The (ongoing) research detailed in this section is concerned with what I regard as a deterioration of merit as the sole criterion of the evaluation of the academic community (both students and faculty). The research has been funded mainly by the Donner Canadian Foundation and partly both by the Horowitz Foundation and by the University of Toronto Administration (a generous gesture, as it and I continue to disagree about this issue). I have divided these writings into conceptual and empirical. The latter section contains systematically analyzed data which, at least in principle, may be useful for both the "merit" and "equity" camps.

CONCEPTUAL CRITICISMS OF THE EQUITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION CAMPUS MOVEMENT

1. On How Emphasis On "Equity" Can Destroy Merit In Tenure-Stream Hiring (1987)
2. Three pro-employment-equity propaganda posters produced by EE (extremist equity) Ontario NDP government in 1994. In 1995, the Progressive Conservative Government abolished employment equity, but this had minimal impact on the universities (see, e.g., http://www.safs.ca/jan2001/equity.html).
3. Unpublished Letter to the Toronto Star (1994) regarding the NDP government's Employment Equity Act

4. Unpublished Letter to the Globe and Mail (1994) regarding the editorial "Time for a Debate on Employment Equity"

5. The Continuing Saga of the Post-NDP-Era Employment Equity Survey at UofT (1995)

6. Political Correctness and the Culture of Comfort: An Impediment to Observation, Objectivity, and the Conflict of Ideas (1997)

7. The Silent Equity Studies Debate (1997)
8. Academic Diversity Examined (1997)
9. Enlightened vs. Ignorant Ways of Fighting Discrimination (1998)
10. Is Birgeneau A Social Engineer? (2000)

11. Views on Diversity Differ (2000)
12. Spousal Hiring, Society for Academic Freedom Newsletter, January 2001
13. Presdient Atkinsons' Opposition to the Use of SAT I (2001)
14. Linking The Diversity Of Peoples' Sex, Race, Etc. With The Diversification Of Ideas: Who's Being Racist And Sexist Here? (2002)
15. Canada Research Chairs Politicized (2002)
16. Diversity or Conformity? (2002)
17. Panel/Discusssion: The Moral Bankruptcy of Diversity/Equity Hiring Policies for University Faculty: Empirical, Logical and Ethical Considerations (2002)
18. Diversity Debates: (2002)
19. Quotas Help No One (2003)
20. Excellence Through Equity - Confronting the Tension in Universities (2003)
21. Excellence Through Diversity (2003)
22. More Diversity Debates: (2004)
23. The Proportionality Game: Biological Versus Intellectual Diversity (2004)
24. Although meant as a jest, many a true word is said … (2005)
25. A Critique of the General Principles Underlying "Equity" in Faculty Hiring (2005).
26. Equity Hiring as a Manifestation of Institiutional Prejudice (2005)
27. High Time Equity Program Subject to Detached Review (2006)
28. No Race Preferential Treatment Either for Murderers or Applicants for Tenure-stream Faculty Positions: Act-based vs. Actor-based Ethics (2006)
29. Equity vs. Merit-oriented Approaches to Identifying Genuine Academic Disciplines (correspondence arising from http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/~furedy/Papers/me/
    UTB12JunM.doc) (2006)
30. Sex-preferential rather than merit-preferential hiring for maths and hard sciences in top universities is a case of relying not on a pool, but a puddle, of talent (2006)
31. Dubious Partnership: Equity and excellence are not equivalent (2007)

SYSTEMATIC EMPIRICAL EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF EQUITY/AFFIRMATIVE POLICIES ON THE HIRING OF TENURE-STREAM FACULTY

This research employs methods of multi-factorial anlyses used by experimental psychologists, where the "subjects" are tenure-strea advertisements, the factors observed are such independent variables as academic status, discipline hardness, location, and time (usually before and after some signifciant political events such as the abolition of employment equity 1995 in Ontario, or the passing of the "anti-affirmative-action" Proposition 13 in 1997 in California), and the dependent variables are rated degrees of emphasis (on a 7-point scale) on merit and equity. These ratings are conducted by student raters, who participate in the research not only as raters, but also in discussions concerning the design of each study. For photograph of one of these discussions, see discussion photo. Note that I and my colleagues are conducting our discussion with an old-fashioned black-board, rather than slides or power point.