Posted on 07/14/2022 11:08:27 PM PDT by ChipMarne
In a move its own Diversity Curriculum Committee has heralded as “unprecedented,” Northern Arizona University will soon mandate students take four diversity, equity and inclusion courses grounded in “critical theory” to earn a degree.
The new grad requirement is scheduled to take effect in 2024 at the large public university, located in the progressive city of Flagstaff and enrolling some 29,000 students.
The four diversity courses must come from the categories of “global diversity,” “indigenous peoples,” “intersectional identities,” and “U.S. ethnic diversity,” according to an internal memo from campus administrators.
The 12 credits of diversity requirements were approved in October 2021 as part of the university’s updated General Studies Program, reported John Sailor in City Journal.
“These Diversity Perspectives courses must … embrace the philosophical underpinning of identity politics,” reported Sailor, a research associate at the National Association of Scholars.
“According to notes from the university’s Liberal Studies Committee, foreign language courses fail to qualify for diversity designation. Why? ‘Because they do not incorporate critical theory which the [Diversity Curriculum Committee] expects of the courses it approves.’”
The course requirements are the implementation of a Diversity Strategic Plan drafted in Fall 2020 which “focuses and prioritizes the university’s attention and resources around diversity, inclusion, and a culturally competent environment for all.”
While the plan called for an increase of 20 percent of students taking DEI courses, the General Studies requirements approved by the Arizona Board of Regents on October 1, 2021 apply to all students.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegefix.com ...
A virtual minor in diversity. What is really important here?
Brainwashing our kids even more. Don’t hire any NASU students.
Comp sci? Another useless degree. I hope he speaks Hindi.
Who the hell appoints idiots like this board of regents?
Both my alma maters still do after 61 and 53 years respectively. Never given a red cent.
Are the indigenous students required to take a course on modern civilization?
Are those who claim "intersectional identities" required to take a course on heterosexuality?
Of course not because schools don't offer those courses.
Same here! Though I had an English professor who’s reading list and lecture was ONLY minority writers.
I dropped that class like a bad habbit
When I was in college you could get around that by just taking a foreign language or a foreign history elective. Maybe it’s tougher now.
I may have to return my forestry diploma
Geez Louise...that’s almost a semester.
He’s a computer science major. It’s just hoops to jump through. Neither he nor I voted for this.
/\
But you both sure are being forced to PAY for those hoops !!!
Useless courses unrelated to a field of study , that you have no choice but to pay for.
Easy A’s my eye. You gotta sit through 12 semester hours of that crap! Sounds harder than Navy Seals training to me.
Me too. When I was in college, diversity was having beer, grain punch and vodka shooters at your frat party.
But not go stark raving mad doing it. That won’t be easy.
It's happening everywhere business, government, etc.
One of the worst colleges for dehumanizing indoctrination in the country. An embarrassment for Arizona. A pimple on the ass of the San Francisco Peaks in Flagstaff, AZ.
I’ve been giving this a lot of thought, and it seems to me that if either the left or the right could tell the truth about racism, we’d be a lot further forward than we are. What the right needs to admit is that this is, in fact, a deeply racist nation. You can see this immediately by looking at the marriage rate between so called white men and so called black women. The most recent data puts this marriage rate at 2 per 1000, when if we were actually a colorblind society, it would be at 120 per 1000. If the difference were between 30 per 1000 and 40 per 1000, you could find other reasonable reasons. Economics, geography, culture, who knows. But between 120 per 1000 and 2 per 1000? No. That’s racism. And that high a level of racism must bleed into every aspect of our lives. It must affect all our relationships.
So much for what the right needs to acknowledge, to move forward. What about the left? The left needs to admit that we don’t know what to do about this. The idea that diversity training is going to eliminate racism is just nuts. We’ve been adjusting what people think they think for sixty years or more. It hasn’t worked. It’s time to do something different.
The idea that CRT stands for marxism, or hating america, or race essentialism, or segregation, is also kind of nuts. I’m not that worried about it, because I feel sure that CRT theorists can defend themselves and, in any event, if they can’t it’s no great loss because they don’t know what to do either. But I do want to point out that there’s quite a distance between actual CRT theorists and the training people are getting, that has so outraged (and rightfully so, in many cases) those on the right. Who in their right mind would teach, or advocate, any of these things? It’s nuts. CRT doesn’t stand for that, and trainers who do actually train those things have separated themselves from reality.
Nevertheless, in the absence of truth on racism on either side, we can still move forward. Forward toward having educational institutions we can legitimately respect. What’s needed is a drive toward realism in university research, similar to the Legal Realist movement of the 1920s and 1930s.
You may not realize this, but much of the research on race and racism comes from medical schools. Smaller flows of race and racism research come from departments of education, psychology, and sociology. All of this research is shot through with ideas and implications that no level-headed person could possibly sanction. Simple common sense would make an enormous difference, and contribute a lot to the idea that these people, almost all university professors or associated with professors, are actually doing something worthwhile.
I’ll give a few examples, the first few I came to.
Yi, J., Neville, H. A., Todd, N. R., & Mekawi, Y. (2022). Ignoring race and denying racism: A meta-analysis of the associations between colorblind racial ideology, anti-Blackness, and other variables antithetical to racial justice. Journal of Counseling Psychology.
Dr. Mekawi (the principal author is almost always the last on the list) teaches psychology at the University of Louisville. The abstract to this particular article seems to imply that making associative connections between, on the one hand, ignoring race and denying the existence of structural racism and, on the other, anti-black prejudice, is going to make a difference in our level of racism. It seems pretty obvious to me that it’s not - as I said earlier, we’ve been adjusting what people think they think for sixty years and we’re still a deeply racist country. This cannot help. I would have thought that was obvious; Dr. Mekawi, obviously, disagrees.
Second example: Carrero Pinedo, A., Caso, T. J., Rivera, R. M., Carballea, D., & Louis, E. F. (2022). Black, indigenous, and trainees of color stress and resilience: The role of training and education in decolonizing psychology. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 14(S1), S140–S147.
Dr. Louis teaches psychology at Harvard. In the abstract to her article she says CRT is a “decolonizing framework.” As I said above, the idea that CRT, even if we were to all accept it wholeheartedly, is going to affect racism by even the tiniest margin is just nuts. We all know racism is wrong; accepting CRT in every particular wouldn’t change that, and so it wouldn’t affect the outcome. We’ll be just as racist afterwards as we are now. So what’s the point?
Well, I could give a bunch more examples but that’s what I’m talking about. We need to write to the OTHER members of these departments and demand that they get their colleagues to have a little common sense.
And, of course, it would be nice if everybody would just tell the truth, too.
Had to take retirement from ‘Not A University’ after only 18 years .... 8 years ago. Was schussing downhill even back then.
The entire “diversity, ecquity and inclusion” agenda is zero percent truly academic and 100% political indoctrination.
If it were a truly academic curriculum, then it would not be founded on a single theory, and any use of or presentation of critical race theory would be in a course or courses where learned oppositions to critical race theory were also presented and required as part of the curriculum. That none of that is being offered demonstrates the indoctrination nature of the curriculum.
Does one course explain why you should reject a qualified applicant for admission, employment or promotion because of their race so you can admit, employ or promote a less qualified applicant because of their race?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.