Elsewhere (272)
Via Herb Deutsch, Heather Mac Donald on identitarian dogma versus scientific proficiency:
Yale has created a special undergraduate laboratory course that aims to enhance minority students’ “feelings of identifying as a scientist.” It does so by being “non-prescriptive” in what students research; they develop their own research questions. But “feelings” are only going to get you so far without mastery of the building blocks of scientific knowledge. Mastering those building blocks involves the memorisation of facts, among other skills. Assessing student knowledge of those facts can produce disparate results. The solution is to change the test or, ideally, eliminate it. A medical school supervisor recently advised a professor to write an exam that was less “fact-based” than the one he had proposed, even though knowledge of pathophysiology and the working of drugs, say, entails knowing facts.
Note too the claim, by the National Science Foundation, that progress in science requires a “diverse STEM workforce,” seemingly regardless of how this goal is arrived at. And as if the insufficiently “diverse” scientists previously supported by the NSF, and who between them have racked up a mere 200 Nobel Prizes, were somehow under-performing due to antiquated expectations of actual competence.
Also at Yale, this. Because an “emotional support guinea pig” is now a thing that exists.
Noah Rothman on the cost of universities’ administrative bloat:
In the 20-year period from 1985 to 2005, the number of administrators increased at universities by 85 percent while the number of students and faculty increased by only 50 percent. In that same period, the number of administrative staff ballooned by a staggering 240 percent. It is no coincidence that in nearly the same period… the cost of achieving a higher education exploded. Between 1985 and 2011, the cost of a four-year degree increased by 498 percent while consumer inflation rose by just over 100 percent.
And Toni Airaksinen smells more money being burned in the name of wokeness:
The University of California-Irvine Esports programme is looking to help promote “social justice” in the competitive gaming industry.
Consequently, computer-games enthusiasts will be “required to undergo ‘diversity and inclusion’ trainings.”
As usual, feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.
The Derwent Reservoir, used by the squadron to practise the low-altitude raids, is a few minutes’ drive from Guild of Evil HQ.
The Nazis didn’t consider a small one-man fighter to be any threat, or they’d have had a tighter defense.
Would you be kind enough to provide a source citation (and link) for that assertion?
Seriously?
Yes.
@WTP
Diversity requirements may continue to exist, but they need not be filled from Professor Liu’s students. My point is, if Akron’s program gets a reputation for having less qualified graduates, employers will simply refrain from conducting interviews there.
And they were probably right. The Lancaster, however, had a crew of 7; pilot, nav, bomb aimer, flight engineer, wireless op and a couple of gunners. In fact, the BBMF’s Lanc is the only heavy bomber left in the RAF’s fleet.
The Lancaster, however…
One Merlin good, four better…
C’mon Daniel Ream, dontcha know that males cannot possibly be sexual victims of females, regardless of age? All manly men know you’re supposed to be ready and willing to fuck anything with a heartbeat from the moment your first curly hair sprouts. Having hormone-driven fantasies about your attractive teacher is basically the same thing as actually losing your virginity to her, so quit your crying and man up.
/sarc (obviously, I hope)
I’m sure Feminists will be denouncing this instance of blatant, sexist discrimination by the judiciary shortly.
Any moment now …
Any mo….
@Sherman
And as demand is artificially inflated by diversity requirements, where will supply come from if not from Professor Lui’s classes or similar? And I think you overestimate the amount of due diligence that is done in most businesses, especially those who have to meet tight artificial (and often taxpayer subsidized) demands. You and I may scoff at such a background but HR departments don’t. And their power is still increasing.
@WTP
The point is that Liu has advertised the fact that certain of his students are receiving grades they don’t deserve. Such may occur everywhere, but Liu seems to be proud of it. Even now, employers don’t visit every college or university that has a Comp. Sci. or IT department. It’s easy to scratch Akron from the list of Fall career fairs.
As for HR departments, I would note my son has had a number of well-paid co-ops and internships and always been invited to return, not to mention job offers he’s turned down. For these his only interaction with HR was filling out the start-employment paperwork. He’s always been hired by a project or research engineer.
@Sherman,
You know, I’m almost positive we’ve had pretty much this exact same conversation previously. And again, to some extent we are talking past each other. Yes, it is true that HR does not make the hiring decisions. But they do a good bit of filtering. I don’t recall what your work experience is, but IIRC you’re a pretty high-end kind of guy. You work with people who dot all their i’s and cross all their t’s and they think that’s just the way effective, productive people work. And (assuming my assumptions) you are mostly correct. But in the world of government contractors, where I’ve spent almost half my career twixt contractors for NASA and DoD/FBI/TSA, there are gaps to be filled. And knowing many of the hiring managers and having been somewhat involved in the hiring process, and knowing how little DD is done by virtually all parties involved, I doubt many people will be aware of the professor Luis and similar. Now I agree that the women at the very top end coming out of that program will definitely be harmed because they are far more likely to apply to organizations that do significant DD and they will have their credentials tarnished by association. It used to shock me (but I got used to it) when, being at the tail end of the interview process, reviewing someone’s resume, when I asked a question about some DD type thing, like references (which are essentially useless…or so HR types have told me) or general knowledge of the kinds of programs people with experience are coming from, I would get the indication that the DD wasn’t done and I was the first to ask the question.
I may have invented the emotional support guinea pig in 1975. I even gave it an acknowledgement in my dissertation. I didn’t think of it in those terms. It was more of a babe magnet. Don’t laugh until you try it.
I denounce myself.