Are we solving a real problem?

Kind of partisan and not particularly newsworthy but it does raise an interesting question.  From UW-Madison sees no improvement in campus climate despite millions invested in DEI by Jackson Walker.

There has been no improvement in the UW-Madison campus climate over the last six years despite the public university pouring millions of dollars into programs and staff positions to support diversity, equity and inclusion.

“Students of color, students with disabilities, nonbinary students, transgender students, and other LGBTQ+ students responded less positively than their counterparts” when rating whether they feel welcome, safe and respected, according to the results of a recently released campus climate survey.

“The gap in reported perceptions between these students and other students did not change between 2016 and 2021,” the survey found.

 

This despite a lot of leadership focus, innumerable initiatives and several millions or tens of millions of dollars spent a year on programs and support systems.

I looked for more details on exactly what the survey was measuring but it appears that the issue is solely the perception within different groups of their their degree of satisfaction and their sense of belonging and comfort on campus.

I think critics would argue that the issue is the very core ideology.  If you want to foster racial identity and division, then you will foster differing levels of satisfaction.

I don't disagree with that.  There is a lot of evidence that all the DEI programs and training are at best ineffective and at worst drive negative outcomes.  

But I wonder if there is something else going on.  

What if the issue is that the mere fact of being considered a minority drives dissatisfaction?

If we focus only on race, the US is approximately 75% white, 13% black, 7% Asian, and 5% Native American, Pacific Islander, Mixed Race.  

What if there were a campus in which 75% were black, 13% white, 7% Asian, and 5% Native American, Pacific Islander, Mixed Race. 

With all the same programs in place, would the results be different?  Would black satisfaction rise because they are the majority, and white satisfaction decline because they would be a minority.

Satisfaction levels and pride at Historically Black Colleges and Universities suggests that that might be the case.  The students are still are a minority within the wider economy but they are happy being the majority on campus.  

All of this is complicated further when you take into account all aspects of a person's identities such as religion, sexual orientation, academic focus, political orientation, etc.  

There is no natural condition in the US where this hypothesis (dissatisfaction is simply a function of being a statistical minority) might be tested that I can think of.

But could we test it in other countries where there is no clear racial majority? I can't think of any examples of a developed country which does not have a racial predominance, i.e. no developed country which is completely pluralistic with no race being dominant.

In Singapore, you have a similar structure as in the US but a different mix.  76% Chinese, 15% Malay, and 8% Indian.  At Singapore University, do Malays and Indians show a similar degree of disaffection simply because they are minorities?

Possibly Brazil or India might offer some examples of universities with distinct ethnic pluralism.

So a good question but one not easily answered.  But pretty critical to answer.  If there is an inherent dissatisfaction in being an ethnic (religious, sexual, class, sexual orientation, etc.) minority, then it calls into further question all the satisfaction surveying and all the DEI programing.  

Right now, we are committed to DEI as an ideological program rather than being committed to understanding what it is that causes the actual differential in satisfaction.  

It would be much better were we able to actually define the problem (and whether there is a problem), and then design solutions pertinent to the actual causes of the problem rather than simply committing to an ideological credo (CRT) with unclear utility.