• Skip to main content
Daily Citizen
  • Subscribe
  • Categories
    • Culture
    • Life
    • Religious Freedom
    • Sexuality
  • Parenting Resources
    • LGBT Pride
    • Homosexuality
    • Sexuality/Marriage
    • Transgender
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Contact
  • Donate

college

Dec 06 2024

Diversity Statements Booted From University of Michigan Hiring Process

The University of Michigan (U-M) will no longer require prospective employees to make commitments to further the school’s “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” (DEI) goals, or diversity statements, Provost Laurie McCauley announced Thursday. Until now, U-M’s affiliates could choose to solicit these statements from applicants, people up for promotion and professors seeking tenure.

The decision comes months after McCauley convened a faculty committee to consider the merits of diversity statements. The group initially recommended keeping such hiring methods — but later changed its mind.

The committee made its first recommendation in deference to “U-M’s commitment to DEI.” By that, it means “the massive amounts of time and money U-M spends on DEI.” The university has poured approximately $250,000,000 into DEI since 2016, according to internal metrics reviewed by investigative reporter Nicholas Confessore, more than half of which has gone toward hiring DEI personnel.

In 2021, the Heritage Foundation found U-M had six DEI officials for every 100 faculty members — the highest ratio of any of the 65 large public universities studied. U-M’s DEI hires continue to outpace its overall faculty growth.

After the school debuted its second DEI program in 2023, the number of employees in the university’s central DEI office, and employees with “diversity,” “equity” or “inclusion” in their title, increased by 70%, finance professor Mark J. Perry told The New York Times Magazine. In contrast, U-M’s faculty has only grown 10% since 2021.

U-M affiliates use diversity statements to maintain the ideological homogeneity the school has worked so hard to achieve. Its Collegiate Fellowship program, for instance, reportedly asks applicants whether they would contribute to DEI by researching “race, gender, diversity, equity and inclusion,” accomplishing a “significant academic achievement in the face of barriers,” or demonstrating “commitment to allyhood through learning about structural inequities.”

But institutional investments don’t always match the opinions of the rank and file. McCauley’s committee changed its recommendation when a survey of more than 2,000 U-M faculty members showed most disliked diversity statements.

The University of Michigan Record reports of the survey:

Most responding faculty agreed that diversity statements put pressure on faculty to express specific positions on moral political or social issues. Slightly more disagreed than agreed that diversity statements allow an institution to demonstrate a commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion by cultivating DEI in the faculty.

The committee eventually recommended to remove diversity statements from the hiring process and, instead, embed DEI principles in their teaching and research standards. McCauley and the school’s Board of Regents elected to ignore the second half of this recommendation, deciding to do away with diversity statements all together.

It’s a big decision, signaling U-M’s willingness to evaluate the effectiveness of DEI on campus. By most available metrics, it’s a bad investment.

In his October exposé on DEI at U-M, Confessore noted such policies, including diversity statements, help U-M pursue racial diversity without breaking the law.

Michigan doesn’t allow public schools or employers to hire based on racial preferences and, in June 2023, the Supreme Court ruled colleges could no longer use race as a determining factor in which students get admitted. U-M subsequently discovered it could use diversity statements to legally identify candidates from marginalized groups. In a federal funding request for the Collegiate Fellows program, U-M noted that “a high percentage of fellows [with] demonstrated commitments to DEI are likely to come from traditionally marginalized groups.”

But screening students this way isn’t entirely successful. U-M has a more racially diverse faculty now than when DEI started, as well as higher rates of Asian, Hispanic and first-generation student enrollment. But enrollment among black students, which U-M has been trying to increase since the 1960s, has remained relatively steady between 4% and 5%. Michigan has a total black population of 14%.

Nor have DEI policies made the school a better place to learn. In a 2022 survey of students and faculty, most reported a less positive campus climate and a decreased “feeling of belonging” than before DEI. Confessore writes:

Students were less likely to interact with people of a different race or religion or with different politics — the exact kind of engagement DEI programs, in theory, are meant to foster.

Nor have DEI policies protected marginalized students from racism and hatred. Between February 2023 and June 2024, U-M received 67 student complaints of harassment and discrimination. “An overwhelming majority involved allegations of antisemitism,” according to Confessore.

U-M only investigated one of these complaints — an error so egregious that the Civil Rights Office at the Department of Education found the university had failed to comply with its Title VI obligations.

U-M bet the farm on DEI. Now, it must reckon with the consequences of its bad investment. Let’s pray other schools find the courage to do the same.

Additional Articles and Resources

Hurray for Walmart Abandoning DEI Programs and Policies: ‘Biggest Win Yet’

Oklahoma Bans DEI in Universities and Government Agencies

Despite Supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Actions, race Will Continue to Influence Who Gets in College, ‘Wall Street Journal’ Reports.

Written by Emily Washburn · Categorized: Culture, Education · Tagged: college, DEI, education

Mar 25 2019

“Conscience is the Most Sacred of All Property”

Being invited to The White House is a singular honor. You ascend the stairs to the State floor for a tuneful arrival. That’s because, as part of protocol, “The President’s Own”, otherwise known as the Marine Orchestra, is often there to greet you with beautiful music.

Members of our Armed Forces officially greet you, and when the large mahogany sliding doors open to the East Room, you are escorted to a row of chairs. The famed Gilbert Stuart portraits of George and Martha Washington capture your attention immediately, flanked by portraits of Theodore Roosevelt on the right and William McKinley on the left.

The event in the East Room on Thursday was unlike any I have attended. The overwhelming majority of the guests were 21 years of age or younger. The excitement was palpable 30 minutes before the President arrived. The iPhones were as ubiquitous as the great portraits and chandeliers that adorn that majestic room. I think it possible that every conceivable photo was taken in that half hour.

The students came from all 50 states. All are undergraduates at American colleges and universities: the Ivies, the large public research institutions, small liberal arts campuses, the gamut.

Of a sudden, the buzz in the room died to the level of crickets, and “Hail to the Chief” wafted from the foyer. Into the great room came the leader of the free world, the iPhones duly aloft to capture his every step and handshake.

He warmly welcomed the guests; said there was a major problem facing the country on college and university campuses, namely a routine and noxiously predictable censorship of conservative students, many of them men and women of faith; and he declared that an Executive Order he was about to sign would direct his Cabinet agencies to review all federal funding flowing to colleges and universities that deign to conflate, reduce, and inhibit free speech and assembly.

The President asked three of the students on the riser standing behind him to speak. Their stories were poignant and compelling:

Ellen Wittman attends Miami University of Ohio. She is the president of that college’s Students for Life chapter. Ellen put out little wooden crosses to remember the innocent preborn whose lives had been snuffed out by abortion. She was allegedly told by school administrators that in order to put out the crosses, she would need to put up so-called ‘trigger warning’ signs for fear that she might offend other students with her pro-life views.

Kaitlyn Muller of the University of Nebraska in Lincoln stood at a table for a conservative student group and was allegedly harassed by a graduate student lecturer and called a ‘neo-fascist.’

Polly Olsen of Northeast Wisconsin Technical College passed out Valentine’s Day greeting cards with sayings on them such as “Jesus loves you.” She was allegedly told she had to stop and move to a ‘free speech zone’ at the school so as not to offend anyone.

The crackdown on students who are imbued with a traditional worldview continues apace even as those college and universities — private and public — continue to consume and absorb giant amounts of taxpayer funding – ‘billions and billions’ in the oft-repeated phrase of the President.

The Trump/Pence Administration, in issuing the Executive Order, is keen that the present censorship stop and has developed a matrix and a catalyst for such a collegiate censorship review.

It is a bold and refreshing decision.

In 2018, Young America’s Foundation, on whose board I am honored to serve, won lawsuits against the University of California, Berkley and Kennesaw State University in Georgia. Both the suits were major First Amendment victories. There are other lawsuits now pending against the University of Florida and the University of Minnesota.

Championing free speech is a winning issue all around. Americans of goodwill on both sides of the proverbial public policy isle desire a wide swath for robust campus debate over a host of ideas.

The Founders envisioned and encouraged such debate for the healthy functioning of our matchless constitutional republic. The philosopher Richard Weaver once wrote that “Ideas have consequences.” Indeed they do.

It is why the father of the United States Constitution James Madison famously and cogently wrote: “Conscience is the most sacred of all property.”

President Trump’s Executive Order furthers that most important of all Madisonian first principles.

Written by Timothy S. Goeglein · Categorized: Free Speech · Tagged: campus, college, free speech

Mar 20 2019

Kentucky Legislature Passes Campus Free Speech Bill

By overwhelming majorities in the state Senate and House, Kentucky lawmakers have passed a campus free speech protection bill aimed at the state’s public (i.e., government-owned) universities and colleges. Governor Matt Bevin is expected to sign it into law.

The Campus Free Speech Protection Act guarantees:

  • That no speaker can be disinvited because their views are controversial.
  • Speech cannot be restricted to small “free speech zones” or impeded by large “security fees.”
  • No permits will be required for spontaneous speech, although schools may charge fees for the use of facilities such as theaters for pre-planned events.
  • Schools must pay damages to those whose free-speech rights are violated.

Such bills are becoming more popular because of recent campus speaker events around the country that have been marred by violence, threats of violence, or merely the school administration’s ideological opposition to the speaker. Speakers such as Ben Shapiro, Milo Yiannopoulos, Ken Ham and Dennis Prager have all, in recent years, experienced this phenomenon.

Eleven states in addition to Kentucky, have passed laws in recent years to protect free speech on campus: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Utah and Virginia. A model bill drafted by the Goldwater Institute has formed the basis for several of those state laws.

In addition to state legislatures passing free speech bills, President Trump has recently promised to sign an executive order that will tie federal research funding to universities with how well they guarantee free speech on campus. The President’s action followed a recent event on the campus of the University of California at Berkeley where a student on a public sidewalk recruiting for a conservative student organization was punched in the face by another student who disliked the organization. The incident was recorded on video.

Related resources:

Parents Guide to Religious Freedom on Campus

The Freedom to Speak Your Faith

Written by Bruce Hausknecht · Categorized: Free Speech · Tagged: campus, college, free speech

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Page 2

Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | © 2026 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.

  • Cookie Policy