The University of Washington has recently encountered some major problems, including a costly financial system that is failing, student violence/vandalism causing major damage to the student body, and a serious homeless problem in campus, to name just a few issues.
Two years ago, respected person Foundation for individual rights and expression (FIRE)rated the UW as the lowest-ranked public university in the country for freedom of speech and diverse expression of views.
But perhaps the biggest threat to the UW comes from the growth of a massive DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) bureaucracy that is consuming huge amounts of university funds and pushing policy makes the UW an unwelcoming place for people of diverse political and social backgrounds. opinion. What is important is that it means politicizing a State institution.
The most problematic part of DEI is part E….the Equity.
Fair not equality, a core principle of our country. Fairness means equality group result. For example, if 15% of the population is of some ethnicity/race/gender, then 15% of the faculty and students in each program must be of the same ethnicity/race/gender. Equality means each individual represent their ethnicity/race/gender rather than themselves as a unique individual.
Opposite, Equality meaning that every individual is equally valuable, regardless of their background, and deserves the same opportunities and attention. They represent we And not a group.
DEI efforts reduce UW’s political diversity
I can remember the University of Washington in the late 70s, where there was significant political diversity among the faculty. That diversity is now historic, with the vast majority of faculty identifying with Democrats and left-leaning groups.
What is troubling is that remaining faculty diversity is rapidly decreasing under UW’s DEI administration. For example, EVERY potential new faculty member’s application must include a comprehensive DEI statement in which they endorse the principles of DEI and describe specific steps they will take to support DEI at UW. Every faculty position has a requirement like this one from the Mechanical Engineer position advertisement:
applicants must provide a representation of how they have contributed to diversity, equity, and inclusion at previous organizations with which they have been affiliated, and how they plan to contribute to these efforts and goals. UW’s goals in DEI.
If you are a conservative, do not consider the concept of fairness but believe in equality, then you cannot get a position at the University of Washington.
My department is currently conducting a faculty search, and the applicants’ testimonials about their adherence to DEI principles are excessive and exaggerated. The search committee structure ensures that only “right thinking” candidates get a chance.
The UW has become a political monoculture, and DEI dominance is rapidly reducing the remaining diversity of viewpoints among faculty. Everyone is a loser in this trend: students don’t hear diverse faculty perspectives, alternative ideas aren’t debated, and social studies is myopic and limited.
It is interesting to note that the faculty members most concerned about the DEI machine at UW are those born abroad in countries with large politicized bureaucracies that suppress human freedom and potential. People. They know. And they recognize the similarities at UW.
But it’s worse than that.
The DEI bureaucracy and sympathetic faculty are actively attacking faculty with “unfair” beliefs. Predatory behavior. I learned this firsthand when I blogged criticizing the I-1631 carbon initiative in 2018 because it hurt low-income people and gave tax dollars to politically relevant activist groups. treat. Then the Dean of Diversity in the College of the Environment sent an email to every member of my faculty, accusing my blog of racism.
Or consider the unfortunate situation of Professor Stuart Reges of the Department of Computer Science, who criticized the virtue signaling land recording commonly used before meetings at the UW. Disciplinary measures were taken against him, resulting in a lawsuit (to be heard on Monday)
The powerful UW DEI facility at UW even promotes highly partisan views using state funds (which is illegal). For example, several diversity/inclusion staff at the College of Education sent emails supporting Hamas last October, shortly after the brutal attack on Israel on October 7.
The UW DEI bureaucracy is wasting millions of dollars
To support the DEI activist agenda, UW has created a massive and expensive bureaucracy that includes DEI deans, diversity officers, etc. One day, I used the database Washington State payroll data to see how much money was spent on the DEI bureaucracy at UW.
I was stunned by what I found. I quickly reached TEN MILLION DOLLARS a year and over 100 positions and could have gone further. If you factor in overhead costs (benefits, pensions, office expenses), that number would be more than $15 million a year. Enough to support several major components.
With 46,000 UW students, that’s at least $326 per student…and clearly a low bar.
this is a some of positions. Many are paid VERY well.
DEI has led to illegal activities at UW
DEI efforts at UW often conflict with Federal and State laws, which are based on equity. Affirmative action is illegal in Washington State (e.g., Initiative 200) and under Federal law (as affirmed by last year’s Supreme Court decision). But that hasn’t stopped UW administrators, faculty, and staff from prioritizing those from privileged backgrounds…all under the flag of DEI.
Recently, the UW Department of Psychology was caught red-handed offering a faculty position to a less qualified candidate because of their race. Severe sanctions were introduced.
Highly biased decision-making in admissions is being implemented by many departments as part of DEI initiatives. The key to this approach is to eliminate valuable objective measures like the SAT and GRE exams and move toward subjective “holistic” admissions. Inclusive recognition is fundamentally subjective and allows affirmative action to flourish.
I’m inside the system and can see how it works. For example, in one department, the graduate admissions matrix includes a DEI flag, which is used to enhance the visibility of applicants with suitably “diverse” backgrounds. The system is heavily weighted to enhance the chances of an applicant endorsing a certain notion of diversity.
Negative impact on the most vulnerable ethnic minority students
One of the most tragic elements of UW DEI’s admissions approach is that it hurting many of the students it purports to favor. For example, students from unsuitable backgrounds are admitted to UW and then fail and fail in college.
For two decades, I was an undergraduate advisor in my department and witnessed the sad consequences firsthand. One student from a DEI-supported group came to me in tears; they failed the program because their math preparation was inadequate. I checked their records and was shocked by their lack of preparation for high school. If this student had attended community college for the first time to build a solid foundation, he would have been successful. UW could have created a comprehensive remediation program….but did not. We provided that student with enough rope to hang him/her. It’s just wrong.
To feed the DEI base and ensure impressive diversity numbers, students are having to make sacrifices. It’s not ethical.
What needs to be done
The UW DEI program is a disaster: financially, ethically, and pragmatically. The huge and expensive bureaucracy needs to be dismantled. The DEI statement requirement for new faculty must be ended. UW admissions must make decisions based on merit and achievement, such as SAT and GRE scores, and not on race or ethnicity. UW must return to core American principles of equality and individual worth.
