(The Center Square) – The University of Michigan is prohibiting diversity statements from faculty hiring after a recommendation by a committee, although the same committee also proposed a rejected recommendation to integrate DEI into teaching.
The school announced in a news release that it will no longer “solicit diversity statements as part of faculty hiring, promotion and tenure.”
When the University of Michigan was reached for comment, director of public affairs Kay Jarvis referred The Center Square to the release.
Provost Laurie McCauley made the decision following “an Oct. 31 recommendation by an eight-member faculty working group” that was commissioned by McCauley, according to the news release.
McCauley did not respond to two requests for comment.
Office of the Provost front desk coordinator Jennie Hafele told The Center Square that she forwarded the request for comment to the Michigan Public Affairs Department.
“I’m grateful for this faculty committee, which spent months soliciting feedback from across campus, evaluating our methods and determining the best course forward,” McCauley said in the release.
“Diversity, equity and inclusion are three of our core values at the university.” McCauley said. “As we pursue this challenging and complex work, we will continuously refine our approach.”
The school’s release states that diversity statements “have been criticized for their potential to limit freedom of expression and diversity of thought on campus.”
Additionally, this is the first institution-wide policy concerning diversity statements at the University of Michigan.
Michigan Professor Chandra Sripada told The Center Square that “DEI statements were contributing to a climate of ideological conformity at Michigan.”
Sripada was one of the eight members of the faculty committee, according to Higher Ed Dive.
“Candidates for faculty hiring recognized that they could be screened out if they deviate from certain kinds of orthodoxies,” Sripada said.
Sripada told The Center Square that diversity statements “also stifle current faculty.”
“If your annual review and promotion depend on demonstrating your ‘commitment to DEI’, you can’t speak openly, freely, and critically about DEI policies and programs or about all the complex social and political issues with which DEI is intertwined,” Sripada said.
“There has been substantial interest in increasing diversity of thought at Michigan,” Sripada said. “I think we are just at the beginning, and there is much more work to do.”
According to the school’s release, the faculty committee “reviewed published literature, considered policies at peer institutions and issued a faculty survey that received nearly 2,000 responses” in order to come to its final three recommendations.
The faculty committee was composed of “individuals with relevant expertise,” and was intended “to explore the use of diversity statements in faculty hiring and promotion at U-M and elsewhere,” according to the release.
“Most responding faculty agreed that diversity statements put pressure on faculty to express specific positions on moral, political or social issues,” the release stated.
“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,” according to the release.
The committee was not entirely opposed to DEI, however, as it also recommended “integrating DEI-focused efforts” into existing teaching, research, and service statements, according to the committee’s report.
Neither that recommendation nor the third recommendation “to bolster training on how best to write and evaluate such [DEI] content” were adopted, according to the school’s release.
The committee’s report stated that “as currently enacted, diversity statements have the potential to limit viewpoints and reduce diversity of thought among faculty members.”
However, not totally against the idea of diversity statements, the report proposes that “well-written” ones “do not necessarily require expression of one’s identity” and “need not express one’s beliefs or stances on socially-charged issues.”
