I was going to post the following little comment on J.A.’s manifesto, but I didn’t want to hijack his blog.
To me, psychologists (like me) and professional test developers (like ETS) have failed in a big way by our inability or unwillingness to quantify the kind of diversity that contributes to an optimum educational or business environment. There should be measurable “diversity” markers (e.g., socioeconomic status) that predict the kind of benefits that so many people assume that diversity should yield. Why should we use controversial markers like skin color and gender when there might be an array of more widely acceptable characteristics (e.g., SES, type of high school, demography of hometown, personality traits, life experiences, etc.) that schools and industry could use to create the most effective types of diversity, which would almost certainly include people from a wide range of skin colors, genders/sexualities, and political/religious persuasions.
then again, maybe this would be about as easy as turning lead into gold.
diversity is praised because, among other things, it is a midwife to tolerance/understanding, etc…or something like that.
productive diversity would seem to be one where all come and help understand what ever is before the group from the various angles of their many experiences.
it seems to me, though, that along with the various etcs of the characteristics you list…you would need some sort of harmony marker, or pacifier marker; someone, somemany, who is/are able to be invested and be detached, care enough to work towards something and be disinterested enough to let those things held precious by them be dropped.
it’s late. i’m reading a book that makes me laugh…it’s for my master’s class. “it’s a classic” pygmalion meets shane, meets john wayne, meets cary grant. it’s highly homosocial…highly risible.
by hermit x—Oct 17, 09:27 PM
I find myself thinking “easy as changing lead into gold.” I like the idea of a psychometrics-defined diversity that is both effective and politically expedient (= “almost certainly”). I met an administrator from our alma mater for dinner once a few years ago. He was in Iowa City being courted as a representative of the school by ACT, who showed him what they could do with numbers. He said to me, amazed, “They can pinpoint to the nearest county which students (based on test scores, GPAs, familiarity with the school, socioeconomic status, etc.) are likely to attend our school. With their information, we could focus our recruiting with laser accuracy.” I think what ACT had shown him was essentially a path to what you’ve described, Chris (and I don’t doubt you’ve had at least one similar conversation with the same administrator).
But how in the world could that be writ large into anything other than something so broadly-bourgeois as university recruiting? Most of life isn’t as factory-driven as higher education. I mean, students get into the system through essentially a graduated series of filters. Nearly all take national tests which serves as the first layer; some get filtered at the next layer by their high achievements locally (grades, volunteering, etc.); finally, there are those intrepid students who make their ways by willpower. Past baccalaureate, there’s a series of filters there, too, and they work the same way: tests, local achievement, willpower. But once you’re out of school, you lose the influence of testing. Things work by achievement and by willpower alone.
Testing, I think, is the only thing that can create the sort of diversity you’ve described, because only in tests do schools and employers and governments gather all the necessary demographic information about any individual. Further for it to work, it must be near-universal. That’s a mighty tall order for a post-educational social structure.
Meanwhile, Jeremy believes in the necessity of a priesthood. :)
by greg—Oct 18, 02:53 PM
All that to say, psychologists and test developers haven’t failed in a big way, unless by “failed in a big way” you mean “We haven’t succeeded in establishing ourselves as your overlords.”
by greg—Oct 18, 02:56 PM
yeah, you’re right in that respect. it would require testing of the kind only a few employers really do today. that kind of idea is much more applicable to professional schools and universities.
by chris—Oct 18, 07:20 PM
well, i didn’t mean that there needs to be a priest…but that empathy seems to be a crucial characteristic…which, no doubt you can test for a certain amount of empathy quotient.
but i guess, i’m still not sure about what you are refering to.
i’ll just back to reading mmy student’s essays…one’s from russia, one’s from the ukraine, one’s over 35, another dances in african dancing troops, two are from colombia, one’s from venezuela, three are from georgia, another grew up as a missionary girl in france. 1/3 are latino, 1/3 are african american, 1/3 are caucasian. 70% are female.
in a way, though, this is an utterly unique situation that the admin is working to undo…they don’t want to undo it but they will…they want the school to move from 4tier to 2tier…and as the school moves up the educational ladder, if it’s actually able to, it will become more selective…as it becomes more selective fewer persons from this city will attend. despite the fact that all 50 states are represented in the student body, the real diversity comes from the city residents.
this means to go somewhere…but again. i’m tired. i’ll come back tomorrow and try to pick up.
by hermit x—Oct 18, 08:58 PM
btw, i don’t mean that last post to be snippy…
by hermit x—Oct 18, 09:28 PM
No snippiness registered here.
All I meant in ref. to the priesthood was that’s traditionally a role for mediators/harmony makers/empathizers.
by greg—Oct 18, 10:09 PM
well, i meant it more in reference to the list of my where my students are from and all that.
but, this does not mean that the real work of diversity gets done…most are reserved…they know how to not avoid “offending”...is this a place where the testing would come in? finding a group of students or persons among this already ethincally, and socio-economically diverse (though not horribly so…they are all either solidly working, low middle or middle class…some are non-traditional upper-middle who pissed away their youth) finding the “right” group of people?
but then what? what do you do with this group? what do they do as a group? what do they do as individuals who return to their various social groups that have little to do with the social groups of other students?
by hermit x—Oct 19, 07:39 AM
Whoa. There’s some broken styles up there. I’ll see about fixing that in the morning. (The Textpattern upgrade made a few changes to the way the HTML is rendered.)
Chris, I thought today, while listening to Talk of the Nation (In which Neil Conan was discussing the gerrymandering of congressional districts) that testing isn’t the only place that psychologists can influence how diversity is understood. Censusing might could supply at least a measure of the kind of data needed to do as you suggest. The census doesn’t get us any closer to broaching workplace diversities, but it does perhaps allow for some more sophisticated models.
by greg—Nov 1, 11:19 PM