This is a very short article, useful because it offers quick definitions of the terms in question, and some statistics regarding them. And it's relevant because diuscussions on the ethics of open learning and sharing have been focusing on these issues. But as I posted on Twitter today: "I support these (diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI)), obviously. But why? I don't think DEI is an end in itself, but means to a greater good. But what? Productivity? Resilience? Self-efficacy? Autonomy? Or are there many goods? I think we need a story here." Now of course there was no response to my tweet, but I don't think we've fully addressed DEI until we've addressed the need for DEI. Contrast this, for example, with what I call 'the sementic condition', a similar set of pinciples (diversity, autonomy, openness, interactivity) which are (I argue) in order to assure the veracity and reliability of network-based cognition. Now maybe veracity and reliability aren't your thing, but my point is, something needs to be in place for DEI to be ethical principles, and not just platitudes.
Today: 0 Total: 16 [Direct link] [Share]
