You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Love the idea of "unveiling hidden curriculum" and also "recognizing contributions to hidden [diversity and equity] work", and that first step of recognizing what is hidden and more importantly getting those with power to recognize it, seems like a challenge. Admitting there is hidden curriculum in the first place is harder for those who are wedded to the culture/stories/head-figures which inspired their careers, and those are often the ones who do the teaching and head the departments. Especially in a scientific field where experts like being experts and are less excited about reframing what they thought they knew. In other organizations I've worked for, paradigm shifts happens because certain people retire. How do we get around that? It's great to have a roadmap like the Cronin paper that academic departments can use to begin the work of decolonizing their institutions and creating an anti-racist culture. How can we apply this roadmap in order to increase our self-awareness of existing colonial lenses as individuals, as small groups of invested community members, and as a larger U Maine organization without preaching to the choir?
Did I not realize or or did I just choose not to think about how so many famous people in the history of science (and other areas) got their fame and achievement only because they had the privilege and wealth to unburden themselves of labor and force it onto slaves? John Green talks about this in The Anthropocene Reviewed: "It’s no coincidence that the scientific revolution in Britain coincided with the rise of British participation in the Atlantic slave trade and the growing wealth being extracted from colonies and enslaved labor." Hearing that was the first time I'd thought about it- that was two weeks ago.
How can DEI committees ensure accountability?
How can we move beyond talking points of land acknowledgements but still do the science we need to do? The Cronin paper suggests collecting data only where you are invited. How practical is this advice and could there be unintended consequences of disproportionately limiting students over already established (and less diverse) faculty or limiting the ones who choose to respect this guideline and those who don't get to sample wherever they want?
Love the idea of "unveiling hidden curriculum" and also "recognizing contributions to hidden [diversity and equity] work", and that first step of recognizing what is hidden and more importantly getting those with power to recognize it, seems like a challenge. Admitting there is hidden curriculum in the first place is harder for those who are wedded to the culture/stories/head-figures which inspired their careers, and those are often the ones who do the teaching and head the departments. Especially in a scientific field where experts like being experts and are less excited about reframing what they thought they knew. In other organizations I've worked for, paradigm shifts happens because certain people retire. How do we get around that? It's great to have a roadmap like the Cronin paper that academic departments can use to begin the work of decolonizing their institutions and creating an anti-racist culture. How can we apply this roadmap in order to increase our self-awareness of existing colonial lenses as individuals, as small groups of invested community members, and as a larger U Maine organization without preaching to the choir?
Did I not realize or or did I just choose not to think about how so many famous people in the history of science (and other areas) got their fame and achievement only because they had the privilege and wealth to unburden themselves of labor and force it onto slaves? John Green talks about this in The Anthropocene Reviewed: "It’s no coincidence that the scientific revolution in Britain coincided with the rise of British participation in the Atlantic slave trade and the growing wealth being extracted from colonies and enslaved labor." Hearing that was the first time I'd thought about it- that was two weeks ago.
How can DEI committees ensure accountability?
How can we move beyond talking points of land acknowledgements but still do the science we need to do? The Cronin paper suggests collecting data only where you are invited. How practical is this advice and could there be unintended consequences of disproportionately limiting students over already established (and less diverse) faculty or limiting the ones who choose to respect this guideline and those who don't get to sample wherever they want?
Recommend: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/watching-a-life-on-our-planet-or-how-i-ruined-david-attenborough-for-myself/
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: