The re-election of Donald Trump has left many progressives worried about the future of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programming.And with good reason.
Yet, as a head of a school in New York City, I’ve come to recognize an ironic truth: DEI programs, as traditionally practiced, can be divisive, placing students into rigid roles that can drive them apart instead of bringing them together.Which is why a new approach to diversity is needed, one that avoids the politicized dogma that now defines the DEI landscape.At our school, Birch Wathen Lenox, we have embraced a different model – one that prioritizes constructive dialogue, intellectual rigor, and respect for diverse viewpoints.
We avoid an identity-based curriculum that paints broad swaths of students in a single light.Instead, we promote a unified community that values diversity of thought, experience, and shared principles. Conventional DEI frameworks are long-known for their problematic principles.
Students are often labeled “oppressed” or “oppressors” — the latter saddled with the burden of dismantling historic injustices, the former implicitly encouraged to view their futures as defined by these same structures.This binary view denies any sense of agency and reduces personal growth to predetermined identity categories.
Also worrisome: Traditional DEI efforts often ignore the long history and continued threat of antisemitism. The impact of traditional classroom DEI programs goes beyond identity categories.DEI in schools can push a single set of ideological views as virtuous.
Topics like “White Supremacy Culture” — which bafflingly paints habits such as “punctuality” as racist — and mandated ethnic “affinity groups “ separate students, despite scant research supporting their effectiveness.In some cases, academic standards have even been lowered to address perceived inequities in achievement that further reinforce damaging stereotypes rather than supporting students’...