The Supreme Court of the United States has a record number of women (3), Hispanics (1), and African Americans (1). Six justices attended Harvard Law School. Three graduated from Yale. Four were born in New York, three in New York City. All but one was born in New York, New Jersey or California. Six are Roman Catholics. Three are Jewish.
Is the court diverse?
A Cavalier Daily editorial ("Not by the numbers," Sept. 21), stirred up controversy when it said student leaders should use more than statistics to assess the success of programs intended to encourage diversity. Will Bane, University Judiciary Committee - one of the organizations the editorial was talking about - took issue with two sections of the editorial.
The first said, "These organizations ought to focus on the quality of their recruits and on ways to ensure that new members contribute to reaching the overarching goals of each body." The second quoted, and in Bane's reading endorsed, Honor Committee Chairman Charles Harris, who "looks beyond race as a primary goal but said the Committee is more invested in creating 'stronger and deeper relationships' with different groups at the University. 'We want interested and qualified people,' Harris said."
Bane wrote in an e-mail that he saw "an implication that diversity and quality were mutually exclusive in recruitment ... When viewed in the context of a critical piece on diversity, this struck me as an implicitly racial appeal."\nIn a guest column, Jasmine Jefferson said the editorial "attempted to argue that major student groups ... should focus on 'the quality of their recruits' and focus less on the statistics."
In a letter to the editor, Minority Rights Coalition Chair Heba Tellawi said she saw in the editorial "an implied notion that because certain organizations have made a targeted effort to recruit minority students, the quality is somehow compromised."
When I asked Ross Lawrence, The Cavalier Daily's editor-in-chief, about the editorial - particularly about the "quality of their recruits" line - he said, "I certainly understand the importance of connotation, and you're correct in saying that sentence could have been clearer, particularly in its context. The best defense I can muster there is that it's difficult on a deadline to delve into all the scenarios for an article's subtext before it goes to print. It can be a bit difficult to predict how people will interpret different statements. But it's certainly something to bear in mind for the future."
Bane thought that deadline argument pretty weak. It is. But the rest of Lawrence's explanation is certainly true. It is sometimes difficult to predict how people will interpret things. In this case, I think there was more inferred than implied. The editorial never says diversity is the enemy of quality. It never says statistical measurements of diversity should be abandoned. It merely says those statistics shouldn't be the only measurements. The point of the editorial, Lawrence said, was that while "statistics and aiming for racial parity are important steps to realizing the merits of diversity ... it's the first step, not the end goal."
I believe he's right. And I believe others have said much the same thing. Tellawi wrote in a guest column ("The meaning of 'diversity,'" Sept. 9), "diversity means a difference in ideals, opinions, experiences, beliefs, etcetera." She said it is "extremely important to appreciate diversity, but it needs to be an all-encompassing diversity, with the recognition that a difference in race or gender does not necessarily indicate a difference in experience." She might have added that a similarity in race or gender does not necessarily indicate a similarity in experience. So "diversity" and "race" are not synonymous.
In her guest column, Jefferson wrote, "I understand that statistics are not an ideal way to track anything because they are not always an accurate view of reality, but ... I wonder what alternative ways the managing board would suggest that UJC and other such groups track their success in outreach and improving diversity."
The editorial answers that, calling for something in addition to statistical measurements. "The larger aim must be for students to evaluate their groups critically and consider how each level of their organizations could be improved or modified to better serve the interests of the University community in its entirety."
That's not as easy or as simple as keeping statistics, but added to those statistics, it can help make sure groups are accomplishing their goals and not just making the stats look good.
In short, the managing board should be more careful in its choice of words. And now that folks offended by this poor choice have had their say, perhaps everyone can put more energy toward worthy goals rather than castigating another student-run group that seems to share essentially the same vision.
Tim Thornton is the ombudsman for The Cavalier Daily.
Read More
EDITORIAL: U.Va. needs to promote better artificial intelligence policies
By Editorial Board | YesterdayA better method of controlling AI use in classrooms comes with collaboration and communication — the University should set a clear policy-making process for professors.
PAYNE: U.Va.’s acquisition of the FEI directly harms the children of Charlottesville
By Michael Payne | 3 days agoThe Department of Education rescinded its award to CCS and gave the FEI property to the University instead.
COHEN: Charlottesville must embrace a comprehensive solution to homelessness
By Ryan Cohen | 5 days agoThe city has made several past efforts to reduce homelessness, but the growing number of unhoused people suggests that these temporary solutions are simply not enough.
