#Mathfest Community-Engaged Learning in Math panel. PIC Math has been mentioned several times. A lot of people utilizing CEL for capstone courses. Great for authentic career experiences.
Dr. Diaz Eaton up to Good Trouble
@mathprofcarrie.bsky.social
892 followers 488 following 4.3K posts
🌈Latina/x neurospicy disabled prof #modeling #computation #AI #data at SLAC, researcher #evolution #ecology #networks #daaaamn #SocialSystems #equity and #highered, Executive Director @rioscommunity My writings are my own. Any pn she/they/él/elle
![Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise
that the United States is built upon “systemic and structural racism” and advanced
discriminatory policies and practices. Proponents of these discriminatory practices have
attempted to further justify them—particularly during the last four years—under the
banner of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”), smuggling racial stereotypes and
explicit race-consciousness into everyday training, programming, and discipline.
But under any banner, discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin is,
has been, and will continue to be illegal.
The Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard4 (SFFA),
which clarified that the use of racial preferences in college admissions is unlawful, sets
forth a framework for evaluating the use of race by state actors and entities covered by
Title VI. The Court explained that “[c]lassifying and assigning students based on their
race” is lawful only if it satisfies “strict scrutiny,” which means that any use of race must
be narrowly tailored—that is, “necessary”—to achieve a compelling interest.5 To date,
the Supreme Court has recognized only two interests as compelling in the context of
race-based action: (1) “remediating specific, identified instances of past discrimination
that violated the Constitution or a statute”; and (2) “avoiding imminent and serious risks
to human safety in prisons, such as a race riot.”6 Nebulous concepts like racial balancing
and diversity are not compelling interests. As the Court explained in SFFA, “an
individual’s race may never be used against him” and “may not operate as a stereotype”
in governmental decision-making.7
Although SFFA addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies
more broadly. At its core, the test is simple: If an educational institution treats a person
of one race differently than it treats another…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:lr7kdznqo64sd6vhcp6x2old/bafkreibio2gjg7jv2z4cmg5gcjsglsbniscw63rt2splujuperpblhgbn4)
