| > Well yeah, because the concept of a "diversity statement", let alone of a DEIB, did not exist at the time. What I was saying is that diversity initiatives, training, seminars, workshops, and all the various activities that are now concentrated in the DEIB office have been going on for quite some time at different levels in the University. Offices of diversity haven't always been around, but similar efforts have always existed. Maybe your instructors haven't written a DEI statement, but surely they have engaged in the activities one would write about in a DEI statement. Every member of the faculty has. > You seem to just assume, prima facie, the effectiveness of these statements The statements are most effective in focusing candidates to answer questions about diversity during the interview. > their failure to emit who knows what positive signals you or whoever is sitting on the DEI board that year is looking for The "positive signals" we are looking for are specificity. We just want examples. What have you done specifically? What do you plan to do specifically? Otherwise, yeah, they're platitudes. > are basically childish, self-centered jerks I'm sorry I probably overstated Berkeley's intention with their rubric, as I'm not a part of Berkeley and had no hand in writing it, but I just had some specific instances in mind when I that this. I will say I've read a lot of statements that say something to the effect of "I treat everyone equally" and I've had a lot of discussions with those candidates. It usually turns out that after a probing discussion, their actual position is much more measured. The "I treat everyone equally" absolutists I've come across have actually ended their careers in self immolation. And I mean, they were hired in the first place, so their statement didn't even affect their candidacy, but I will say their attitude lead to problems. > You are extremely even-tempered and civil It comes from dealing with teenagers all day. Cheers! |