The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), like most highest-echelon universities, has, for the past several years, required applicants for faculty positions to submit “a statement regarding their views on diversity, inclusion, and belonging, including past and current contributions as well as their vision and plans for the future in these areas”.
But now, all of a sudden, MIT has decided that this kind of statement – i.e. obeisance to a specific position on hiring that puts merit either in competition with, or in second place to, social justice orthodoxy – is the wrong way to go.
According to John Sailer at unherd.com:
On Saturday, an MIT spokesperson confirmed in an email to me that “requests for a statement on diversity will no longer be part of applications for any faculty positions at MIT”, adding that the decision was made by embattled MIT President Sally Kornbluth “with the support of the Provost, Chancellor, and all six academic deans”.
Such requirements have long been controversial, and the basic argument against them is simple: “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has come to connote a set of controversial views about identity, power, and oppression. Universities which require scholars to “demonstrate” their “commitment” to DEI can easily invite ideological screening, as well as potentially unlawful viewpoint discrimination. Many groups thus oppose the diversity statements on the grounds of academic freedom and free expression.
At MIT, these arguments seemed to have won the day. In a statement provided to me via email, president Kornbluth notes: “We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”
Is this the start of a return to meritocracy? Is this the start of not just MIT, but maybe also the Ivy League universities and so many others actually being serious about academic merit/achievement over racial/etnic quota systems that put merit in the backseat, or even the trunk?
We’ll see….
