2020 Diversity? Sure, mostly. I guess...

Diversity? Sure, mostly. I guess...                           

Steven B. Zwickel    

                   April, 2020    

Samuel J. Abrams made some important points in a July, 2019  NY Times op-ed piece “College Grads, Consider Rural Life.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/21/opinion/college-graduates-rural-america.html For a variety of reasons, young college grads want to live in big cities, not in the suburbs or rural areas. I taught undergrads for many years at UW-Madison and have come across the same attitudes about life after college he describes.
     I have another story to share. One of the assignments in my senior-level communication course was for the students to research and write a comparison report on three employers for whom they’d be interested in working after graduation. They were permitted to choose whatever criteria for the comparison they liked, so, in addition to salary, cost of housing, and other criteria, many decided to consider “location” for their reports.      The UW-Madison has long had a well-deserved reputation for a liberal outlook, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise to learn that my students, if asked, would almost certainly claim to be champions of “diversity.” They would insist that they value the contributions of minority group members, don’t discriminate, are unbiased, etc.     To help them research their reports, I would demonstrate in class how to use a variety of websites (such as BestPlaces.net) devoted to comparing demographics of different parts of the country, including things like the cost of living, cost of housing, average snowfall, etc.      We also discussed at length in class the importance of citing credible sources and how to compare “apples to apples.” These are important skills, especially in an age when there is so much misleading information on line. The goal was to have them learn how to use available data from reliable sources to compare things.     The results were interesting and disturbing. When undergrads used location as a criteria in their reports, they often began by explaining that they wanted to live in an exciting “fun” urban setting, which they often described as having clubs, restaurants, artistic venues, and other entertainment opportunities. They followed this by examining population demographics and expressing a strong desire to live where there are more “people my age.”      In other words, they were saying that diversity is fine, as long as the diverse group consists of 20-somethings. They do not see age as a factor in diversity.
At the same time, some of them used education as a sub-criterion under location, because they want to live where there are smart people like them!     After I read and graded their papers, I attempted to demonstrate to them the dissonance between what they said they valued—diversity—and what they actually considered important—living near people like them. I wasn’t sure if they got it, so the following semester I gave the same talk before they wrote their reports, and the results were quite different.     Ageism is insidious, so speak up folks, and don’t let these young whippersnappers get away with hypocrisy!