The increasing use of “diversity statements” in academic hiring and faculty evaluation has sparked significant concern among free-speech advocates and defenders of academic freedom. A study by the American Enterprise Institute found that these statements were required for 19 percent of academic jobs, with a higher prevalence at prestigious universities. This trend raises substantial issues, as illustrated by a University of California, Berkeley, search in the biological sciences that filtered applications based on “contributions to diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI). This process eliminated 679 of 893 nominally qualified candidates solely on DEI criteria. Organizations like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and the Academic Freedom Alliance have called for an end to the mandatory use of these statements.
Potential for Discrimination
One major concern is that diversity statements can be used to discriminate against candidates with specific worldviews, particularly the classical liberal view that individuals should be treated equally rather than differently based on demographic group membership. While universities do not explicitly state that classical liberal views are unwelcome, they clearly indicate a preference for statements reflecting active participation in DEI initiatives, such as community activism. This preference can disadvantage candidates who believe in equal opportunity but do not engage in such activities.
Personal Experience with Diversity Statements
In my department at North Carolina State University (NCSU) Computer Science, two faculty searches considered requiring diversity statements last year. I expressed my concerns to the committees involved. One committee member later informed me that their search did not ultimately require a diversity statement. Another committee member reflected that additional statements might complicate the application process.
Diversity statements were discussed again at the first faculty meeting this year. While several faculty members supported the idea, I was the sole dissenter. I questioned whether candidates who declined to submit a statement would face discrimination. After the meeting, I emailed my colleagues outlining my concerns. The ensuing email exchanges revealed a range of opinions. Some argued that not requiring diversity statements might signal a lack of commitment to diversity. Much of the discussion centered on using rubrics to evaluate the statements, with one colleague suggesting that problematic rubrics could be avoided by creating our own. I countered that candidates would likely standardize their statements to align with more progressive institutions, regardless of their personal beliefs.
Faculty Meeting and Broader Implications
At the October faculty meeting, proponents of diversity statements emphasized their goal of identifying candidates who would create a welcoming environment for minority-group members. I suggested using a term like “broadening participation” instead, to avoid the negative connotations of diversity statements. However, others felt this might confuse candidates. The chief advocate for diversity statements argued that while demographic diversity should not lead to hiring inferior candidates, it was essential to reach a wide range of applicants early in the process. The department head concluded by acknowledging the value of our discussion and promising to consult with the College of Engineering.
Lessons Learned
Several lessons emerged from this experience:
- Well-Meaning Intentions: Many faculty members see “diversity” as synonymous with outreach efforts, not realizing the potential for differential treatment based on group identity. They may be unaware of the potential abuses of diversity statements.
- Merit Over Identity: It was encouraging that none of my colleagues questioned the principle that faculty should be hired based on merit rather than group identity. One colleague shared that at his former institution, they downgraded candidates who focused on personal demographics in their diversity statements instead of their contributions.
- Raising Awareness: My input helped my department understand the legitimate concerns about diversity statements. While this may not eliminate all downsides, it highlighted the importance of free-speech advocates voicing their concerns. Even a single dissenting voice can significantly influence the discussion and draw attention to serious issues.
In conclusion, while diversity statements are intended to promote inclusivity, they can also lead to unintended consequences, such as discrimination against certain worldviews and the imposition of ideological conformity. Open discussions and a balanced approach are essential to address these concerns while striving for genuine diversity and inclusion in academia.
