. If one muttered the “N” word, there were stern lectures. It was not at all about some Marxist-leaning form of Godless lifestyle that instructors in colleges cram down the throats of impressionable young adults.

Could you explain how Karl Marx's theory or ideology aligns with DEI policy? I am genuinely interested in your analysis to understand this perspective.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Great news. Young students are taught to respect diversity, equality, and inclusion. What part of this do you find problematic?

Actually, the "E" in there isn't equality, it's equity...which is a different concept.


But that aside, it's loaded language that often implies much more than the strictly semantic definition of those terms.


For instance, when an evangelical right-wing person advocates for a "religious freedom" bill, everyone acknowledges that it's about more than just religious freedom being advocated for, and if one were to criticize it, "Gee shucks golly, what do you have against religious freedom??" would be a very transparent and disingenuous defense.
(as everyone knows "religious freedom" is often times a dog whistle for "here's the anti-discrimination laws we want to be exempted from")


"DEI advocacy" much like "Religious Freedom advocacy" is as much, if not more, about telling other people what they can't do than it is about promoting the semantically stated principles.

I've referred to it as "disclaimer advocacy".

"Here's this principle that we're advocating for!"***
*** and in order to comply, here's the list of 20 things you're no longer allow to say or do. List subject to change

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Could you explain how Karl Marx's theory or ideology aligns with DEI policy? I am genuinely interested in your analysis to understand this perspective.

Granted, it would depend on the type of DEI instruction one is receiving. Not all of forms of DEI training would check that box.

But the overlap occurs when the DEI training/mandates leverage various forms of "critical theory" (which was a part of Marxist-inspired philosophy)


So, one example, if we look at one of the original authors of critical race theory, Derrick Bell...

His philosophy was that any systems in which you can find a disparity in outcome, means that the disparity is the direct result of those systems, and that people who are on the "winning side" of that disparity have a moral duty to tear down those systems and replace them with something else.

Even things that were almost universally considered to be good by most people, were seen as "bad" by advocates of critical race theory if they upheld those broader systems. For instance, most people saw the Brown V. Board of Education ruling as a good thing, as it ended segregation in schools. Derrick Bell suggested that the ruling was actually a bad thing, because it was still upholding the broader system of education in America, and was accomplishing nothing more than integrating Black kids into an educational system that was "designed by and for White people", and that what actually needed to happen was for privileged White people to tear down the current educational system, and rebuild a new one that produced no disparities in outcome between races.


So, the key differentiator would be, is the DEI training in question also coming with the social mandate that certain broader systems, traditions, and institutions need to be torn down and completely replaced in order to achieve the desired outcome.


To highlight the differences:
A) Women have gotten an unfair shake in our economy, historically, and we shouldn't be excluding women from positions of leadership in the workforce merely on account of their sex.

B) The disparity in the outcomes between the sexes is a result of our capitalist system and certain religious & social traditions, so people in privileged positions have a moral duty to tear down & rebuild (or permanently scrap) those systems in order to alleviate the disparity.


A - would be an example of non-marxist DEI training
B - would be marxist DEI training

 

[Valletta]

Could you explain how Karl Marx's theory or ideology aligns with DEI policy? I am genuinely interested in your analysis to understand this perspective.

As I said, Critical Race Theory is a spinoff of the Marxist Critical Theory. If you were unaware of this take the time to read some of what Derrick Bell (the man most often given credit for CRT) had to say. I previously held my thoughts back, but to categorize DEI as "To help your fellow man" is like saying the Affordable Care Act made health care affordable or the Inflation Reduction Act reduced inflation. Here is how the experts in DEI, not the Democrat posters here, not the major media, or not Democratic Party leaders have to say about DEI:

"The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE) is the preeminent voice for chief diversity officers. It leads the national and international conversation on diversity, equity, and inclusion in postsecondary education. Ultimately, it investigates, influences, and innovates to transform higher education so inclusive excellence thrives at the core of each institution worldwide.

NADOHE is a membership organization designed for diversity professionals and institutions of higher education to become equipped with the necessary tools and mindsets to advance equity and dismantle systemic oppression."

NADOHE | About

www.nadohe.org

Here is the "dismantle systemic oppression" teaching, they didn't include the word "white" but if you look at what DEI teachers have to say it's really white oppression:

Should White People Do DEI Work? | ERE

www.ere.net

Like the closely aligned CRT, people are put in categories, CRT emphasizes racism while DEI goes into many more "categories." Teaching students that they are not successful because they are oppressed does great damage to the students. The Supreme Court has, by their ruling, stopped some of the discrimination against high achieving Asia students who were kept out of top universities only because of their race. We as a nation need to look past color of skin, but we have taken a step backwards with DEI and CRT.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Granted, it would depend on the type of DEI instruction one is receiving. Not all of forms of DEI training would check that box.

But the overlap occurs when the DEI training/mandates leverage various forms of "critical theory" (which was a part of Marxist-inspired philosophy)


So, one example, if we look at one of the original authors of critical race theory, Derrick Bell...

His philosophy was that any systems in which you can find a disparity in outcome, means that the disparity is the direct result of those systems, and that people who are on the "winning side" of that disparity have a moral duty to tear down those systems and replace them with something else.

Even things that were almost universally considered to be good by most people, were seen as "bad" by advocates of critical race theory if they upheld those broader systems. For instance, most people saw the Brown V. Board of Education ruling as a good thing, as it ended segregation in schools. Derrick Bell suggested that the ruling was actually a bad thing, because it was still upholding the broader system of education in America, and was accomplishing nothing more than integrating Black kids into an educational system that was "designed by and for White people", and that what actually needed to happen was for privileged White people to tear down the current educational system, and rebuild a new one that produced no disparities in outcome between races.


So, the key differentiator would be, is the DEI training in question also coming with the social mandate that certain broader systems, traditions, and institutions need to be torn down and completely replaced in order to achieve the desired outcome.


To highlight the differences:
A) Women have gotten an unfair shake in our economy, historically, and we shouldn't be excluding women from positions of leadership in the workforce merely on account of their sex.

B) The disparity in the outcomes between the sexes is a result of our capitalist system and certain religious & social traditions, so people in privileged positions have a moral duty to tear down & rebuild (or permanently scrap) those systems in order to alleviate the disparity.


A - would be an example of non-marxist DEI training
B - would be marxist DEI training

So the issue lies not with DEI itself, but with the instructors or materials. A poor math teacher doesn't imply that teaching mathematics to student is a flawed concept.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

As I said, Critical Race Theory is a spinoff of the Marxist Critical Theory. If you were unaware of this take the time to read some of what Derrick Bell (the man most often given credit for CRT) had to say. I previously held my thoughts back, but to categorize DEI as "To help your fellow man" is like saying the Affordable Care Act made health care affordable or the Inflation Reduction Act reduced inflation. Here is how the experts in DEI, not the Democrat posters here, not the major media, or not Democratic Party leaders have to say about DEI:

"The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE) is the preeminent voice for chief diversity officers. It leads the national and international conversation on diversity, equity, and inclusion in postsecondary education. Ultimately, it investigates, influences, and innovates to transform higher education so inclusive excellence thrives at the core of each institution worldwide.

NADOHE is a membership organization designed for diversity professionals and institutions of higher education to become equipped with the necessary tools and mindsets to advance equity and dismantle systemic oppression."

NADOHE | About

www.nadohe.org

Here is the "dismantle systemic oppression" teaching, they didn't include the word "white" but if you look at what DEI teachers have to say it's really white oppression:

Should White People Do DEI Work? | ERE

www.ere.net

Like the closely aligned CRT, people are put in categories, CRT emphasizes racism while DEI goes into many more "categories." Teaching students that they are not successful because they are oppressed does great damage to the students. The Supreme Court has, by their ruling, stopped some of the discrimination against high achieving Asia students who were kept out of top universities only because of their race. We as a nation need to look past color of skin, but we have taken a step backwards with DEI and CRT.

It is important to distinguish between Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Critical Race Theory (CRT), as they are separate topics. DEI is not the same as CRT, and vice versa.

 

[BCP1928]

As I said, Critical Race Theory is a spinoff of the Marxist Critical Theory. If you were unaware of this take the time to read some of what Derrick Bell (the man most often given credit for CRT) had to say. I previously held my thoughts back, but to categorize DEI as "To help your fellow man" is like saying the Affordable Care Act made health care affordable or the Inflation Reduction Act reduced inflation. Here is how the experts in DEI, not the Democrat posters here, not the major media, or not Democratic Party leaders have to say about DEI:

"The National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE) is the preeminent voice for chief diversity officers. It leads the national and international conversation on diversity, equity, and inclusion in postsecondary education. Ultimately, it investigates, influences, and innovates to transform higher education so inclusive excellence thrives at the core of each institution worldwide.

NADOHE is a membership organization designed for diversity professionals and institutions of higher education to become equipped with the necessary tools and mindsets to advance equity and dismantle systemic oppression."

NADOHE | About

www.nadohe.org

Here is the "dismantle systemic oppression" teaching, they didn't include the word "white" but if you look at what DEI teachers have to say it's really white oppression:

Should White People Do DEI Work? | ERE

www.ere.net

Like the closely aligned CRT, people are put in categories, CRT emphasizes racism while DEI goes into many more "categories." Teaching students that they are not successful because they are oppressed does great damage to the students. The Supreme Court has, by their ruling, stopped some of the discrimination against high achieving Asia students who were kept out of top universities only because of their race. We as a nation need to look past color of skin, but we have taken a step backwards with DEI and CRT.

Aren't you violating your own standards for university curricula by teaching us about CRT and DEI?