[anigbrowl]

In other words, UC Berkeley rejected 76 percent of qualified applicants without even considering their teaching skills, their publication history, their potential for academic excellence or their ability to contribute to their field. As far as the university knew, these applicants could well have been the next Albert Einstein or Jonas Salk, or they might have been outstanding and innovative educators who would make a significant difference in students’ lives.

Welcome to the historical experience of numerous underprivileged people who were excluded through no fault of their own. But since DEI statements can be rewritten at any time, applicants are not stuck with the prospect of permanent exclusion.

I am not a fan of college administrators in general, nor of the heavy-handed bureaucratic approach described here. But administrators are looking for faculty who can produce more distinguished grads in the future, who might be 'the next Albert Einstein or Jonas Salk'. You could be an outstanding brain in your field, but if you're not interested in maximizing the search for undiscovered talent, are you likely to attract it to your school?

[crackercrews]

> Welcome to the historical experience of numerous underprivileged people who were excluded through no fault of their own.

Emphasis on historical. You have to make sure not to swing the pendulum too far, otherwise you'll just end up creating a new generation of aggrieved people. Especially if your actions are themselves illegal.

[anigbrowl]

Maybe you should have read the rest of the comment, which addressed these concerns.

[crackercrews]

Maybe you should consider the possibility that I read your entire comment multiple times and found it unconvincing.

[anigbrowl]

I would have if you had made an effort to address it instead of cherry-picking a bit that was easy to react to.