Specifically, as a huge institution, PCC has directly managed to focus on equity and inclusion not just in a sense for students of color. I see this process also serve as a planning step to get all the managers and directors on the same page of awareness and open-mindedness to equity, inclusion and sustainability.

Again, As a planning process, No governing body lists this process as a requirement for an institution to plan their infrastructure. PCC is rightfully one of the best community colleges in the country because of its continuous commitment to the organization’s value of equity, inclusion and sustainability and activities like this is what proves it.

Do y’all believe that we already live in a just, equitable, and inclusive society? If you’re upset with how little teachers are paid and their perceived lack of exceptionality, shouldn’t you be more concerned with the political and economic systems responsible for those phenomena? “Academic excellence” does not exist in a vacuum, it’s defined by those with the power to dictate what knowledge is valuable and which students are worthy.

Last point, the scientific method is a useful tool, scientific knowledge is an accurate approximation, and scientism is a dangerous ideology. It’s critically important to know your limits and avoid sweeping claims you can’t justify down to the minute details. I’m not perfect at this, I might have even done that in this response; hopefully errors are ironed out by subsequent discourse. I just think we should keep in mind when criticizing knowledge on the basis of not being scientific that epistemology is a hugely complicated and open field of discourse, and that the scientific method will likely never tell us what it means to live a meaningful life, how it can be done, and why it is important to remain open-minded to new and unfamiliar ideas in the pursuit of greater purpose.

Thanks for your patience and contributions.

Yes, but the quality of instruction will be examined through the (distorted) lens of “social justice”, “equitable” outcomes, and CRT. Therefore, great instructors will be those who hold the SJ ideology supreme over academic and instructional excellence. We see that already. On the pcc website we have :
Diversity Matters at ˿����Ƶ
Recruiter hired to advance equity in hiring
(/hr/jobs/)

We don’t see: recruiter hired to find exceptional instructors with a commitment to academic excellence. Why? Because that’s not the goal of PCC hiring practice. It’s not about education.

@Kate in response to @An Actual Student
“The cost of PCC’s Integrated Planning effort has no bearing on instructor salaries, nor is it paid for by student tuition – these are separate budgets.”
While Kate’s response is technically accurate, An Actual Student is more spot one than he/she knows. PCC wastes plenty of time, resources and money to “guide” instructors in the ways of SJ, E and I. In addition there are many full-time positions dedicated to the “pursuit” of SJ, E, and I. The resources could be expended in improving/refining curriculum, but the agenda is NOT about academic excellence.

It seems more straight forward to put all efforts towards keeping tuition low, emphasizing quality education via higher paying positions for teaching staff, and putting funds into programs that get students into the job market. Most students care about affording school, finding parking/transportation to school, getting a good education in clean facilities, and finishing school as quickly as possible to get higher paying jobs–not endless virtue signalling with expensive initiatives and more administrators.

I would love to be a fly on the wall when an academic from PCC has a meeting with a contractor and has him/her redesign the plans with more ‘equity’ in mind. Every day academia becomes more and more of a parody of itself as the virtue signalling increases along with tuition rates.