Make no mistake — the financial sector is important. Properly distributed, resources (especially financial) provide the necessary infrastructure to address existing problems. That is, things should not be at the end of the discussion, but at the beginning. Minor things can happen without them.
The question is, what do we do with it when we have it?
A year later George Floyd was assassinated, the third phase continues to grow: New job opportunities are created, new jobs have been green, and job advertisements speak volumes about anti-racism practices. But we have made some progress — and I want to say that it is all important — now we are moving to an unknown destination.
The first question for the new section 4 is, Are We Here? What should we do, and how do we know if we are making progress? Have we done a good job of recruiting more computer scientists in the next five years? Few would doubt that this is a great sign. If enrollment of students with a permanent disability doubles in the next two categories of graduate students, we should be encouraged.
Even here we have to be careful and think about Goodhart’s law: When metric wants to be a goal, it is no longer a useful metric.
If the low number of black or brown scientists shows that organizational culture is biased or unacceptable, then it is correcting the numbers alone it is not a way to change the culture. Additionally, if you just change the amount of black and brown faces in public, you probably haven’t changed much.
But this is not entirely true. Obviously enhancing facial diversity in public is a section of purpose. Because the problems are so great, the disruptive treatment that multiplies the numbers at once can create a difficult mass. And the sheer number of pressures can make early-career scientists from oppressed areas feel more distant from their programs and activities. In addition, the culture is changing.
Perhaps the fourth step should include a more detailed analysis of how we live. Any innovative approach that seeks to address cultural problems requires a similar (or over-the-top) tool to see if this is effective. Non-slip roads are made with good intentions (from section 1 to 3).
Even our numerical powers are useless if we do not choose its purpose. Constraint: Have we, in each of these areas, reviewed the problem we want to address? And by that I mean, I mean something more well-known than “dealing with racism.”
These and other areas can only succeed if we come back with an unfortunate truth: Racism is dangerous because it hides itself in the public eye, often in ways that are difficult to identify and make rules. What they are difficult to understand does not mean that they are meaningless. The opposite can be true: Racial segregation is so complex that it invades the universe and destroys people from within.
This decay is seen in the way in which some primary fields are received when they come out of the mouth in relation to others.
It depends on who is the expert, and why we need the signals from others but not others.
They serve on governing bodies and on committees to promote and promote them.
It tells us why students with similar skills or interests are taught differently, which is why some are encouraged to take on more challenging tasks that can grow.
It explains why one scientist is known as a polymath while the other is known as a dilettante in the same field.
It’s about how technology is built, often in social and non-social spaces. (I may not like IPAs, but I can benefit from the interactions that are linked after work.)
It could also be how black educators are supported by students who want to encourage them, or how black health professionals are supported by patients who are trying to help them.
Source link
