Thread by @realchrisrufo on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "EXCLUSIVE: @LukeRosiak and I have discovered that the DEI director of UCLA Medical School, Natalie J. Perry, plagiarized multiple long passages in her PhD dissertation, which is her only published academic work. The plagiarism here is shocking. 🧵
UCLA Med School has been in the news recently for promoting ideology about "Indigenous womxn," "two-spirits," and "structural racism." A guest speaker praised and two residents championed "revolutionary suicide." The DEI director, who advances "anti-racism," is Natalie Perry. But according to our exclusive analysis, Perry's career is predicated on academic fraud. Her PhD dissertation plagiarized material from ten other papers, which she did not attribute or put in quotations. The examples are brazen: Throughout the paper, Perry copies and pastes large sections of text from other authors. When she has to rely on original work, she often lapses into serious errors and basic grammatical problems. The paper—of course—was about DEI at universities."
DEI Meets Plagiarism at UCLA - "Recent headlines about UCLA School of Medicine suggest that the institution has lost its focus. Instead of brushing up on organic chemistry, its students were subjected to lessons on “Indigenous womxn” and “two-spirits.” Future doctors had to take a class on “structural racism” and were led in a “Free Palestine” chant by a Hamas-praising guest speaker. The school made plans to segregate students by race for courses on left-wing ideology, and two of its psychiatry residents championed “revolutionary suicide.” Why has the school charted this course? One reason is its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion ideology. UCLA has a DEI program called “Cultural North Star,” and at the medical school, it is led by Natalie J. Perry, whose official title is Cultural North Star Lead... The scale of the plagiarism suggests that Perry lacks both ethics and competence and raises questions about academic programs that push DEI... Entrepreneur Mark Cuban recently argued that DEI policies don’t necessarily lower an organization’s expectations. But for Harvard, UVA, and UCLA Medical School—where Perry earned her master’s, Ph.D., and DEI position, respectively—this is evidently not the case. These institutions have dramatically lowered expectations for favored groups and pushed a cohort of “scholars” through the system without enforcing basic standards of academic integrity. Ultimately, Natalie Perry is to blame for her misconduct. But these institutions of higher learning share some fault for permitting such shoddiness to stand unchallenged"
Thread by @aaronsibarium on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "NEW: In 2021, MIT hired six high-level DEI officials. Two of them now appear to be serial plagiarists. One official, Tracie Jones-Barrett, copied an entire section on "ethical considerations" from a classmate in her Ph.D program. Her dissertation's title? "Cite A Sista."🧵 In 2021, MIT welcomed six new deans of DEI, one for each of the institute's main schools, as part of a "DEI Strategic Action Plan" launched the previous year. The plan pledged to "make equity central" to the university "while ensuring the highest standards of excellence." But according to a 71-page complaint filed with the university on Saturday, at least two of the six DEI officials may not be living up to those standards: In their doctoral dissertations, Tracie Jones-Barrett and Alana Anderson copied pages of material from other scholars. In her 2023 dissertation titled "Cite a Sista," Jones-Barrett, MIT’s deputy "equity officer," lifts a whole section on "ethical considerations" from Emmitt Wyche III, her classmate in Northeastern University's Graduate School of Education, without any sort of citation. The section is one of several long passages taken from Wyche's 2020 thesis, "Boyz in the Hoods: (Re) Defining the Narratives of Black Male Doctoral Degree Completers," which does not appear in Jones-Barrett's bibliography. Anderson, who served as the diversity czar for MIT's computer science college until last year, when she left to become Boston Beer Company's inclusion and belonging program manager, likewise copied copious material from other scholars. Her 2017 dissertation, "#BLACKONCAMPUS: A Critical Examination of Racial and Gender Performances of Black College Women on Social Media," lifts over a page of material from Mark Chae, a professor of counseling at Pillar College, who is not cited anywhere in her dissertation. "It would have been nice to at least get a citation!" Chae told the Washington Free Beacon in an email. "Anderson seems quite comfortable in taking credit for large portions of another writer's scholarly work." Anderson, who held DEI posts at Boston University and Babson College before coming to MIT, lifts another long passage from Jarvis Givens, a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, without an in-text citation. The omissions appear to violate MIT's plagiarism policy, which states that scholars must cite their sources any time they "use the words, ideas, or phrasing of another person." In total, the two diversity deans lifted about 10 full pages of material without attribution, according to the complaint, as well as dozens of shorter passages sprinkled throughout their theses. Like former Harvard president Claudine Gay, Anderson even stole language from another scholar's acknowledgments, copying phrases and sentences used by Khalilah Shabazz, now a DEI official at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, to thank her dissertation advisers. The lift was executed clumsily: Anderson's acknowledgments contain several typos not seen in Shabbaz's, including missing words and commas and a lack of subject-verb agreement. Saturday's complaint is the latest in a string of plagiarism allegations against campus diversity officials. Since Gay's resignations, DEI officers at Harvard, Columbia, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the UCLA have been accused of research misconduct. The accused administrators have not been publicly sanctioned by their universities, which have either declined to comment on the allegations or issued statements in support of the officials. The complaint against Anderson and Jones-Barrett may be harder for MIT to brush aside, however, given its high-profile efforts to distance itself from DEI in the post-October 7 era. MIT said this month that it would no longer require DEI statements from candidates applying to faculty positions, making it the first elite school to axe the practice. It also led the way in restoring the SAT requirements axed by many colleges in an effort to boost diversity. The pushback has come largely from MIT faculty and been driven, in part, by a sense that DEI programs excuse and even encourage anti-Semitism. An April article in MIT's faculty newsletter noted that an event on "Jewish inclusion" had whitewashed the rhetoric of the school's pro-Palestinian protesters, who have occupied campus buildings, called for "Intifada revolution," and allegedly chanted "death to Zionists." "Jewish students," a blurb for the DEI event read, "are encountering much of the same discomfort that other minorities face on campus and in the world, in that they don't feel heard or acknowledged." The two dissertations at issue are strikingly derivative, cobbled together from classmates, online sources, and even a book's dust jacket, and at times read like replicas of their unattributed source material. Jones-Barrett's summary of her dissertation, for example, is nearly identical to the summary Wyche provides of his own. Both papers use "semi-structured interviews" to "gather insights" from black graduates of Ph.D. programs about their "subjective experiences" of "meaning-making," or, as Wyche misspells it, "mean-making." The primary difference is that Wyche's study deals with black men, while Jones-Barrett's deals with black women. "This study, the first of its kind[,] uses Black Feminist Thought as a framework to explore and investigate how Black women at Ivy League graduate schools of education make meaning of thriving," reads the first sentence of Jones-Barrett's dissertation, which is missing a comma. "There are limited studies that center the voices of Black women at Ivy League graduate schools and there are no studies that look specifically at Ivy League graduate schools of education." Jones-Barrett, who has taught courses at Harvard Extension School and was initially hired as the DEI czar for MIT's humanities programs, also poached a passage on "potential research bias" from Wyche—now a DEI consultant who on LinkedIn calls himself as a "status quo disrupter." He's not the only classmate she plagiarized: On p.1 of her dissertation, she lifts an entire paragraph from Scott Fitzsimmons, who earned his PhD in education from Northeastern, without attribution, swapping out "rural EMS leaders" for "Black women in graduate programs." Anderson, meanwhile, lifts several paragraphs from a 2016 ThinkProgress article about her alma mater, Boston College, from which some of her study's interview subjects were drawn. That plagiarism undercuts her effort to prevent the school, to which she refers with a pseudonym, from being identified—a possible violation of the study's consent form, which promised participants that no "identifying information" would be disclosed. Anderson—who runs her own consultancy that offers "scientifically-based" DEI programming—also borrows three sentences from the dust jacket of Ebony and Ivy, a 2013 book by MIT historian Craig Wilder, who is only cited in one of the sentences (without quotation marks). Like many of the authors plagiarized by Gay, Wilder defended Anderson's decision to copy his work, writing in an email that he didn't think a citation was necessary. "I cannot imagine why anyone would cite a dust jacket, nor do I see the urgency of criminalizing the failure to do so," Wilder told the Free Beacon. "I'm honored," he added, when other scholars "find inspiration from my publications.""
Fourth Black Female Harvard Scholar Accused of Plagiarism Amid Assault on DEI Initiatives - "Harvard Sociology assistant professor Christina J. Cross was accused of plagiarism in an anonymous complaint to Harvard’s Office of Research Integrity, conservative activist Christopher F. Rufo reported in the City Journal — the fourth Black woman at Harvard who studies race or social justice to be accused of plagiarism. The allegations against Cross mark the fourth in a rapid series of anonymous plagiarism complaints of varying severity lodged against Black women at Harvard amid a growing right-wing attack against diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education. Cross follows former Harvard president Claudine Gay; Sherri A. Charleston, Harvard’s Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer; and Shirley R. Greene, a Title IX coordinator at the Harvard Extension School, who have all faced plagiarism allegations since December."
Clearly, this just shows how much racism and sexism there is against black women when white men are as bad or worse, and even though the left wingers have been openly proclaiming that they'll try to weaponise plagiarism accusations too and the only attempt they've made is Bill Ackman's wife, and that's a bad attempt too, they're tons of examples out there
gail shulman on X - "Let's not ignore your racist, sexist mission to discredit as many Black women as you can. You could choose to investigate white male professors for plagiarism (and I assure you there are plenty of them) but you focus on Black women. I can't wait till someone investigates you."
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ on X - "Newsflash: One of my sources investigated white social-justice scholars at Harvard, but did not find plagiarism in their work. This is not dispositive, nor a large-scale survey, but the initial result suggests the strong possibility of a disparity in behavior, i.e., copy-pasting."
Moderately Deplorable Diva on X - "You can assure us there are many white, male plagiarizers? So why aren’t you exposing them?"
gail shulman on X - "I'm too busy smashing the patriarchy."
Moderately Deplorable Diva on X - "Well, exposing white male frauds should right in with your project then."
When did universities' zero tolerance for plagiarism become zero tolerance only for plagiarism by white straight cis men?
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ on X - "One of the ironies to this accusation is that I have explicitly asked my sources to review the work of white and Asian scholars and, thus far, the verified plagiarism cases have been predominantly from black women. This is not dispositive, nor is it a systematic study, but it is not implausible that CRT/DEI fields would have higher rates of plagiarism, particularly in specified demographics, given that these fields are heavily populated by affirmative action policies and have lower scholarly standards that more rigorous disciplines."
AmishDude on X - "There’s another factor. The people that you’ve focused on have administrative positions. Those in the DEI/CRT fields tend to be attracted to admin. Typically admin isn’t filled with the best scholars but social climbers."
guwinster on X - "Those in DEI fields are also less likely to believe in academic merit or that successful people (particularly white people) succeed academically because of merit. Because they don't believe in academic merit, it should be no surprised they have low academic integrity."
Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ on X - "Let's not ignore the pattern: This is the fourth black female CRT/DEI scholar to be accused of plagiarism at Harvard. We need further research, including a control group of more rigorous fields, but initial reports suggest that the grievance disciplines are rife with fraud."
Roger Kimball on X - ""Grievance Disciplines," indeed. Many of these people major, if but covertly, in grievance studies. It fuels their narcissism as well as their anger."
Michael Nayna on X - "People aren't going to like this but it's an obvious pattern. It boils down to the more (intersectional) oppression categories one's identity has the less scrutiny applied to thier work. A result of DEI culture. Poke around the work of Indigenous scholars, it gets wild..." *crazy video of woke socialist drivel and demanding to be paid to grievance monger*
Yale Tells Hopeful Scientists: You Must Commit to DEI - "Want to be a molecular biologist at Yale? Well, make sure you have a ten-step plan for dismantling systemic racism. When making hires at Yale’s department of molecular biophysics and biochemistry, faculty are told to place “DEI at the center of every decision”... every job advertised on the site links to a DEI “rubric” that tests candidates’ “knowledge of DEI and commitment to promoting DEI,” their “past DEI experiences and activities,” and their “future DEI goals and plans.” The questions are designed to find out how they would infuse diversity, equity, and inclusion—a focus on race, gender, sexual orientation, and other categories of “marginalization”—into their work... The assessment puts the thumb on the scale for those with progressive sensibilities. Scientists earn a high score in the category of “DEI knowledge” by showing they understand the “specific challenges faced by underrepresented minorities”—a criterion likely to favor those with a strong faith in the concepts of microaggressions, implicit bias, and systemic racism. Diversity statements raise serious issues about free expression, and they also signal an ill-advised shift in priority—away from disciplinary excellence and toward social activism."
Want to Get Hired by Columbia? Put DEI Before Teaching. - "Columbia is using an “evaluation tool”—strikingly similar to the Yale rubric—that mandates hiring committees assign more weight to DEI than teaching, and to give DEI equal weight to research. The tool, designed by the Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, tells faculty to give each candidate up to 50 points, with DEI comprising 15 of those points—the same amount as their research. An additional ten points each are awarded in the areas of teaching and service... if Columbia search committees follow the advice of their administrators, they would rank an average researcher with strong DEI credentials more highly than an outstanding researcher who expresses skepticism about, say, segregated graduations. (Meanwhile, the worst thing any scholar or scientist could do for their job prospects is to focus on diversity of thought in their mandatory DEI statement. Don’t even think about using the word color-blind. If that describes your approach to diversity—as it does for Columbia graduate and Free Press contributor Coleman Hughes, for example—keep it to yourself.) If the “tentifada” protesters who took over Columbia weren’t enough to put prospective students off the Ivy League college, sliding academic standards might just be. Perhaps one day Columbia will again be a serious institution"
The DEI Eradication Must Extend to K-12 Schools - "“DEI must DIE.” Elon Musk posted this simple message on X, formerly known as Twitter, for the world to see on December 15. Thankfully, it seems much of the world is agreeing with him... these are excellent developments. But real victory will not be achieved until reforms reach K-12 schools, where DEI policies have fundamentally transformed them from centers of learning and discovery into apparatuses of retribution, resentment, and shame... Presented as the optimal way to close achievement gaps and improve the overall school environment, DEI instead conditions administrators, board members, teachers, and staff to openly embrace prejudice... In Jefferson County Public Schools in Kentucky, the bias is noticeably clear in how it defines “diverse.” According to its racial equity policy, diverse is “pertaining to any and all cultures that are NOT heterosexual, male-centered, white, Western and/or Christian.” When the district runs programming for diverse students, or prioritizes hiring diverse staff, it is easy to picture who does not qualify. “How to be Anti-Racist" author Ibram X Kendi illustrated this mindset when he wrote, “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” Nothing should be seen as more sinister in a K-12 school context than the enthusiastic implementation of discrimination based on revenge. Yet, many districts have written equity policies that permit and encourage this vile practice. In Virginia, Falls Church City Public Schools’ Equity Vision Statement declares that it is “Persistently, unapologetically, and consistently providing more time, attention, support, effort, resources, advocacy, and energy to those groups who have historically received less.” The district desires to undo historical discrimination by redistributing educational resources based on skin color, as well as the past treatment of groups. In Vermont, Essex Westford School Districts’ equity policy states that it works “to recognize and undo the harm of centuries of systemic inequalities and oppression” and distribute “resources, power and decision making to marginalized groups or individuals in order to redress marginalization.” Defining privileged groups as predominantly white and male, the district has enshrined shame and retaliation in its official policy. Experts in gaslighting, many K-12 schools have been tragically successful in convincing the public that inclusion is exclusion. Resurrecting evils reminiscent of the Jim Crow era, districts promote the long-discredited – and illegal – practice of segregation through race or ideologically based affinity groups. Hamilton County Schools in Tennessee contracted with a consultant for $50,000 to facilitate an “educators of color” teacher affinity group. California’s Piedmont Unified School District has a program geared toward training kids to proselytize the “inclusive” practice of affinity groups and the celebration of collective identities, adding, “When we don’t acknowledge differences, we are centering whiteness.” In New York, Rochester City Public Schools openly discriminate against Enlightenment values. It states in its Racial Equity Action Plan that the district will “work toward ensuring that all [district] educators will demonstrate fundamental understanding and commitment to valuing the importance of race and class consciousness.” The district includes these “fundamental understandings” in its hiring process as well. In Rochester, being inclusive means discriminating in favor of neo-Marxist thought."
Opinion | For the sake of academic freedom, universities should rethink their use of diversity statements - The Washington Post - "One 2021 study found that about one-third of job postings at elite universities required them. Now, however, some in academia are starting to express second thoughts about this practice. In April, Harvard Law School professor Randall L. Kennedy urged abolition of DEI statements, arguing that they amount to “compulsion” and “ideological litmus tests.” Not long after Mr. Kennedy’s article appeared, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology became the first top university to voluntarily end their use. The decision came after extensive consultations among all six of the school’s academic deans. MIT’s president, Sally Kornbluth, explained: “We can build an inclusive environment in many ways, but compelled statements impinge on freedom of expression, and they don’t work.”... they stoke what Mr. Kennedy, a self-described “scholar on the left,” who formerly served as a law clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall, called “intense and growing resentment” among academics. Not surprisingly, 90 percent of self-described conservative faculty view the statements as political litmus tests, but so do more than 50 percent of moderates and even one-quarter of liberals... Because the criteria for acceptable DEI statements are often vague, jobseekers must do the work of anticipating the ideological and political preferences of university administrators and faculty, who are disproportionately left-leaning... Harvard University’s Bok Center for Teaching and Learning included a list of guiding questions including, “Do you seek to identify and mitigate how inequitable and colonial social systems are reinforced in the academy by attending to and adjusting the power dynamics in your courses?”... In one faculty search at University of California at Berkeley, around 75 percent of applicants were screened out of consideration — irrespective of criteria such as teaching ability and research skills... The last thing academia — or the country — needs is another incentive for people to be insincere or dishonest. The very purpose of the university is to encourage a free exchange of ideas, seek the truth wherever it may lead, and to elevate intellectual curiosity and openness among both faculty and students. Whatever their original intent, the use of DEI statements has too often resulted in self-censorship and ideological policing. Fundamentally reconsidering them could actually strengthen DEI, by placing it on a more sustainable basis — intellectually and politically"
Meme - "Modern half a billion dollar movie productions are made super carefully in order to please this specific person *fat woman with multi-coloured hair, big ugly glasses, a black upper lip and ugly top*"
Zᴇᴚo on X - ""your game is not inclusive enough!!"
Us: "haha look, I'm a monkey""
Pirat_Nation 🔴 on X - "They want gay monkeys, idk 🤣"
bingbongbingy on X - "Probably change the monkey to a strong black female because monkeys are offensive to black peoples"
Candace Owens Trends For Hours After Dems Demand ‘Black Woman’ For Supreme Court - "The BLEXIT founder was recently mocked on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” in a racially-charged sketch, essentially for being black and having views SNL apparently believes are unacceptable for a black person"
From 2022
Our conversations are losing individuality, linguists say - "Conversation and speech patterns are increasingly lacking individuality, as people grow more likely to echo bromides and jargon made fashionable by business, academia and activism, according to linguists at Lancaster University and the University of Liverpool. People are "increasingly adopting each other’s speech patterns to be more socially inclusive," the team found, suggesting that the "dramatic change" could be due in part to an "institutional turn towards corporate social responsibility (CSR), and ideologies such as Equality, Diversity and Inclusion," also known as DEI. The mockingbird-esque tendency was more noticeable among those with higher levels of formal education and among people who do not do manual labour, according to the researchers, whose findings were published in the journal Applied Linguistics. "This increase is not found in workplaces where these ideologies are not institutionalized and routinely encouraged," said Vittorio Tantucci, senior linguistics lecturer at Lancaster University. The researchers studied over 1,600 British conversations over a 20-year-period, while controlling for creativity, age, class, gender, context, dialect, and intra-generational speech. "Over time, this form of engagement, known as resonance, has increased mostly among people in higher social grades, including people in leading managerial positions in the corporate world, doctors, university lecturers and politicians""
"Diversity" leads to less diversity
Universities' crazy, stupid love … for diversity - "Perhaps the dumbest article to recently appear in the formerly distinguished U.S. journal Science was a June 27 piece entitled “Radical women-only hiring policy improves diversity at Dutch university.” That is saying something, since under the guidance of its editor-in-chief for the past five years, Holden Thorp, the journal has veered away from strict and critical science reporting toward the promotion of political ideology, producing a lot of drivel in the process. Thorp was perhaps chastened by his brief, scandal-plagued career as chancellor of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, which may have led him to believe that faculty, and sometimes students, were not to be trusted. (While he was UNC chancellor, he had university administrators sent around to check on classroom teaching, for example.) As a result, the recent approach at Science has been that higher education is inherently suspect, and needs to be reined in. Specifically, Science began endorsing and promoting critical social justice dogma, arguing that systemic sexism and racism — including the notion of white supremacy — were endemic in the sciences and somehow intrinsic to such things as teaching and research in physics, and supporting wherever possible politically motivated impositions (now often discredited) of “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” on free speech, hiring and promotion in academic scientific disciplines. Legalized academic gender-based discrimination is not new. Universities in Canada now advertise positions open only to candidates who identify as women or non-binary. But the current Science report describes how the Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), which specializes in engineering science, announced in 2019 a more comprehensive and more radical policy. For the first six months of recruitment for permanent academic jobs, only female applicants would be considered. The legality of the program was questioned by the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, which complained about the method, but not the goal. The university amended its draconian measure in 2021 to apply to only departments where less than 30 per cent of the faculty were women, and reduced the number of women-only endowed positions. Guess what? After five years under the new policy of recruiting mostly women, the number of female faculty at TU/e increased (although, as it turns out, only moderately, from 22 per cent to 29 per cent). Shocking! If they had limited applications to only people under five-foot-five, one might have similarly expected that overall the faculty would get shorter. Nevertheless, Science deemed this result sufficiently newsworthy to publish an uncritical, and laudatory, report about it. The article stressed that TU/e had had the smallest ratio of female professors to male professors in the Netherlands. The implication was that this reflected some underlying inequity that needed to be fixed. However, TU/e is an engineering university, not a liberal arts college, and engineering is a field that traditionally has attracted few women. For some reason, in fields like engineering, as opposed to, say, teaching, or health care, social justice advocates feel a compelling need to ensure that academic departments match the background demographics of the population. Could it be that women simply prefer other fields, as numerous critics have suggested? We won’t know, because new policies are designed to enforce numerical equity independent of the pool of applicants, gender preferences, or the qualifications of those applicants. Indeed, nowhere in the reporting of this bit of non-news were the issues of quality, merit or qualifications seriously analyzed. Tellingly, the only place where the issue of qualifications arose was in a comment from the university president, who said many women were surprised to be headhunted. He argued that this suggested they would not have considered themselves qualified and would not have applied on their own. He went on to support the idea that such self-assessments by women are unreliable, so discounting these (along with the possibility that they might not meet all of the job criteria) would not compromise quality. (Nothing was said of men who may also be too timid to apply because of a lack of self-confidence. Indeed, to suggest that this is uniquely gender-related is an unfair stereotype.) This patronizing attitude is not good for women, or for universities. It suggests that women cannot compete on an open playing field in STEM studies and need special assistance. That may be true, but no evidence is provided that gives empirical support for draconian policies like this. And of course, such policies unfairly penalize male candidates. As if to add insult to injury, all new female recruits at TU/e receive grants of €100,000 ($147,000) to support their research, as well as additional mentorship to help them build their careers. Any males who actually get hired must surely feel like the second-class citizens that they are. That this is lost on academics and administrators at places like TU/e, who have been so barraged by the notion that demographic equity is essential, was made clear by a distinguished scientist in the U.S. who reported to me about a lengthy conversation she had with a colleague from the Netherlands. Her colleague kept repeating the mantra: “but it is not discriminatory against men — because we did not take positions from men, we just created new positions, which are designed for women.”"
We're still told that diversity is about giving everyone an equal chance and removing barriers
So much for Europeans not being woke
Clearly Lawrence M. Krauss knows nothing about science
