MIT abandons use of DEI statements

Re:MIT abandons use of DEI statements by blueboo on Sunday May 05, 2024 @04:59PM (#40268315)

Well, the “acknowledge and mark” phrase gets at the statement—That if the org thought objective X was authentic existential goal, it behooves them to understand how an applicant understands and would configure into that plan. (I have no claim about its efficacy. The highly-structured nature of the statement is a head-scratcher. I’m here watching the fallout with everyone else.)

I hasten to restate that is my understanding of the premise, in the spirit of collectively untangling the causal chain here. This is incendiary stuff on HN!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:MIT abandons use of DEI statements by shkkmo on Sunday May 05, 2024 @05:18PM (#40268499)

> it behooves them to understand how an applicant understands and would configure into that plan.

I (and a lot of us I think) follow you up to this point, but then you lose us here.

How does a written statement, the expected content of which is clearly known, give any understanding of the individual's position? This type of approach to education seems to me that it actively harms the ability to sway people's opinions.

I have this issue with a lot of discussions of DEI, there are a lot of arguments that support the DEI goal and a dearth of arguments that support the methods being used to achieve that goal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:MIT abandons use of DEI statements by dgfitz on Sunday May 05, 2024 @06:43PM (#40269285)

> How does a written statement, the expected content of which is clearly known, give any understanding of the individual's position?

ChatGPT, please write me a DEI statement for this job interview.

[ Parent | on HN ]