It could be theorized that the use of diversity in public education could create a negative and disadvantaged atmosphere for the native white and native black American school students. This might occur because the use of diversity as it is practiced today also refers to the inclusion of non American cultural ideals. This could cause some potential hardships for the native white and native black American students who have been reared under the traditional American values and belief systems. This may not be the most politically correct point of view in our society today but nonetheless it could be a true statement. The American culture is the real substance of the American nation and diversity undermines the culture of this country by forcing rules for the equal acknowledgement of foreign cultures into this great land called America. In the Brown case, the Supreme Court ruled that race could no longer determine a child’s right to attend any particular public school. The ruling in the Parents case dispute also followed this same notions that race alone could not be the determining aspect, because of its broad brush approach in achieving diversity in public schools. The court decided there was no need to resolve whether racial diversity produced better academic or social outcomes. The court seemed to be more concerned with the use of racial classifications as the main issue for determining diversity, by stating that this method is not narrowly tailored to the extent for reaching diversity in public schools. Conversely, the 5/4 slit decision by the Supreme Court does give some glimmer of hope to the proponents of positions that see racial quotas as the indicator that diversity truly exists in public schools. The question is: What are your recommendations for local school board policy and practice with respect to diversity? Well, some suggestions to the local school boards would be to reel-in the presumed power of entitlement for the concept called diversity. It is suggested that the diversity department in public school districts should be pruned down to a statistical branch of the human resource department. Often the diversity department is also in charge of areas like race, sexual and other forms of employment discrimination concerns. This type of structure could create an atmosphere for conflicts of interest issues to arise. It could be recommended that a complete restructuring and reduction of the diversity department specifically in regards to discrimination and employment. This widespread practice of allowing the diversity department to act as a scrutinizer of employment practices could be an accident waiting to happen. It is wrongly assumed by some employers and employees alike that, the diversity department is in some form a protected class area of an organization. It can be argued that the employers who allow the diversity department to dictate its employee demographics could result in lower productivity and increased employee relations problems. Research evidence also indicates that a diverse workforce is most often a divided workforce as well (Kearney 2001). The idea of diversity started out as a noble and honorable thing to do, but today diversity is perceived as a right and not something that should be earned. Diversity also lays the breeding ground work for the development of lazy attitudes towards being conscientious about ones job performance. Employees may tend to believe that they don’t need to perform or even be competitive at their jobs; they might believe that through diversity they have a right to have a job regardless of any other factors. It has been widely reported and assumed that our differences help make us stronger as a society. However, research is suggesting that diversity may cause some to become uninvolved citizens. This is indicated in “a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam, famous for ‘Bowling Alone’, in his 2000 book on declining civic engagement, has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charities and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous community settings. This study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings†(2007 Boston Globe News). The author explains further that people in more diverse communities tend to ‘distrust their neighbors, regardless of the color of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television(2007 Boston Globe News). Authors and researchers are also reporting the good news about diversity in its efforts to open doors for talented individuals who may have been previously overlooked. Some research facts indicate that homogeneous communities fair much better than the more diverse ones. In addition, it could be said that diversity has become tainted by the misapplication of ‘political correctness, to racial and ethnic hypersensitivity and to group favoritism and it has done so in a way that really undercuts the candor and completeness in reporting of controversial diversity-related issues such as race, affirmative action, immigration, gay rights and feminism’ (Bercovici, 2002). The notion that diversity is strength or in some form strengthens the community or institutions it servers is countered by investigations that suggest ‘Diversity, unlike merit, is, in and of itself, neither a strength nor a weakness†(Kearney 2001). Interestingly, a cursory review of literature suggests many plausible disadvantages to the practice of diversity. It would be easy to create a linkage between diversity in its totality and racial diversity. Some opinions, that the practice of diversity as a whole thrives from the fears of racial diversity and the desire to be politically correct for the American society. Frank Bellamy, Writer Examiner.com (Youngstown Public Schools & Education) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JR_GuUJhbA&feature=player_embedded
Being exposed to different view points and ideals is not a bad thing How is diversity earned? I wonder where you got the stats on that, because it sounds like the type of thing that was said when affirmative action was put in place. The American worker is more productive now then it's ever been and our job market is more diverse (with those allowed to work in it) then it has been in the past.