[untitled]
6 comments
I think the correct framing is that the NSF itself has become more political (while trying to pretend otherwise). The excerpt you provided is a good example: the focus is on DEI, but they try to look impartial by using less political sounding "broader impact". That kind of language is only used in more recent documents, it is not like NSF had this "mission" since Vannevar Bush. Even the word "STEM" is mostly a political neologism [1] often used by DEI initiatives [2].
Also, it is not just "Equity", but also "Latinx", "Intersectional", and "Underrepresented". These are clearly reminiscent of the parlance of particular political faction.
Some do argue that DEI initiatives are not political, but I think these denials themselves look suspiciously politically motivated.
[1]: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=%22STEM%22&yea...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science,_technology,_engineeri...
Also, it is not just "Equity", but also "Latinx", "Intersectional", and "Underrepresented". These are clearly reminiscent of the parlance of particular political faction.
Some do argue that DEI initiatives are not political, but I think these denials themselves look suspiciously politically motivated.
[1]: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=%22STEM%22&yea...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science,_technology,_engineeri...
For context, this is not the well-regarded CSPI (Center for Science in the Public Interest) that's been around for 50 years. This is the right-wing "think tank" CSPI (Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology) that was created about a year ago.
Well, I have not read the entirety of the article, but the graphs are interesting and seem to support the claim in the headline pretty well (especially for the politicization part).
This organization doesn't pass the sniff test. This is a passage from their mission statement on their own front page, complaining about the "great awakening":
> In the last decade, white liberals in America have shifted far to the left on issues of race, gender, and sexual orientation. Ideas once seen as radical, like defunding the police and gender being on a spectrum, are embraced by more people than ever before.
> In the last decade, white liberals in America have shifted far to the left on issues of race, gender, and sexual orientation. Ideas once seen as radical, like defunding the police and gender being on a spectrum, are embraced by more people than ever before.
The counterpoint to the argument of "excessive politicization" is "the personal is political". There will forever be a tug of war between left and right as to what constitutes acceptable public policy discourse.
> Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
So the fact that grants are including words like "equity" is in no way a surprise. What's interesting to me is that this article fails to mention the NSF's broader impacts focus at all. A plausible hypothesis for why grants have been focusing more on "equity" is that NSF has always had this mission, and academics have just been getting better at fulfilling NSF's mission. I think this is closer to the truth than the proposed hypothesis that the mission of the NSF is changing.