In previous posts I have mentioned what I call “trigger
words.” These are words that fire off an
automatic judgment in our brains as either good or bad. We have been conditioned to react to these
words. Words like natural, green,
organic and sustainable automatically draw a favorable review. Words and expressions like chemicals, carbon,
big business and radiation automatically make us scared or less trusting. Although everyone learned in school that the
entire universe is made of atoms and compounds, also called chemicals,
and it’s common sense that nicotine and snake venom are all natural; many
people still have the predictable gut reaction to these words.
Advertisers and advocates use these automatic responses to draw us on
board, hoping that a trigger word will get us to act before we spend too much
time thinking.
Another trigger word is diversity. When it is thrown into conversations and
arguments, it carries an automatically favorable connotation. Another assumption about it is that you can
tell by looking at a group of people whether or not it is a diverse group. Diversity, we are told, leads to more
creativity and better solutions in all cases, sometimes even when the pursuit
of diversity supersedes the pursuit of competence. If these are facts rather than beliefs, I
would like to see the data on those studies.
Mohamed El-Erian in his book The Only Game In Town devotes several chapters to the advantages of
diversity for companies and governments to meet financial challenges in the
near future citing several experts on the subject. Even after his high praise for the power of
diversity he warns: “This is not to say
diversity should be pursued at the expense of competence…it is about getting
the right mix.” But there may be another
issue.
A couple of summers ago the big crisis of the month was the
lack of diversity in Silicon Valley.
There were too many white men and not enough men and women of color, or
women in general. My conclusion was that
to reject anyone because of some prejudice against his or her physical
appearance, whether conscious or unconscious, is wrong. Likewise to favor anyone for the same reason
is to risk producing a substandard product.
I would rather that the applications on my computer not crash than to
feel an inner glow knowing the programmer was hired based on his or her ability to represent
some victim class and thereby help even up the score.
With all the fuss at the time, there was no mention that all Americans might soon become underrepresented. Look at the tables below. The first shows the proportion of graduate
students in several graduate STEM majors in US universities. The second shows
the number of US colleges with a majority of international students and their
overall proportions in graduate electrical engineering and computer science
programs. These numbers do not reflect
well on America’s continued leadership in this area, nor do they proudly
represent how well our school system is doing.
Perhaps if the country spent more time educating students
and preparing them for difficult courses, and less time worrying about things
like diversity, problems would sort themselves out. We’d have qualified and interested men and
women, blacks and whites, and everyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Click again on the title to add a comment