Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Same Ole’ Song, Different Chorus

Within the President’s 2020 education budget request, Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos gave testimony to a House appropriations subcommittee last week in Washington DC. Within a short back and forth between Devos and Katherine Clark, United States Representative for Massachusetts's 5th congressional district, DeVos unapologetically stood behind non-black research used within a recent report justifying the removal of Obama-era school discipline guidance. The Obama guidance was beseeched to not only inhibit the national disproportionate Black v. White suspension rate, but it also attempted to curtail the school-to-prison pipeline countless education researchers, such as myself, have studied. The report DeVos submitted is nothing but a product that essentially is a reproduction of systemic racism. In order for a reproduction of systemic racism to transpire, and “subsequent measures of control to be not only in place but legitimized, an entrenchment of inferiority directed toward the marginalized is needed.” The use of systemic reproduction of racism is what created and maintains the establishment of two separate worlds—one White and one deemed Black. DeVos and the research she used as the foundation for her misguided justification for the removal of said guidance dates back much further than DeVos can count. During the late 19th and early 20th century, White so-called intellectuals William Shockley to Charles Murray have attempted to depict Blacks as less intelligent, more violent, immoral, sexual monsters, and on and on. DeVos and her findings are nothing but 21st-century scientific racism. https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2019-04-01/rep-katherine-clark-calls-for-betsy-devos-to-resign-citing-racist-research

Why negotiations fail

For business leaders engaged in negotiations, it’s essential to constantly analyze and revisit their negotiation strategy to avoid many of the errors typically made in the process. In the Handbook of Conflict Management Research, Erika Hall, assistant professor of organization & management, and coauthors Brian Lucas (U of Chicago) and Leigh Thompson (Northwestern U) offer a window into negotiation methods and some of the mistakes negotiators make along the way. The trio discovered and defined three specific errors that occur in negotiations, including what they label as domain myopia, the self-preoccupation effect, and the script hijack effect. Domain myopia is described as the “tendency for negotiators to fail to see meaningful parallels across negotiation situations that might appear different on the surface, but have meaningful underlying similarities.” Hall and her coauthors also describe the self-preoccupation effect, where negotiators let their emotions win the day and subsequently lose perspective. The third scenario that they define is the script hijack effect, which they describe as “the tendency for negotiators to feel compelled to follow a script, often based on stereotypes.” According to the authors, the problems they document apply across a variety of industries. Source:

Liberals' best hope for a new swing vote is... John Roberts?

As Brett Kavanaugh, 53, readies himself for a series of heated Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, many have questioned who will take up his mentor’s mantle on the Supreme Court. For three decades Justice Anthony Kennedy was arguably the most powerful figure in Washington, D.C. Famed for his ability to vote across party lines. Kennedy, who announced his retirement in June, helped shape some of the biggest landmark decisions of the past decade—most notably on the issue of same-sex marriage and LGBTQ rights. As a replacement, Kavanaugh is unlikely to be as magnanimous with his votes. But will that alter the Court’s direction? Only a little, said Dr. Martha Ginn Ginn, assistant dean of the Pamplin College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences and associate professor of political science, said Kennedy’s most likely “successor” is already a fixture of the Court: Chief Justice, and occasional swing voter, John Roberts. “Roberts will likely become the Court’s ‘swing vote’ now that Kennedy’s out,” Ginn said. “While Roberts may move a little more to the center as result, the overall shift will be more conservative.” A scholar of constitutional law and the Supreme Court, Ginn said the Court’s rightward movement won’t be quite as monumental as pundits have proposed. After all, Kennedy’s votes weren’t always left-leaning. In his last term, he sided with his liberal colleagues not once. “I think one point that is getting lost is that Kennedy was, for the most part, a conservative and voted accordingly,” she said. “There were certain issues where he was more likely to join the liberal wing, most prominently LGBTQ rights, but he voted with the conservative justices the majority of the time.” Kennedy’s retirement will certainly shift the Court toward the right, Ginn added, but “not to the same degree as if Ruth Bader Ginsburg retired or died in office.” Meanwhile, as the non-chaos of a Kavanaugh confirmation plays out, Roberts stands to gain as the Court’s new wildcard. Ginn said Roberts’ latest ruling, that law enforcement agencies must obtain warrants to use cell tower data, is a good indication of how he’ll vote as part of a post-Kennedy Court. “I think the role of Chief Justice Roberts becomes even more significant in a Kennedy-less Court and that hasn’t been given much attention,” she said. “I think both sides are forgetting that Roberts is a bit of wild card too when it comes to voting on very consequential cases. The one that comes to mind most Source:

Equal in marriage but what about the workplace?

Tuesday marks the 3rd anniversary of 'Obergefell v. Hodges'. The 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision about same sex marriage and deciding that it is a constitutional right 'under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment'. Under this, states are constitutionally bound to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. It was a monumental day and one seen as a major step forward for America. But just how far does America have left to go in the effort to make life for its LGBTQ citizens equal? A recent report, A Workplace Divided: Understanding the Climate for LGBTQ Workers Nationwide, stated ‘46 percent of LGBT employees are not open about their sexuality at work for fear of being stereotyped, making people feel uncomfortable or losing connections with coworkers.’ That number has only moved a fraction since 2008 when it was 51 percent. A recent Supreme Court decision also ruled a business can decide if it chooses to serve LGBTQ customers or not. So as much as America can claim it is progressing – is it? The gay marriage decision was a significant milestone for America – but was it meaningful? There are a lot of questions and that’s where the experts from Michigan State University can help. Professor Mae Kuykendall is an expert in the relationship between legal definitions of marriage and the common usage of the word. She is available to speak with media regarding the 3rd anniversary of 'Obergefell v. Hodges' – simply click on her icon to arrange an interview. Source: