Do you agree with laws banning DEI?
Read and think about these two articles we will call 1) Smith (technically, Bailee Hill wrote the article, but it’s basically former DEI trainer Erec Smith’s arguments, so we’ll call it “Smith” for short), and 2) McNair. 
“Former DEI trainer sounds alarm on ‘useless’ trainings: ‘Detrimental… to minorities'”
Subtitle:  Erec Smith tells Jesse Watters the left is calling out racism where none exists:  “If you’re making money off racism, the last thing you want is for it to go away”
By Bailee Hill, Fox News, August 29, 2023Links to an external site. (please call this article “Smith” in your essay)
“Alabama’s anti-DEI bill would undermine higher education”
By Lily D. McNair, Alabama Reflector, March 20, 2024Links to an external site. (please call this article “McNair” in your essay)
(The text of both articles is on this page below the assignment explanation.)
1) Give the major argument(s) for BOTH articles (Smith and McNair).  
(Do NOT summarize the entire articles; you won’t have enough space.) (6 points each, 12 points total.)
2) What do you think?  Choose the ONE commentator you agree OR disagree with more, and why. (5 points.  If you can’t choose either, explain why.)
3) Do you think DEI is a worthwhile thing?  (3 points.  Or if you can’t really come down on one side, say why you can’t. Just share and explore your thoughts.)
Structure the essay like this with separate paragraphs:
Intro paragraph establishing what happened in Alabama and that this is symptomatic of a national push against DEI training, that you will be talking about Smith’s and McNair’s arguments and then finishing with your opinions.  (I must see where this essay is going by the last sentence of this paragraph.)
Paragraph describing Smith’s arguments in your own words.
Paragraph describing McNair’s arguments in your own words.
Paragraph describing your opinions about one article’s arguments, informed by its arguments.
Paragraph exploring your thoughts on whether DEI is a worthwhile thing, with a short concluding sentence or two wrapping things up.
Criteria for Success
What I’m looking for:
I want to see a calm, accurate restating of 1) Smith’s AND 2) McNair’s main argument(s) in your own words.  In your essay, to shrink your word count you may simply say, “Smith argues….”, “McNair says…” etc.  I know who they are, and don’t need any further background information, so save words.  
When I say “restating”, I mean that you paraphrase. Essays that essentially offer a stitched-together patchwork of quotes from the authors’ text (as opposed to you paraphrasing their arguments in your own words) will lose points.
I want to see a calm, thoughtful write-up about what you think about ONE of these articles (for example, cite the argument you agree most with), and why.  If you can’t agree/disagree with either author, explain why in detail.
I want to see an essay written by you, not by any third party or AI tool.  AI-generated submissions will get a zero score and/or an F in the course.
I want to see a thoughtful response to a classmate that is also civil in tone.  
I want to see paragraphs.  This is an essay, not a blog post or a YouTube comment.
I want to see college-level writing in tone and organization.  That means you make an outline before writing, then proofread after you write, and finally use Grammarly or Microsoft Word’s spell checker to check writing mechanics (i.e., spelling, grammar, punctuation).  Be careful NOT to overrely on Grammarly (e.g., letting it adjust your writing tone) or it may trip my AI checker. 
I want to see basic writing conventions followed in terms of grammar, spelling, punctuation etc.  Writing mechanics constitute 10 of your 20 points maximum, so submissions that are clearly unproofread jobs written at the last minute will only get half credit.  See Grading Rubric below for specific points allocations and deductions.
What I’m NOT looking for:
I DON’T want an overview of the structure of the articles.  I just want the main argument(s) that are related to this assignment calmly summarized.
I DON’T want a first draft all in one paragraph that reads like a blog post, that was hurriedly dashed off in one sitting without proofreading or spell-checking.  Do due diligence, and don’t leave this essay to the last minute.  I can tell if you did.
TEXT OF THE ARTICLES, FOLLOWED BY GRADING RUBRIC:
SMITH ARTICLE:
“Former DEI trainer sounds alarm on ‘useless’ trainings: ‘Detrimental… to minorities'”
Subtitle:  Erec Smith tells Jesse Watters the left is calling out racism where none exists:  “If you’re making money off racism, the last thing you want is for it to go away”
By Bailee Hill, Fox News, August 29, 2023Links to an external site.
Courtesy https://www.foxnews.com/media/former-dei-trainer-sounds-alarm-useless-trainings-detrimental-minoritiesLinks to an external site. 
A former diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) trainer sounded the alarm on what he sees as a far-left ploy to ensure fairness in the workplace, arguing the initiative is a matter of “optics” and remains “detrimental to minorities.”
Former diversity trainer Erec Smith joined “Jesse Watters Primetime” Monday to discuss why he believes the strategies are ineffective and even “useless” within corporate culture. 
“This was a while ago when I was a diversity officer, and I realize how useless it was because, A, you can’t really compel people to do certain things or think certain things,” Smith told Jesse Watters Monday. “You can’t be a thought police when it comes to these things. And secondly, I was always preaching to the choir. It wasn’t working.”
Smith, who is a co-founder of “Free Black Thought,” a nonprofit dedicated to unpacking diversity of thought within the Black community, is known for his work focusing on anti-racism advocacy. 
He suggested that the DEI agenda is a strategy designed to financially enrich the far-left proponents who advocate for the implementation in various facets of public life, including colleges and corporate workplaces. 
“Think about it. If you’re making all that money off of racism, the last thing you want is for racism to go away,” Smith said. “You are going to perpetuate it. You’re going to see it where it isn’t.”
“The major tenet of critical social justice pedagogy is don’t ask if racism happened. Ask how it manifests in this situation, which is to say there’s racism everywhere,” he continued. “And you know the saying, if you’re a hammer, then everything’s a nail. Well, if you’re a critical social justice activist, everything’s racist.”
Smith’s remarks come as some experts have questioned the legality of the DEI policies moving forward following the Supreme Court’s decision to rule against affirmative action back in June. 
The Supreme Court said in a 6-3 decision that colleges and universities could not include race considerations in their admissions process, effectively outlawing what’s known as affirmative action and upending previous legal precedent that allowed it.
The decision has sparked debate on if and how it could influence other sectors of public life, including the hiring and promotion practices of companies and corporations.
Fox News Digital previously spoke with experts who said the decision could mean that corporations could be held liable for “wokeism” in DEI programs and policies.
Nonetheless, Smith warned the “woke” initiative pushing “equity” in the workforce is unlikely to make an exit anytime soon. 
“It’s not going to go away tomorrow, but what we have to do is start pushing back,” Smith said. “A lot of people are afraid. A lot of people are complying with this, but they don’t really want to. They just don’t want to be mobbed on social media. They don’t want to lose their jobs. They’re very much against this.” 
“The people who can speak out, people like me, need to be loud and clear about how detrimental this is to minorities,” he continued. ENDS
/////////////////////////////////////////
MCNAIR ARTICLE:
Alabama’s anti-DEI bill would undermine higher education
By Lily D. McNair, Alabama Reflector, March 20, 2024
Courtesy https://alabamareflector.com/2024/03/20/alabamas-anti-dei-bill-would-undermine-higher-education/Links to an external site. 
“Ignorance is more costly to any state than education.” So said Booker T. Washington, founding president of Alabama’s Tuskegee University, one of the most distinguished historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) in the country. While a private, land-grant institution today, Tuskegee was chartered in 1881 by the Alabama Legislature.
As a former president of Tuskegee, I had the honor of serving as Washington’s successor, and of carrying forward his commitment to access to higher education for students of all backgrounds. Today, however, I am gravely concerned that the Legislature may be abandoning that historic commitment.
SB 129, a bill that would undermine the advancement and diffusion of knowledge in both public higher education and K-12 schools, has been passed by the House and Senate and is headed to the governor’s desk. SB 129 is one of over 350 educational gag orders that have been proposed in states around the country. These bills – over 20 of which have become law – censor educational speech on a broad swath of so-called “divisive concepts” related to race, gender, identity, and US history, depriving students of critical knowledge and understanding of the world in which they live. The most extreme educational gag order, Florida’s “Stop WOKE ActLinks to an external site.,” has been partially stayed by a federal court on the grounds that it violates professors’ free speech rights and unconstitutionally discriminates against students and faculty of color.
In several ways, SB 129 would be a more serious threat to campus free expression than even the Stop WOKE Act. Like the Florida bill, it would prevent faculty not only from “advocat[ing] or requir[ing] assent to a divisive concept,” – a less restrictive, though still censorial, option enacted by several other states – but even from requiring students to “participate” in “course work” or complete course readings that promote such ideas.  This language would restrict discussions of American history and culture in a variety of disciplines by prohibiting professors from assigning different ideas about the challenging issues of race, gender, and identity. Even worse – and unique to SB 129 – is a provision that would prevent faculty from assigning books or films where the author merely expresses that they themselves feel complicit in past wrongs.
Additionally, the bill would restrict students’ freedom. SB 129 prohibits state universities from “sponsor[ing] any diversity, equity, and inclusion program,” defined as any program where participation is determined “based on identity group.” In effect, this could well ban recognition or funding for Black student unions at public universities, including at Alabama’s eight public HBCUs.
Alabama should not be considering passage of one of the most repressive educational gag orders in the country. College should be a time to explore and debate ideas. Professors must be free to teach controversial issues from a variety of perspectives, and students must be free to engage with complex topics and diverse opinions from across the ideological spectrum and come to their own conclusions. Learning to evaluate evidence and weigh competing perspectives is core to the mission of higher education.
Most importantly, educational freedom is crucial for the protection of our liberties as American citizens. My father, a veteran of the United States Army, swore to defend those liberties. When the government starts telling professors and students what ideas they can and cannot discuss in the classroom, and students what groups they can and cannot associate with, that is the opposite of freedom.
By restricting the flow of knowledge in Alabama’s institutions of higher learning, bills like SB 129 threaten to take away the very ideals my father defended – and to replace prudent education with costly ignorance, undoing the work of past generations to educate the citizens of Alabama. ENDS
Author Bio: Lily D. McNair was president of Tuskegee University from 2018 to 2021.