Real Diversity

For John, BLUF:  The right committee is better than some genius.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

From The New York Times we have an interview with Law Professor Lani Guinier.  It coincides with the release of her new book, The Tyranny of the Meritocracy:  Democratizing Higher Education in America.

I admit to being a fan of Professor Guinier from before the time that newly elected President Bill Clinton dropped her like a hot potato after saying he would nominate her for Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.  It was not an act of courage on Mr Clinton's part.  Ms Guinier was not a "quote queen", as suggested at the time.  What she was was a very innovative thinker in the area of eliminating segregation.  She was an optimistic person, a person with hope for the future.♠

At any rate, the Reporter is Tamar Lewinfed and the article is "Lani Guinier Redefines Diversity, Re-evaluates Merit".  This is a topic we talked about, from a different vector, a few days ago, at this blog post:  "American [Academic] Aristocracy".  There we looked at the spin The Economist was putting on what it saw as a new American elite class.

In looking at our meritocracy, Ms Guinier notes that:

The score on your SATs or other exams is a better predictor of your parents’ income and the car they drive than of your performance in college.

Ouch!  That doesn't speak well for our diagnostic tools.  And, as one would expect, there are consequences for this current approach.

The credentials of our testocracy legitimize a new elite, and give them an inflated sense of their worth.  They believe that they are entitled to power because they got it through their individual merit.  Our testocratic meritocracy has let those already at the top of the heap rule, and keep their power, without any sense of moral or political accountability.

The cynic in my wants to use the Bob Hope line, "You mean like Democrats."

But, the issue is more important

Diversity is not simply a matter of having people who look different sitting next to each other but learning in the same way.  What I’m trying to introduce into the conversation is the power of collaboration, of bringing together people who bring different kinds of skills to solving a problem.  That diversity can empower creative ways of learning.

Studies show that groups made up of the highest-performing individuals are not as good at solving complex multidimensional problems — like designing environmental policies, cracking codes or creating social welfare systems — as groups with a mix of skills, backgrounds and ways of thinking, even if the individuals in the group are not all high performers.  That’s important, since this world has a lot of complex problems we need to solve.

So, bringing a diversity of backgrounds makes some sense.  Perhaps there was some wisdom in the William F. Buckley, Jr. quip:

I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.

What is the tag line Greg Page uses, "If everyone is thinking alike someone is not thinking."

And, I am reminded of an article in Linked In by retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Taylor V. Beattie, about learning leadership from a Nun.

Real diversity, not diversity by artificial separations.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Unlike our current Attorney General, who seems to be a person of making the Machine work for him.