Donna Riley, Purdue University’s
School of Engineering Education (PUSEE) head, believes academic “rigor
accomplishes dirty deeds” including “white male heterosexual privilege,”
according to a report by Campus Reform. Huh?
In
the abstract to her article in the journal Engineering
Studies, Riley wrote: “Understanding how rigor reproduces inequality, we
cannot reinvent it but rather must relinquish it.” Huh?
She contends that
rigor “has a historical lineage of being about hardness, stiffness, and
erectness; its sexual connotations—and links to masculinity in particular—are
undeniable.” Riley claims a “visceral reaction in many conversations where I
have seen rigor asserted has been to tell parties involved (regardless of gender)
to whip them out and measure them already.” Huh?
Riley, on a roll,
also averred that academic rigor reveals “how structural forces of power and
privilege operate to exclude men of color and women, students with
disabilities, LGBTQ+ people, first-generation and low-income students, and
non-traditionally aged students.”
She asserted that
rigor can “reinforce gender, race, and class hierarchies in engineering, and
maintain invisibility of queer, disabled, low-income, and other marginalized
engineering students.”
The Boilermaker’s
School of Engineering Education (SEE) leader also said that research shows “a
climate of microaggressions and cultures of whiteness and masculinity” permeate
the field of engineering. She further stated that the discipline harbors
“inherent masculinist, white, and global North bias…all under a guise of
neutrality.”
Global North
bias? I don’t even know what that is. I looked it up- or tried to- and I think
it means that because north is positioned up on maps, people tend to see “it”
first, and that it is also associated more with whiter and wealthier people,
while southerly locales are thought of as harboring poorer and darker-pigmented
people.
Moreover, the
potty professor argued that “scientific knowledge” itself is “gendered, raced,
and colonizing,” and has previously said she wants to be “part of a paradigm
shift” to move “diversity in science and engineering from superficial measures
of equity as headcounts, to addressing justice…” in part by “integrating
concerns related to public policy, professional ethics and social
responsibility.”
Scientific
knowledge is gendered, raced, and colonizing? Perhaps you’re alluding to the
global warming fascists who state “the
science is settled?” Ms. Riley, academic rigor produces quality, not inequality. If we are to survive as a society, we
must leave some disciplines untainted by social justice warrior dogma. You want
social responsibility? Spewing forth preposterous prevarications is inimical to
social responsibility. Designing and constructing buildings and bridges that
don’t fall down is the very definition of “socially responsible.” As is the invention and production of tools,
machinery, computer components and medical devices that save lives and make us
more productive.
Sadly, Professor
Riley is by no means alone in her nuttiness. More and more academics are
speaking out against the evils…of academic achievement. Take Professor Rochelle
Gutierrez of the University of Illinois for instance. She is a math education
professor who believes the ability to solve geometry and algebra problems- and
the teaching of such subjects- perpetuates white privilege. Gutierrez’ views
are laid out in an article published in an anthology for mathematics educators
titled, “Building Support for Scholarly Practices in Mathematics methods.” To
wit: “School mathematics curricula emphasizing terms like Pythagorean Theorem
and pi perpetuate a perception that mathematics was largely developed by Greeks
and other Europeans.” She flatly states that equity in mathematics education
will only be attained when teachers can understand and negotiate the politics outside the classroom.
That’s a capital
idea! Politics hasn’t yet completely and permanently permeated addition and
subtraction, geometry and algebra. One plus one equals two? Who says? The white
European Patriarchy? Is that code for the denigration and marginalization of
single people or those in a polyamorous relationship?
Professor
Gutierrez continued: “On many levels, mathematics itself operates as whiteness.
Who gets credit for doing and developing mathematics, who is capable in
mathematics, and who is seen as part of the mathematical community is generally
viewed as white.” Ms. Gutierrez says mathematics operates with unearned
privilege in society, “just like whiteness.” Egads! I see it now, they are one and the same! How could I have
been so blind? Does sociology itself operate as blackness?
In the anthology,
Professor Gutierrez claims that mathematics operates as a proxy for
intelligence, but asks, “are we really that smart just because we do
mathematics?” Well…
She also asked,
“As researchers, are we more deserving of large grants because we focus on
mathematics education and not social studies or English?” And, she goes so far
as to say that evaluations of math skills discriminate against minorities,
especially if they do worse than their white counterparts. Well…I guess one
could say that evaluations of any skill necessarily discriminate against those
who don’t do as well as their counterparts, regardless of gender, color, or
anything else. Gutierrez also bemoaned the fact that people are “judged by
whether they can reason abstractly.” Quite. Why should a student be “judged” on
their ability to analyze information, detect patterns, and solve problems of a
complex, intangible nature? Why can’t mathematics and engineering students just
ruminate on tolerance, openness, love, and acceptance all semester long? Oh
wait, sorry, those are all abstract concepts.
Gutierrez
purports to be baffled by the fact that the average person doesn’t seriously
question the role of mathematics in society. (I’m baffled by how she obtained
her position as head of Purdue’s School of Engineering Education). Her
solution, of course, is for teachers to develop broader political knowledge, to better prepare them in determining what
learning opportunities work best for their students. (“Well, Hector, I know you
wanted to become an engineer, but I think journalism would be a better fit for
you, Amigo!”).
It is a
dangerous, disingenuous, and sinister road on which we are traveling. One which
can only lead to a fractured society of entitled- and incompetent- citizens
watching helplessly as hope and self-esteem crumble as fast as the nation’s
infrastructure.
When all rigor,
success, achievement, knowledge, communication skill, competence, decency,
reason, restraint and striving are labeled- and thoroughly denigrated- as “racist” or “sexist,” as signs of “white privilege”
or equated with “whiteness” itself, everyone loses. Indeed, human life is
cheapened when these things are mocked and perverted. When the very things that
elevate us, that differentiate us from flora and fauna and transform us for the
better, are considered pointless at best and evil at worst, society has reached
a tipping point.
When “progressive
academics” state that these previously positive attributes are truly
characteristic of only one race, they do grave disservice to all the others.
This is the worst possible form of racism.
And one that I
must rigorously protest.
No comments:
Post a Comment