(1) I agree with Leigh Palmer that I would like to know more about what
"diversification" means and what its benefits are. Otherwise I fear it may
be just another "buzz word."
The "diversity" buzz-word has been very popular on our campus for the past
several years, and after all that time I still don't understand it. On one
hand we say we cherish "diversity" and seek to embrace students and faculty
with diverse views. On the other hand we have declared "zero tolerance" on
some issues and state we will have none of it on our campus. On the
surface, the things for which we show zero tolerance (racism, sexism, etc.)
seem like good things for which to have zero tolerance, until you try
defining it and enforcing it. For example, if someone wants to make the
statement... "Hey, we are going overboard on some of the "politically
correct" language around here. Can we lighten-up a little?" ... all of a
sudden that person is racist or sexist and the "extreme diversity people"
want to lynch him. I have come to the conclusion that the diversity people
welcome all types of diversity only as long as they agree with it.
I suppose the AAPT is thinking of a different definition of diversity... or
are they? I just can't tell what it means.
(2) I am not sure whether I totally agree with Leigh about not wanting to
"politicize" AAPT. Probably this is another matter of definition, but let
me give an example of how some politicization of AAPT could be beneficial to
those of us in education.
When we try to decide the breadth and depth of coverage for physics in our
curricula, we often need all the help (clout) we can get. Although this is
true for our major programs that crank out physicists, it is especially true
for our teacher education programs and for our general education programs.
Teacher education always seems a "battle" between the scientists (advocating
science credit hours) versus the education folks (advocating
teaching-methods credit hours). It is true that NSTA has helped carry the
torch, but they might need more support. When we have lobby for strong
physics preparation for physics teachers we always point to NSTA. The
rebuttal we often get is... "Okay, we know what NSTA says, but that's one
organization. Tell us what APS or AAPT or any other professional physics
society says." And the answer is that they have said precious little.
So, there are areas where some clear thought and the resulting specific
policy statements (recommendations?) can definitely help us as we try to
convince non-scientist administrations, etc. what ought to be done. Without
this type of support, individual faculty members or small departments will
often get accused of "empire building." Charges of "empire building" or
"self-serving" are also levied against bigger organizations, especially
professional societies, but local administrators have a much more difficult
time refuting the statements of an organization like AAPT than they have
refuting the statements of one person such as Michael Edmiston. In these
situations I can use more support.
Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D. Phone/voice-mail: 419-358-3270
Professor of Chemistry & Physics FAX: 419-358-3323
Chairman, Science Department E-Mail edmiston@bluffton.edu
Bluffton College
280 West College Avenue
Bluffton, OH 45817