Accreditors are considering dropping diversity requirements

[Anonymous]

https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

[Anonymous]

A big dinner?

[Anonymous]

I would hope that we aren’t supporting the idea of being fine with schools discriminating just because the far right mod of to blame everything on DEI. It’s concerning how quickly everyone is forcing the pendulum in the exact opposite direction. People need to accept a bit of balance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

Really hope all this DEI crap goes away and we get back to merit/performance. I can’t read the article above.

[Anonymous]

Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Apologies, soared*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Regardless who has been the biggest beneficiary, making the process meritocratic will solve the problem. So what’s the complaint?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Choosing someone for their race constitutes discriminating against someone else for their race in college applications. And of course that should be illegal.

How would people like it if some college said, “We require at least 95% white people! Oh we aren’t discriminating against black people really! We just want at least 95% white people.” Everyone would be outraged.

We should also avoid scenario 2. What’s clear amongst republicans is they want an outright reduction and make it near impossible for poor students and students of color to enter higher ed, at least the highest rungs of higher ed. They continue to sue schools who don’t have the type of diversity they want and continue to perpetuate the idea that black students are inherently worse applicants.

Stop that BS propaganda! The biggest beneficiary of DEI has always been rich blacks and Hispanics (they’re actually mostly white people). It has never been about the poors.

Okay? But now trump is making it difficult for poor black and Hispanic people to go to college. His loan policies are awful and the endowment tax discourages institutions from taking in low income students.

Also questbridge, the outcomes of various top CBOs, and fly in programs combat your nonsense about “biggest beneficiaries of DEI.” The biggest beneficiaries of DEI were white women, who have soured after getting access to education and then students from impoverished, first gen backgrounds.

Regardless who has been the biggest beneficiary, making the process meritocratic will solve the problem. So what’s the complaint?

DP. The process isn’t meritocratic. Almost nothing has changed about admissions. You understand what accreditation is, right? For the process to be meritocratic, we’d expect significant changes to education including a nationalized, standardized high school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

You racists showing the true colors! More Asian Americans =China?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.chronicle.com/article/under-pressure-from-trump-the-accreditor-overseeing-harvard-proposes-nixing-dei-standards

This is a pretty big dinner of a lot of the push for diversity over merit. You think these schools are woke? This is where a lot of it comes from

The meritocracy crowd wants us to turn into china.

So it’s okay to turn into Europe but not China?

I don’t want either. I don’t want a Gaokao or an a levels system in the US. If you do, that’s…interesting, but I don’t think there’s a massive push to make high school much much harder than it currently is.