Should the “rigor” yardstick, used in traditional evaluation practice, be used to assess an equity-focused mission? Does centering questions of validity, objectivity, and appropriateness advance equity? A growing group of funders and evaluators are beginning to answer these questions with “maybe not” due to such traditional evaluation methods tendency to center the very inequities, power dynamics, and biases many justice-oriented foundations seek to undo.
The two weeks following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 28 ruling that the controversial citizenship question cannot be added to the 2020 census questionnaire has been a wild rollercoaster ride for anyone trying to track what’s been happening.
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Commerce Department cannot include a question on citizenship in the 2020 Census, for now. It is possible that the Administration will be able to offer adequate justifications for its inclusion, but experts analyzing the decision seem to agree that the census timeline necessitates that the Census Department move forward with printing census forms without the citizenship question.
The college admissions scandal made news on the same day that this year’s high school seniors, including my son, were getting their first admissions emails (the days of skinny and fat envelopes are long gone).