UF presidential search is getting underway (U Michigan prez is the sole candidate) update- merged

Maybe you should try watching Living Single instead

 

Everyone knows what HR does or what it believes it has to do.
You seem to be the last to know that DEI has been pushed out the window of most sane corporations.

 

The problem is that 5-10 years ago, everyone was for DEI, including UF. It’s like tearing down a statue of Thomas Jefferson because he had slaves. It’s true, but it also ignores the context of the time.

UM had a DEI office when he arrived, and it didn’t when he left. Seems like that alone should be evidence in his favor. https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/27/us/university-of-michigan-eliminates-dei-programUniversity of Michigan will end its DEI program, citing Trump executive order that ‘began to reshape higher education’ | CNN

- - -

But for me, the much bigger point is that these political hot buttons are such a minuscule part of the job of president that they should never be driving the whole bus. We’ve allowed politics to metastasize in our brain so completely that each side now has its own way to prepare freaking french fries. It’s messed up.

We should remember that UF rose up the ranks without a centralized state committee meddling in all its affairs. Not that universities can’t be biased or make mistakes -they can and do! - but political parties are famous for these errors. If the state wants any chance of helping UF, it needs to work with the university, not against it. And certainly not use it as a forum for signaling ideology.

 

I actually think if the UF brand wasn’t doing so well and if we sucked at sports (like the SOW recently) then the state probably wouldn’t care

 

If rising up the rankings wasn't evidence of success for them ... good luck with that. But this is not their motivation. They see schools as places where people are taught to hate them and its simply a matter of adjusting the programming, and that this is apparently a top down thing.

 

The New College thing doesnt really support this thinking. In fact, they basically turned it into a sports school to hand out scholarships to various fail kids. I think the turnover at UF presented them with an opportunity, first with Sasse and now with this. Their brains are even more fully cooked now, and with DeSantis on his way out, you have various vultures circling to try to make an impression on Republican primary voters.

 

Keep in mind the current chair of the bog literally ran dei at J.P. Morgan chase lol. Why can’t people admit this was just political dumbshittery? There is no way an objectively more experienced and successful candidate applies for the job now. All so some dipshits at the bog can have 5 minutes of fame on Twitter.

 

DEI is being relabelled and reformatted to fly under the radar of public scrutiny and comply with current executive & court orders -- NOT pushed out the window. It's public face is gone but the core concepts remain.

And while the focus now is on merit-based systems, there will be a parallel of diversity efforts within organizations to make sure "merit" doesn't result in the three isms: favoritism, cronyism, and nepotism.

 

I didn’t know that DEI was wearing a new mask.
All I’ve noticed is big biz fired DEI…companies like Boeing cancelled it and fired that department to save money.

 

Much like AA, imo, DEI started out noble. The govt adds stats and soft quotas. Over time, it became its own enterprise that needed constant bogeymen. Just another power center to go with the unions (in govt). Merit based is often the gold standard, but friends and family is more prevalent. Now add on vet preference, etc, etc

 

I think you highlight a critical issue here, sota. Does DEI reduce bias or introduce it? Let’s look at the example of orchestras moving to blind auditions, when the realized seeing the people altered their impressions of the music. In one way, this is straight up DEI looking to increase participation from women and minorities, who were getting excluded based on their looks. In another, this was a straight up merit based intervention, looking to reduce bias in evaluating the best musical talents.

DEI definitely has its roots in the right place, reducing bias against individuals. Hence the bias trainings that many programs included. Certainly some of these programs went too far, introducing bias in the other direction. Any program that made people admit that they were racist because they were white was totally out of bounds.

I think we have to realize that merit must play a central role in our decisions, and at the same time admit that many of our systems for judging merit are routinely corrupted by our biases.

 

Really good points. I think it’s misplaced here, because I think the issue with Ono is about power-by-label, not truly about DEI, or woke, or anything else.

 

A woman in Ohio, employed in some state (I think state) government position just won a USSC case in which she was clearly discriminated against because she was a white heterosexual. The 1964 Civil Rights Act was not put into law to apply to only a specific minority group, but to all, irrespective of race, skin tone, religion, sex, etc.

Over the past few years:
Diversity was applied without wisdom. Thus, no diversity of ideas.
Equity was applied so as to come to equal outcomes irrespective of merit, effort, ability, etc.
Inclusion was applied without consideration of principles, morals, ethics, or any standard at all.

DEI was never needed in the USA post Civil Rights Act. Why? See Tiger Woods when he was young, particularly who is rabidly cheering him on at Masters. See Oprah whose followers have been suburban white women for decades. See Obama who was elected twice. See others, like Dr. Ben Carson, LaBron, Kobe, Morgan Freeman, Shaq, MLK, Thomas Sowell, Hershel Walker, etc.

DEI was a policy with a so called "good intention" but without a measurement of its results.

We are beyond that and those who want to force DEI are on the wrong side of history.

 

I know this is a tangent, and I'll preface it by saying that I don't agree with tearing down statues of Jefferson because we can honor a bad person who did great things, but citing the context of the time is quite generous. Jefferson knew slavery was wrong.

 

That's not exactly correct. She originally lost the case because the Sixth Circuit required a member of a majority group to meet a more stringent test. The Supreme Court ruled that was in error. She should be held to the same standard under the statute as anybody else. The case is being remanded to determine whether she suffered discrimination using the proper standard. The Supreme Court did not hold or find that she was discriminated against. I agree with the decision. The statute's text does not require that members of a majority group satisfy a higher standard.

False and hypocritical.

 

And the folks who scream the most about "merit" are the least interested in trying adhere to it when they're the ones in power. See, e.g, the entire Trump administration & the DeSantis administration's hiring of university presidents.

 

"Merit" becomes code for "let me hire whoever I want, for any reason, without question."

 

I just received this email. Not sure what to make of it:
Dear UF family and friends,

As many of you are aware, the State of Florida Board of Governors on Tuesday declined to confirm Dr. Santa Ono as president of the University of Florida. This action is unprecedented in the Board of Governors’ 22-year history.

Dr. Ono is one of the most accomplished academic leaders in the world. He most recently served as president of the University of Michigan, one of nation’s top ranked public universities. He is a member of the National Academy of Medicine and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has led three globally recognized research universities. He has a distinguished record of academic excellence, executive leadership, and public service.

We had a national search led by a committee composed of faculty, the student body president, administrators, alumni, other stakeholders and a representative of the board of governors. The committee unanimously selected Dr. Ono as the recommended finalist in early May.

On May 27, after a thorough public interview and discussion, the UF Board of Trustees unanimously selected Dr. Ono as the 14th President of the University of Florida. Our Board of Trustees stands by the integrity of the search, the strength of the candidates it produced, and the principles that guided our work. It also continues to stand by its selection of Dr. Ono and fully supported that selection at the Board of Governors confirmation meeting.

The Board of Governors failure to confirm Dr. Ono is deeply disappointing to our Board of Trustees.

We believe Dr. Ono was uniquely qualified to lead this University at this moment. The symbolism and substance of a sitting president of a university as prestigious as the University of Michigan choosing to come to the University of Florida should not be lost. It was a powerful signal that Florida’s model for higher education — grounded in merit, academic excellence, institutional neutrality, and accountability to students and taxpayers — is earning the trust and interest of top-tier leaders across the country who are ready to advance that vision. Still, we remain focused on our mission and united in our commitment to this institution.

Let me be clear: this moment, while disappointing to our Board of Trustees and many of you, will not diminish the University of Florida’s momentum, with or without Mori Hosseini.

We remain firmly committed to our students, our faculty, our staff, and our role as a national leader in public higher education. Our responsibility now is to move forward with strength, purpose, and an unshakable belief in UF’s future. We will continue to pursue the kind of bold, principled, and forward-thinking leadership that Gator Nation deserves.

Go Gators,

Mori Hosseini
Chair, UF Board of Trustees
----------------------------------------------
Is Hosseini threatening to resign?

 

Wow. He is the staunchest defender of DeSantis. This is a huge turn of events.