The University of California said Wednesday that it would stop calling for employment to use the diversity statement. It's a practice that made the campus more comprehensive, but praised by those who said it was criticized by others who said it was against it.
Diversity statements usually ask job seekers to explain how they contribute to campus diversity, such as on pages. Their move from one of the nation's largest higher education systems is because the Trump administration escalates attacks on higher education over diversity programming.
For 10 years, the 10-campus system has been a national leader using such statements as universities are increasingly pressured by people who want more diverse student organizations and faculties.
“Our values ​​and commitment to our mission have not changed,” Janet Reilly, chair of the system's board of directors, said in a statement late Wednesday. “We will continue to embrace and celebrate Californians from a variety of life experiences, backgrounds and perspectives.”
The announcement came as the university faces many direct challenges from the new Trump administration.
Two weeks ago, the administration announced it would end $400 million in a research grant with Columbia University over criticism that the system hadn't done enough to crack down on anti-Semitism. Last week, the Education Department sent a letter to 60 universities warning “potential enforcement measures” if they do not protect Jewish students. Four of the University of California System's 10 campuses (Berkeley, Davis, San Diego and Santa Barbara) received the letter.
And last month, the education division issued guidance that interpreted the 2023 Supreme Court decision to further broadly reduce racially conscious admissions practices and include “racial-based decisions.”
University of California System President Michael Drake did not address the diversity statement in his opening remarks at the Regents meeting on Wednesday. However, he drew a bleak picture of university finances.
The system has paid 8% state budget cuts and is concerned about the threat of curbing federal funding. Like other universities these days, Dr. Drake has announced a system-wide employment freeze.
In a letter to the system leaders on Wednesday, university provost Katherine S. Newman said the regent had directed Dr. Drake to eliminate the diversity statement for all new recruits.
“The requirement to submit a diversity statement may lead applicants to focus on aspects of candidates other than their expertise or previous experience,” she writes. She said, “We can continue to effectively serve our community from a variety of life experiences, backgrounds and perspectives without the need for a diversity statement.”
Even before Trump took office, the diversity statement became lightning.
Conservative critics describe them as “Purchase of loyalty” that limits the diversity of academic thinking. Others saw them as another tool that savvy applicants could use to type the right buzzword.
Some states, including North Dakota, Florida and Texas, have banned them from requesting them or halting them entirely. Amidst the pressure, several universities, including Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Michigan, recently said they would stop asking for them in faculty employment.
“They encouraged performance,” said Stephen Blint, a professor at the University of California, Riverside. “People knew the right thing to say.”
The University of California was sued over a statement of diversity, but the federal lawsuit was eventually thrown out after a judge said the plaintiff had no status.
But for their supporters, the statement was a statement showing how comfortably they were navigating the increasingly diverse student body. The diversity statement does not evaluate beliefs or measure behaviour, said Brian Sousek, a law professor at the University of California, Davis.
Professor Soucek said the university is surrendering to the Trump administration in vain attempts to avoid the president's rage.
“An attempt to appease people who have been made clear about their intentions to destroy higher education because we know that we are now politically naive,” Professor Sousek wrote this week in a letter to teacher leaders.
In an interview, he added, “Please tell me how it worked for Colombia.”
