DEI
Statement
I belong to various organizations that
have been formulating and posting DEI statements. I am not in favor
of posting such a statement because it strikes me as mostly virtue signaling,
defined as, "The practice of publicly expressing sentiments intended to
demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on
a particular issue." (Oxford online dictionary)
My particular concern is when such a
statement is put out by a professional organization whose stated purpose is not
one of politics or social justice but rather the promotion of better teaching. Members of such organizations typically have
expertise in the area of teaching, which qualifies them to promote their own
opinions on pedagogical issues and to put out statements about best
practices. In contrast, mathematicians
and math teachers have no particular expertise on political matters, and they
have no more expertise in issues of social justice than does any concerned
citizen. Putting forth such statements (e.g.,
DEI statements) poses a dilemma: either the statements are self-evident, in which
case they are pure virtue signaling, or they are propositions on which
reasonable people could disagree, in which case they imply a consensus that
does not exist. In fact, striving for a
political consensus among a nonpartisan professional
organization would be antithetical to the goal of diversity.
Here on my personal page, where
political opinions reflect no one's beliefs but my own, is some nonpartisan
political rhetoric meant to persuade rather than to signal. The
following definitions are adapted from sources such as dei.extension.org.
Diversity: the presence of differences including those of race, gender, etc.
Equity: as it relates to math education, it means either (1) equal
opportunity for educational achievement in a given setting, or (2) equal
educational outcomes across groups; whether (1) or (2) is more what is meant
depends on whom you ask and in what context.
Inclusion: ensuring that all participants feel welcomed (this is aimed
especially at previously marginalized groups).
My opinions:
I am very much pro-inclusion. On the issue of equity, I see a mix of pros
and cons. I find diversity largely to be
a non-issue as it relates to math teaching. Here are some details as
to why.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCLUSION is one of the fundamental
things that teachers strive for when aiming to improve their classrooms: they
seek ways to engage students who appear not to be engaged. Insofar
as these students skew toward marginalized groups, general efforts at inclusion
will also skew toward these groups. Regardless, I support inclusive
practices and I think they are an obvious correlate of good teaching.
EQUITY in the second sense (equal
outcomes) isn't anywhere close to attainable right now. One might
consider it a laudable long-term goal; however, efforts aimed directly at
equalizing outcomes are likely to backfire. EQUITY in the first
sense (equal opportunity for value added) is a proposition on which reasonable
people could disagree. Some might argue that public schooling is by
its nature aimed at the modal student, and that outliers such as gifted or
struggling students cannot expect lessons to be aimed at them as much as they
are aimed at the average student. Others might argue that gifted
students represent a potentially large societal payoff (rocket scientists,
etc.) and that more effort, rather than less, should be spent to teach
them. Still others could argue that the weakest students deserve
disproportionate efforts because they have the greatest need. These
are important questions of policy and ethics, but mathematicians and teachers
don't have any special claim on the right view here, and personally, I'm on the
fence.
DIVERSITY seems to me more to be a
description than a goal. Our population is
diverse. That's a fact. We can celebrate
it. We can recognize that diversity of mathematical backgrounds
makes teaching math a lot more
difficult. The goal in most classrooms is not increasing diversity
but dealing with it. The other kind of diversity that DEI statements
aim at is diversity of exemplars: cultural details appearing in word problems,
bits of math history, and the diversity of the teachers themselves. As
teachers, we can’t change our own demographics, so there’s not much point in my
having a position on my contribution to diversity through personal example. About exemplars in our lessons, it is true
that we occasionally get to make these choices in our classrooms, though
cultural references appear much less frequently in math classrooms than in,
say, history or English classrooms. We can, and arguably should,
dress up our examples with signposts of diversity. However, for
those seeking to help at-risk populations, there are much more effective things
we can do.
Improving classroom strategies,
teacher training, curricula and assessments, all of which are done by groups such
as TPSE that I am involved with, have immeasurably greater effect on
marginalized groups (and indeed on all students) than do DEI efforts in the
classroom. Here, at least, I do speak
with some expertise. I don't think there is much justification for
DEI efforts to be mounted front and center on the websites of math education
groups I belong to. These solidarity statements, as they become
increasingly obligatory, lose meaning and, to me, detract from an otherwise
worthy mission.