Does DEI include women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

You're really just highlighting an issue of bias. There's a ton of research on why women are heavily represented in some STEM fields and not in others, and it has nothing to do with intellect but social marginalization and harassment. We have similar issues over here in Physics, and it's a damn shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Help me out here, but from what I have read, the DEI policies seem to be regarding race and not much talk about gender. The only gender issues regarding admission I have seen related to transgender in sports.

So are the new DEI policies related to race or gender? We know that some schools in the past, particularly the Ivies, balance gender as close to 50-50 as possible. I am not certain this is changing going forward.

Of course it does

OMG women did not get credit cards til the 1970s if you want your DD to get jobs and not be breeders dam well better support DEI

How the hell
Do you think all the FOX news people got their Jobs in trumps administration?? Not like they are qualified!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

Girls were allowed to study at Columbia only after the 80s, less than 50 years ago. Give it another 50 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

Girls were allowed to study at Columbia only after the 80s, less than 50 years ago. Give it another 50 years.

By 2028 there will be no college admissions for women

See Project 2025

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Usually DEI for colleges benefits men.

+1
DEI applies to any effort to balance the equation. If outcome shows greater percentage of any group over another, DEI is the mechanism deployed to “correct” that.
Oddly enough, though, people only seem to see it as an issue when the inequity of representation exists in roles/professions that are perceived to be coveted and where the underrepresented group is not a white male.
You won’t see a push for DEI initiatives to increase the number of white or Asian males on an NBA team or to increase the number of women (of any race) in the roofers labor union.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

Girls were allowed to study at Columbia only after the 80s, less than 50 years ago. Give it another 50 years.

This is optimistic. I don't think the pipeline of girls into high level quantitative science work is as strong as you seem to. For example, last year's winning US IMO team had one young woman on it. She was the first one since 2007.

https://maa.org/news/usa-first-at-imo/

What your saying might happen, but there are a lot of intermediate steps that will be necessary for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me out here, but from what I have read, the DEI policies seem to be regarding race and not much talk about gender. The only gender issues regarding admission I have seen related to transgender in sports.

So are the new DEI policies related to race or gender? We know that some schools in the past, particularly the Ivies, balance gender as close to 50-50 as possible. I am not certain this is changing going forward.

Of course it does

OMG women did not get credit cards til the 1970s if you want your DD to get jobs and not be breeders dam well better support DEI

How the hell
Do you think all the FOX news people got their Jobs in trumps administration?? Not like they are qualified!

+1

Exhibit A: Pete Hegseth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DEI helps everyone. It hurts exactly no one.

The Supreme Court disagrees.

The Supreme Court was actually pretty divided on their ruling with Uncle Clarence ironically being one of the deciding votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me out here, but from what I have read, the DEI policies seem to be regarding race and not much talk about gender. The only gender issues regarding admission I have seen related to transgender in sports.

So are the new DEI policies related to race or gender? We know that some schools in the past, particularly the Ivies, balance gender as close to 50-50 as possible. I am not certain this is changing going forward.

Of course it does

OMG women did not get credit cards til the 1970s if you want your DD to get jobs and not be breeders dam well better support DEI

How the hell
Do you think all the FOX news people got their Jobs in trumps administration?? Not like they are qualified!

+1

Exhibit A: Pete Hegseth

So true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

You're really just highlighting an issue of bias. There's a ton of research on why women are heavily represented in some STEM fields and not in others, and it has nothing to do with intellect but social marginalization and harassment. We have similar issues over here in Physics, and it's a damn shame.

Physics is probably worse than math. But in this era of the replication crisis, pardon me if I don't immediately concede your contention of a singular cause (bias) because you handwaved at "a ton of research."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Usually DEI for colleges benefits men.

+1. More women going to college than men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

Girls were allowed to study at Columbia only after the 80s, less than 50 years ago. Give it another 50 years.

This is optimistic. I don't think the pipeline of girls into high level quantitative science work is as strong as you seem to. For example, last year's winning US IMO team had one young woman on it. She was the first one since 2007.

https://maa.org/news/usa-first-at-imo/

What your saying might happen, but there are a lot of intermediate steps that will be necessary for it.

Google Hannah Cairo. True talent seldom manifests at Olympiads, just another way to coddle boys into doing some work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Help me out here, but from what I have read, the DEI policies seem to be regarding race and not much talk about gender. The only gender issues regarding admission I have seen related to transgender in sports.

So are the new DEI policies related to race or gender? We know that some schools in the past, particularly the Ivies, balance gender as close to 50-50 as possible. I am not certain this is changing going forward.

The very selective schools are to balance their classes because they have so many qualified applicants there is little difference between genders. The mid to lower schools are where the issues are. Though many people still think DEI applies to women not men- ie push for more women in stem, etc. That all will be going away.

that is a fair assessment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a faculty member/chair at a STEM-focused university. From the perspective of the Trump Administration, DEI does include women. We have received guidance from the DOE and DOJ that includes gender within the context of federally-funded grants, admissions programs that consider gender (e.g., recruiting, scholarships, etc.), hiring initiatives, and leadership programs.

Not in the context of college admissions. Girls outperform boys by a mile in colleges.

Higher up in academic settings, yes, women are being discriminated still. Fewer female professors in colleges, even fewer in leadership positions. But I think these positions are currently occupied by a lot of aged male professors, they will be gone in a few years by force of nature. I wouldn't worried too much about DEI for women.

That is not entirely true. Admissions is broader than AO's making decisions about denial/acceptance. I was referring to admissions practices around recruitment/marketing and merit scholarships. For example, we have received guidance that recruitment efforts to increase the number of female applicants in STEM falls under DEI or scholarship earmarked for women-only.

You missed the main point: Girls outperform boys.

Maybe at being average-exceptional in terms of college admissions. Only two women have won a Fields Medal. Men still outperform at the far upper bound.

Girls were allowed to study at Columbia only after the 80s, less than 50 years ago. Give it another 50 years.

This is optimistic. I don't think the pipeline of girls into high level quantitative science work is as strong as you seem to. For example, last year's winning US IMO team had one young woman on it. She was the first one since 2007.

https://maa.org/news/usa-first-at-imo/

What your saying might happen, but there are a lot of intermediate steps that will be necessary for it.

Google Hannah Cairo. True talent seldom manifests at Olympiads, just another way to coddle boys into doing some work.

No one said girls can't be AMAZING at math, like Hannah. PP said "girls outperform boys" as a blanket statement. I pointed out a significant area where they do not (in aggregate) and everyone went into a frothing rage.