NEW: Louis Galarowicz (@nasorg) and I have acquired a trove of records from University of Colorado, Boulder, that show how the entire university coordinated to advance a system of brazen race-based hiring.
The receipts are pretty astonishing... 🧵
@NASorg We acquired the approved/successful proposals for the university's large-scale diversity hiring program. Here are a few examples:
The College of Engineering & Applied Sciences said its cluster hire had “the goal of doubling our underrepresented faculty in the college.”
@NASorg Another example:
The Renewable And Sustainable Energy Institute proposed a specific candidate—who it noted was “an outstanding BIPOC scholar” who would increase the program’s “domestic Faculty of Color...”
@NASorg Another example:
The Department of Journalism told the admin in its proposal that “Our commitment, should we be successful with this application, is to hire someone from the BIPOC community…”
@NASorg Another example:
“We have an urgent and qualified need for BIPOC femme/women of color faculty,” the Department of Ethnic Studies stated, adding that the scholar should contribute to a “thematic cluster hire in racism and racial inequality.”
@NASorg These are just a few examples, the list goes on and on.
The College of Media, Communications, and Information’s cluster hire, meanwhile, emphasized "hiring Black, Indigenous, Asian American, Latinx, and Pacific Islander faculty…”
But also note the disciplinary focus...
@NASorg As we argue in the @WSJopinion, racial preferences went hand-in-hand with ideological preferences.
Notice that this proposal to hire a German studies scholar touts how she's both a woman of color and has an expertise in “anti-racist pedagogy” and “decolonizing German Studies.”
@NASorg @WSJopinion One of the most remarkable troves of public records I've ever received, the implications here are far-reaching, both for the university and for federal policy.
Read our full analysis, with full context, in the Wall Street Journal.
@NASorg @WSJopinion Full link here. Please read and share:
NEW: According to emails I've acquired via records request, Dana Renga, Ohio State's Dean of Arts and Humanities, enthusiastically approved a faculty search committee report that boasted about blatant race-based discrimination.
🧵🧵🧵
As I’ve previously reported, an OSU search committee, hiring a professor of “black France,” stated it was "essential" to hire a “visible minority.”
“We thus chose three Black candidates” for on campus interviews, the report states.
Remarkably, the emails I acquired show that Renga—who was responsible for approving the report—read it closely enough to catch a minor detail.
The committee didn’t list when all of its members attended the mandatory inclusive hiring training.
I talk to a lot of professors who hesitate to publicly push back against institutional madness.
It makes sense. Universities can make their lives miserable.
But two recent examples should inspire dissenters. Faculty who take a stand hold more card than one might think...
🧵🧵
Yesterday, a University of Michigan physics professor called out the president and board of regents — directly, in a public setting — for supporting what he described as blatantly discriminatory programs.
A truly remarkable statement.
That brings to mind an episode from the University of Washington.
In the summer, a professor stood up at a meeting and—while others tried to shout her down—directly confronted several administrators over allegedly wide-spread illegal hiring.
At the University of Michigan, a large-scale hiring program only recruits scholars who show a “commitment to DEI.”
In practice, its a career pipeline program for scholars in activist disciplines—like “trans of color epistemologies” and “queer of color critique."
🧵🧵🧵
After the New York Times published on Michigan’s DEI bureaucracy, the university scrubbed (❗️❗️) the Collegiate Fellows Program directory from its webpage.
But I saved archived links.
Here’s what the much-celebrated initiative looks like in practice.
1⃣ A gender studies professor hired through the program studies how “transgender Latinas are racialized and sexualized in sexual economies of labor and the US nation more broadly.”
At the NIH, the Distinguished Scholars Program hires scientists who show a “commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.”
Through a public records request, I’ve acquired redacted NIH hiring documents that show what this criterion looks like in practice.
🧵
Note, the NIH's former chief DEI officer emphasized that this program does not limit hiring based on race or sex—because, as she puts it below, “legally we cannot.”
Instead, it purports to boost diversity by proxy, hiring scientists who value DEI.
But...
...the records I acquired show—first of all—that NIH applicant reviewers repeatedly highlight gender and minority status.
Here's an example, in the section soliciting positive and negative comments on the potential NIH scientists.
NEW: The University of Michigan has hired over 50 professors via initiatives led by its chief diversity officer, Tabbye Chavous.
In records I've acquired, U-M boasted that, for these hires, diversity statements serve as a near-perfect proxy for racial preferences.
The University of Michigan Board of Regents may soon ditch DEI. In the unfolding drama, Chavous plays a central role. Her vision for higher education hangs in the balance.
In my latest, I unpack the FOIAed record, which sheds light on that vision.
NEW FOIA DOCUMENTS: a UW professor discusses her department's policy of "prioritizing DEI" in the hiring process. This, she says, is "operationalized as focusing on increasing hiring of URM candidates."
Earlier in that thread, when discussing how to rank candidates, search committee members ask whether the department has a policy on BIPOC candidates, like it does on URMs.
In a separate email, a committee member points out that "DEI contributions" are supposed to be their "top priority."
"This is what led to my surprise that DEI didn't seem to be the highest rated criterion in the committee's evaluation of candidates."