RE: Meritocracy is Dead - Diversity and Privilege in Higher Education
Sweeping statements like "Meritocracy is dead at our universities" is rather aggressive in my opinion. I see a lot of absolutes being used here and it feels like that is being done to trigger some shock value in me.
Defending only your side as ferociously as you do is a turn off. It borders along the lines of racism, even if I agree with you, while I am also positive that was not your intention. You are obviously out to make some good points here, I can tell you are very eloquent, and very smart, but most folks will assume there is a bias when they detect such anger.
That anger and your consistent condescending tone throughout this post is not helping your case here, it is working against you. Your responses to critical thought applied to your paper by others is also rather aggressive, which is not going to draw anyone to debate, because it really feels like you want to fight about this more than anything else.
So while I am not going to argue with you, I can tell you what I would rather see, and why I personally think it would help your argument.
I think everyone could learn a lot by examining both sides of the argument in a much more serious fashion. I found you blatantly bashing the other side of the argument nearly resorting to name calling in some cases.
If you were to write about both sides of this debate in a more neutral fashion, you could more carefully draw lines and conclusions that allow people to think and make the decision for themselves. Probably even in your direction. This post clearly feels like someone is trying to think for me.
I have a feeling that is what @heretickitten is saying here too.
People who side with you may respond really nicely to this sort of work, and you can use it to rally your cause, if that is what you are really after. But if you are really trying to convince others to come to your side... If you are trying to create real change... Then it is going to take a more careful style of leadership and guidance.
You seem very passionate about it and you seem good to fit this bill. So I think it is something you should work on and consider Steemit comments as your peer review. Not as some sort of challenge for you to smash.
If you worked or lived in the educational institution as long as you say you have, then this should not be anything new nor offensive. This is simply constructive criticism because we like your work, and we want to see more.
Now that really was a well-crafted and balanced response, thank you. I actually felt good reading that because it addressed the text in a critical yet substantive manner.
Admittedly, I was not going for a neutral academic tone, nor did I address the genuine and legitimate concerns that lead to the institution of affirmative action/equal opportunity policies by people who meant well. True too that I was rather stringent in my condemnation of non-meritocratic practice, I was not going for a treatment of both of sides of the argument.
Meritocracy in other respects is most certainly alive and well in some corners of higher education. Grading for example (if one is fortunate enough to have an educator or supervisor who is not adamantly opposed to different opinions). Also within my network of friends at the universities, I have noticed that the liberal arts departments are much prone to a non-meritocratic mindset discussed than the natural sciences departments. As to my spirited defense of the piece, I can understand how in this context it comes across rather vehement, but logical fallacies deserve to be called out as such.
All of my writing for public consumption to date has been strictly academic with a rare excursion into fiction; this is admittedly the first social media / blog platform where I have even considered posting a written text that reflected a personal opinion and it is a learning process. I will definitely consider your constructive criticism when crafting future opinion posts.
Thanks again!